Unequal Distribution of Wealth Essay

Smith advocated for free trade for a country. A country should export more than it imports. This stimulates the growth of the economy. Adam Smith was an optimist who sought the best for his country.

The continuous disparity of wealth and income can cause constant economic problems within a society. Although it is not apparent all the time, there are few benefits of discrepancy itself such as individual wealth, capital, and labor. Both Smith and Carnegie have distinct beliefs about wealth that differentiate from one another, yet are similar in certain ways. Adam Smith confined all his ideas about the common man in his “Wealth of Nations”. Whereas, in the “Gospel of Wealth,” Andrew Carnegie had distinct beliefs about the effects of capitalism . All in all, economic conditions of the 21st century still date back to previous years and signify the importance of economic competition.

In today’s capitalist economy, where economic transactions and business in general is centered on self-interest, there is a natural tendency for some people to make more than others. That is the basis for the “American Dream,” where people, if they worked hard, could make money proportional to their effort. However, what happens when this natural occurrence grows disproportional in its allocation of wealth within a society? The resulting issue becomes income inequality. Where a small portion of the population, own the majority of the wealth and the majority of the population own only a fraction of what the rich own. This prominent issue has always been the subject of social tension

Wealth can be defined as a surplus. This surplus is distributed among a society. The distribution creates associations among the people of the society with respect to wealth. The Gospel of Wealth, written by Andrew Carnegie, describes two classes and the association of wealth between them. Adam Smith’s passage, Of the Natural Progress of Opulence, similarly, includes a reciprocal relationship of production between the town and country. Unlike the other essays, Marx’s, Communist Manifesto, debunks the separation of classes and urges equal distribution of wealth and, The Position of Poverty, Galbraith’s composition, emphasizes the importance of wealth in the public sector to abolish poverty. The essays all have a common structure of the distribution of wealth and include some insight on how to maintain the distribution or how to alter it so that it is more beneficial to society. Carnegie, Smith, Marx, and Galbraith explain the distribution of wealth and it’s affects on society.

Adam Smith is a proponent of capitalism, more specifically, laissez faire economic. Laissez faire is an economic policy in which businesses operate in the free market with little to no regulation from the government in a free market. Smith would disagree with Karl Marx because the two have different idea when it comes to economics. Smith argues that capitalism is the best form of economics because human self interest drives positive results in the economy. In addition, Smith would argue that invisible hand of the marketplace would help control the economy through supply and demand. When the supply is greater than the demand, the price of the product would be lower than the standard price. The opposite is that when supply is lower than the demand, the price would be above the standard price. With this, Smith believes that laissez faire would be the ideal economic plan. Furthermore, Smith would also argue that competition would lead to better product for the people as competition forces businesses to compete with each other for customers, leading to innovations and better products.

Income inequality is an important issue that affects almost every person in the united states besides the extremely wealthy. Income inequality is an issue that both John Stuart Mill and Karl Marx philosophy’s touch on in a way that could change the issue. Income inequality is touched on in both the philosophies of Karl Marx in the communist manifesto and John Stuart Mill in the Utilitarianism. Overall both philosophers have their opinions of how people should be treated and managed in the structure of government and how people should be compensated for their work. Income inequality is an issue that Karl Marx has an answer to in the communist manifesto.

Within the United States, a multitude of Americans live in poverty, actually, according to the Census Bureau in 2010, “there were 42 million poor people in the United States,” and a large portion of those who reside in the middle class are approaching the poverty line, thus, augmenting the amount of people who live in the lower class. As a result of this occurrence, income inequality has become a paramount topic in recent times, especially in the 2016 election. In addition of politicians and other government members discussing this gargantuan issue, professors, journalists, and others have written about this topic to inform the populace about income inequality, and provided ways to fix the issue. The authors Robert B. Reich, Gregory Mantsios, Alan Ajas, Daniel Bustillo, William Darity Jr., and Darrick Hamilton are experts within the field of economics and labor; however, all of these writers are people from different backgrounds, such as Robert B. Reich, who was the Secretary of Labor under President William J. Clinton, and Alan Ajas, who is a professor at Brooklyn College. Although these authors write about income inequality and its causes in the United States, each of the three essays written have a unique focus to each of them, a unique style they are written, and unique solutions to the problem plaguing the U.S.

The conversation about economic inequality is not one that only exists in today’s contemporary society but rather one that continued through time, evolving with the changes in different societies. From before the existence of agrarian societies through the industrial revolution and even up till today, the topic of economic inequality is one whose moral implications to the equality of all individuals has been and always will be questioned. Today, it is one of the most debated issues in the United States. Regardless of the terminology used to discuss it—economic inequality, income gap, or wealth disparities—it is heatedly conferred and everyone has an opinion on it. Is it right or wrong? Should it exist? Is it justified? Does it corrupt our

Income inequality has slowly become an issue gaining momentum over the last thirty-five years, did we see it coming, I think so. It has always been an issues, only after decades of misleading political leadership spanning decades are people finally fed-up of being misled and lied to. The current election for the next president has brought about a voice of the American people to demand a change within our three failing political systems that govern America. Only this change, I believe is going to bring a country to its knees, the wealth holders are not, going to just step aside and willing unlock the scales of wealth that to encumber its poor, they are going to dig in and hold fast to what they have stolen and hoarded since the time of slavery.

Smith traces the development of the power afforded by wealth in chapter 6 of Book I, which he begins by discussing an “early and rude state of society” (53). In this state, there is no ownership of land and no ownership of stock, and so no source of wealth apart from that which one laborer can produce themselves (53). The origin of power imbalances is tied to the disruption of this state of society, which occurs “as soon as stock has accumulated in the hands of particular persons” (54). This marks the first instance in history in which one person can command substantially more labor than another. This inequality rapidly widens, as the stock-owner will “employ it in setting to work industrious persons,” supplying them with materials and subsistence

In current times we often observe that many members of our society receive less than other members regardless of whether they are no less deserving. In contrast, there are some who have ownership over assets and earn income that they may not be deserving of. The distributive balance is upset and wealth distribution today can thus be seen as a social injustice. This injustice that is becoming more noticeable as people start to become aware of the facts, as we can see through the start of the occupy wall street movements that, first started on wall street in America, have spread to other countries (one of which being Australia). As a consequence of how wealth is habitually distributed and the way in

In order to consider the problem of income inequality from Mill’s perspective, it is of imperative importance to first grasp an understanding of what factors contributed to the development of his key ideas. Known as one of the most influential figures in classical economics, Mill is more commonly described as a philosopher and socialist than an economist due to his obstinate strive for progressive social reform throughout his

When arguments arise in the United States (US) about healthcare systems, the common rebuttal in opposition to a state-run universal healthcare system usually goes something like, “If universal healthcare is so great, then why do so many people from Canada come here [United States] for treatment?” Although this seems like a logical rebuttal, it really misses the point. Firstly, the belief that an abundance of Canadians flee to the US for healthcare purposes is largely a myth (Katz, Cardiff, Pascali, Barer, & Evans, 2002). Secondly, people from all over come to the US for healthcare due to some of the best hospitals in the world (Katz et al., 2002). After all, the US does spend the most per person on healthcare in the world, it makes sense that

Income inequality has affected American citizens ever since the American Dream came to existence. The American Dream is centered around the concept of working hard and earning enough money to support a family, own a home, send children to college, and invest for retirement. Economic gains in income are one of the only possible ways to achieve enough wealth to fulfill the dream. Unfortunately, many people cannot achieve this dream due to low income. Income inequality refers to the uneven distribution of income and wealth between the social classes of American citizens. The United States has often experienced a rise in inequality as the rich become richer and the poor become poorer, increasing the unstable gap between the two classes. The

Currently there are many problems and flaws with the way the Canadian government’s policies deal with healthcare, income inequality and poverty. Time to time changes in policies have been made, perhaps to improve these issues, however, the gap between rich and poor keeps increasing and there is very little improvement in healthcare and the economy. In fact, healthcare keeps on becoming costly. Major issues like income inequality and poverty are not being taken care of by the government. According to Dr. Raphael (2002) poverty is caused by several reasons such as inequality in people’s income, weak social services and lack of other social supports (p.VI). He states, “Poverty directly harms the health of those with low incomes while income