Wealth Income Inequality

James Madison once stated inequality of the rich and poor predicament to be “evil” and believed that the government should avoid an “immoderate, and especially unmerited, accumulation of riches” (Johnston, 2016). As one of the founding fathers of our nation, James Madison had a concern about the separation between the rich and the poor. He felt the government should do what it could to avoid the separation, which one can infer that he meant for the government to tax the rich by a greater percentage, thus reducing the financial burden on the poor. A rift has always been present between the rich and the poor throughout history. Depending upon the job, the working class may or may not make enough to support a family. At this point, the

In an economic sense, income distribution refers to how wages and salaries are split among a society of people. The top earners in a society are naturally considered to be the richest, whereas the lowest earners are the poorest. In any society, such differentiation in earnings commonly creates class systems based on yearly income. This structure is often measured by labeling people as lower class, middle class, or upper class depending on yearly earnings even though there can be a large difference in the top and bottom incomes of a class. Concerns about the inequality of the distribution of income in any society are often brought about when individuals believe that one income class is earning too large or too little of a percentage of the total income. In the United States however, certain policies and programs are in place to combat criticism against the fairness of income distribution. In addition to these policies and programs, the United States was founded on the belief that any individual, regardless of social class or birth status, should be as successful or unsuccessful as they wish depending on their ability to capitalize on opportunities presented to them throughout their life. Commonly known as “The American Dream,” this notion towards freely being able to create one’s own wealth and worth can be seen throughout the history of the United States and is a major factor that guided America to become one of the world’s economic super powers. After recognizing a historic

According to Inequality.org, “We equate wealth with ‘net worth,’ the sum total of your assets minus liabilities. Assets can include everything from an owned personal residence and cash in savings accounts to investments in stocks/bonds, real estate, and retirement accounts. Liabilities cover what a household owes: a car loan, credit card balance, student loan, mortgage, or any other bill yet to be paid. In the United States, wealth inequality runs even more pronounced than income inequality” (Wealth). Wealth disparity affects everyone in America. When the top twenty percent of earners in America take over fifty percent of total earnings in any given year, It can be see as very unfair by anyone who is in the middle class and especially the lower class of citizens in the U.S. It is safe to say that both sides of the political world (Republicans and Democrats) are equally worried about how economic inequality will affect their children and future generations. No matter who you ask, rich or poor, and whatever their opinion on the shape of economic distribution in America is, they most likely have a unrealistic sense of the state it is actually in.

In Income Inequality: Too Big to Ignore, Robert H. Frank paints a picture to the reader about the struggles of pier pressure. For example: an upper-classmen chooses to buy a big house and fancy clothing. This acts as a “frame of reference” to the changes and norms of the society. If he spends money on something nice, a middle-classmen will then go and decide to do the same thing, and then a lower-classmen…all the way down the social hierarchy. This is what he calls an “expenditure cascade.” Robert relates this with a person’s downfalls, which can be traced due to lower income inequality. Income inequality basically means that in a given quantity, the dispersion of income is underlined by the gap between individuals and or households with

The issue of income inequality in the United States is complicated and does not have a definite answer. Income inequality can be measured in a few different ways. The first measurement for the income inequality in a country is to look at the percentages on households and group them into income categories, called distribution by income category. The second measurement for income inequality is called distribution by quintiles or fifths. This is when you divide the total number of people, households, families into five groups called quintiles to examine the percentage of total before tax income received by each quintile. Each quintile would then be ordered by income and households in the category.

In any given population, there is a difference between what people within the population earn. The uneven distribution of income in any given population is income inequality. In order for there to be income, there has to be several sources of income. These sources of income may be combinational or independent per person receiving the income. Income may result from wages, rent, bank account interests, salaries or even profits made in business transactions ( Stiglitz, 2012).

After watching the video Wealth Inequality in America (2012) and reading the article Apple’s Retail Army, Long on Loyalty but short on Pay by David Segal (2012), I started reflecting on how blind we have become to the conception of America’s growing economy. While the social stratification is an ideal ladder, for the poor to middle classes to seek for economical growth to reach the top, the wealth class. There’s a misconception on how corporations are helping society’s economic growth. While growing in value for its shareholders, corporations are rising inequality among the workplace. The reality of an uneven economy is notorious for the poor, yet its magnitude is not imaginable by many. President Barack Obama has tried to address this issue with a proposal of raising

The economics video is an infographic video that addresses the major inequality of wealth in America. The overall theme of the video clip is that the top 10% of the people in America have and produce way more money than the poorest Americans, which makes up the majority of the population. There is basically not bias in the video, other than that the video creator does not talk about the poor people as if he is one, and he does not talk about the upper class as if he in in the upper class. Depending how the viewer perceives the information there could be a positive or mainly negative bias. The video maker made this video to bring awareness to what people say the ideal wealth inequality should be, what people believe the wealth distribution inequality

The author touches on an important issue that affects the United States, which is income inequality between different sexes and occupations. The researcher asks an interesting research question that affects a high population in the United States. There have been several debates on income inequality, and it is essential to know the contribution of government and state policies to this problem. The increase in the disparity started in the mid-1970s. It is also important to know the reason for the inequalities between different states. This makes it easier to identify and change policies that contribute to income inequality. The research question is situated properly in the literature. The literature first explains the problem of income inequality,

Income inequality has been a major concern around the world, and it mainly links to how economic metrics are distributed among individuals in a country. Economists generally categorise these metrics in wealth, income and consumption. Wilkinson and Picket (2009) showed in their studies that inequality has drawbacks that lead to social problems. This is because income inequality and wealth concentration can hinder or delay long term growth. In 2011, International Monetary Fund economists showed that less income inequality increased the duration of countries’ economic growth spells more than free trade, low government corruption, foreign investment or low foreign debt (Berg and Ostry, 2011).

Income inequality has been a major issue in American history. There are many different factors that contribute to inequality. These include education, wealth, discrimination, ability, and monopoly power.

I found a lot of new information throughout the entirety of the film. For example, the fact that many of the people who live on Park Avenue, like Stephen Schwarzman and David Koch, contributed large amounts of money to politicians in order to lobby for their own opinions. This is important because it opened my eyes to the possibility of corruption in our government. In addition, the film highlighted that people in the capitalist class are likely to abuse their money and use it for rather useless things. For example, Charles Schumer spends thousands of dollars every Christmas to buy, ship, and decorate 60 Christmas trees, one for each room of his house. Also, John Thain was shown spending millions to renovate his office during the recession

Two “overall wealth is continuing to grow at a high rate. Wealth expansion over time benefits everyone. If wealth were expanding faster at the bottom of the income spectrum, it would mean a devastating lack of investment opportunities” (CDN, 2011, Para.4). This sort of thinking has never been brought up during my lifetime and I find this view to be very interesting. An article from the commentator mentions “Inequality of income and wealth is a driver of growth. If the young, or investors, see people making large profits in app design, or green technologies, they will shift their careers or investments to those sectors. Income disparities are part of the price system and they are a form of free speech (“invest here”)” (Gibson, 2014, Para.9).

We will begin with the topic of income inequality. My understanding of income inequality is that it is a large disparity of wealth between those who are rich and those who are impoverished. It can be thought of as an uneven concentration of money towards the top. If money is considered a resource, then a large concentration of money in one place is inefficient. Large amounts of money could be better used to promote social welfare if it is being put to work, rather than being saved in a bank account for several decades at a time. This idea ties into the Paradox of Thrift. It may be beneficial for an individual to store their wealth in a bank for future heirs, but it is not economically the best option.

Every American dreams of finding a job that pays well enough so that they may comfortably take care of their loved ones and themselves for years to come. Most Americans hope to find some way to make a living that they enjoy, something that they view as productive. Unfortunately, many do not have this luxury. In our society, a good portion of the population is forced to hold the base of our country in place while hardly being redeemed for their time and effort, and thus the problem of income inequality. Numbers of these people live from paycheck to paycheck, barely getting by, not because they manage their money poorly, but because the value of their time at work is negligible.