Why Are Some Countries Rich While Others Poor?

Reich starts his exordium with a distribution of where American workers found themselves in the early 1990’s in reference to where almost all American workers were just 20 years before. Reich placed most of the workers that contributed to the economy during the Nixon administration as being in one boat, analogous to the famous quote by G.K. Chesterton, “We are all in the same boat, in a stormy sea, and we owe each other a terrible loyalty.” Under Reich’s distribution you were still in a lifeboat, but the sea state and your future could be rough or smooth sailing depending upon your chosen profession. To which boat one found his or her self was directly related to how

In the book by Jacobus, A World of Ideas, Robert Reich writes the article, “Why the Rich are Getting Richer and the Poor, Poorer”, and he uses a metaphor to describe the three economic groups that are now in different boats. He compares how the routine producers’ boats and the in-person servers boats are sinking while the symbolic analyst is rising. He also discusses how immigration, and technology competes for the job of routine producers and in-person servers while the symbolic analysts are in such great demands. Robert Reich is correct about the symbolic analyst have the potential to become wealthy and it is expected for them to have high level education and job experience: for example, being a student is considered as an in-person server but taking high education, such as nursing, will make them be identified as a symbolic analyst.

In the book by Jacobus, A World of Ideas, Robert Reich writes the article, “Why the Rich are Getting Richer and the Poor, Poorer”, and he uses a metaphor to describe the three economic groups that are now in different boats. He compares how the routine producers’ boats and the in-person servers boats are sinking while the symbolic analyst is rising. He also discusses how immigration, and technology competes for the job of routine producers and in-person servers while the symbolic analysts are in such great demands. Robert Reich is correct about the symbolic analyst have the potential to become wealthy and it is expected for them to have high level education and job experience: for example, being a student is considered as an in-person servers but taking high education, such as nursing, will make them be identified as a symbolic analyst.

According to Rector & Sheffield (2011), a public opinion poll concerning America’s view of poverty, states: “A family in the U.S. that has a decent, un-crowded house or apartment to lie in, ample food to eat, access to medical care, a car, cable television, air conditioning and a microwave at home should not be considered poor.” The results revealed a bipartisan majority of Americans polled, did not consider a household with these amenities to be poor. However, poor and poverty are often synonymously used when discussions of impoverished peoples are a foot.

What does the AK growth model lead you to expect about the relative growth of rich and poor countries?

There are many factors at play in determining whether a nation is rich or poor. Geography is one of them. Some nations are lucky to be located in places with rich oil deposits, others are in key locations along important shipping lanes whilst some are land locked or have very little natural resources.

The ability to receive an education is often taken for granted in the United States. Unfortunately, many Americans do not have a choice regarding how and where they are educated. However, many people in America have the opportunity to receive a college education, not only from a state school, but a private school or institution. In the chapter “Why the Rich Are Getting Richer and the Poor, Poorer” selected from his 1991 book entitled The Work of Nations: Preparing Ourselves for 21st-Century Capitalism, author Robert B. Reich explains the widening gap between wealthy and poor Americans (p. 179). While Reich describes the trends of three different types of workers to prove his claim: production workers, the service sector workers, and symbolic analysts, these workers each had different opportunities regarding how they were educated. The theory that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer can be clearly proven by analyzing educational and financial opportunities.

Economic growth, put simply, is “an increase in the amount of goods and services produced per head of the population over a period of time”; development is inextricably linked with this economic growth. By utilising theories of economic growth and development we can see how the Chinese and Sub-Saharan African economies have emerged, but, more notably, we can use these to look at patterns from past and present to show their experience and the implications of this growth for the future.

Godrej’s “Myth 10: Growth is the Only Way” is the tenth installment of a series of articles addressing common “myths” about economics. As the title suggests, Myth 10 evaluates a common belief system stating continued economic growth is the only logical path for the future. Godrej refutes this idea, pointing out flaws in the economic growth mindset such as proliferation of hunger and poverty due to disproportional growth for the wealthiest individuals. Instead, Godrej claims, the best path for the future is to maintain a “steady-state” economy focused on stability and sustainability.

However, this pattern was only observed in select countries, not in a broad sample. Romer and another economist Robert Lucas wrote papers defending models of growth that differ from the neoclassical model , which failed to properly explain convergence. Namely, the assumptions that technological change is exogenous and that the same technology is available in all countries were dropped. Growth was explained by endogenous factors, such as investment in human

So we see that on the other hard there are some situations where population growth can hamper economic development. This seems to focus more on the poorer countries of the world, which is probably due to more of a lack of resources. Also noted by Cincotta & Robert (1997), results of an elaborate study found that the correlation between stagnant economic growth and economic strength is the most prevalent among developing nations of the world. In other words, stagnate economic growth can be attributed to population growth as well, which as previously noted is an antithesis to this paper, but to point out, this heavily relates countries with a below average gross domestic

Taking into consideration the trickle-down theory of economics by Lewis, if the growth in economy is not sufficient to satisfy the needs and wants of the upper sections, nothing or very little shall trickle down to the lower sections in the hierarchy of society. Thus, the gap between the rich and poor widens and though economic growth has impacted a certain section of society, this cannot be considered development. Another example is an increase in the defence output of a nation, which accounts for an increased GDP but does not in any way contribute to economic development. Economic growth is not enough in itself to measure economic development as even if there has been a leap in the income of people in a particular nation,

Eyeballing any cross sectional data on growth across countries shows that countries grow at different rates. Many theories try to explain this phenomenon with emphasis with capital accumulation being one of them. I will start by developing the standard neoclassical growth model as developed by Solow(1956)[1]. I will then proceed to discuss the extensions that have been made to this basic model in an attempt to better understand actual growth figures, for e.g. the standard neoclassical model cannot explain the magnitude of international differences in growth rates. Mankiw[2] points out that “the model can explain

This research also shows that economic growth, on average, raises incomes for both the rich and the poor. It helps to lift the poorest in society out of absolute poverty and does not automatically increase inequality. More importantly, no country has managed to lift itself out of poverty without integrating into the global economy.

He pointed out that different economic levels have their own requirements and they may not follow the same process of industrialization. Moreover, he raised the most influential theory related to late industrialization that the economically backward states may have rapider growth rate as they are late comers, and the national development process relied on the degree of economic backwardness. That is to say the more backward a country, the faster it will advance (ibid).