Samuelson, Robert J. "Inequality Misunderstood." Washington Post. 03 Feb. 2014: A.15. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 28 Jan. 2015.
Today’s economic inequality has led some Americans wishing for the rich to pay more in taxes. Leaving the rich speechless as to why they should pay more even after working hard to reach their goals. “The poor are not poor because the rich are rich”, as this was stated in the Inequality Misunderstood document by Robert J Samuelson, this proves the point as to the rich being able to work hard in order to have the money to support their family. The reason as to why the rich are rich is because of small businesses, including car dealerships, and also creating big companies such as Google or Microsoft. Even though there are few percentage of Americans who are rich because of inheriting their family fortunes, there was still that one person in their family who worked hard enough in order to provide this kind of support for his or her family. In this article, the author argues about the thesis of the economic inequality, because the poor want the rich to pay more in taxes because they are considered as “scapegoats.”
…show more content…
In my opinion, the rich should not pay more in taxes because they have done nothing to the poor, in order to pay extra. Just because the rich are rich does not mean the poor should feel the need to make them pay more in taxes. Even though some rich people got rich because they got lucky with the inheritance from family members, it still does not give the poor to call the rich “scapegoats” just because they have them money to support themselves and their family and also have a little extra for other
Paul Krugman, in a recent article has eloquently discussed the issue of unequally distributed income in the United States (Krugman, 2015). He alludes to a number of general economic principles in this article. He talks about how a major misconception about the effect of taxes on income inequality in the United States has been addressed through a recent research carried out by Branko Milanovic and Janet Gornick.
In William Domhoff’s article, Wealth, Income, and Power, he examines wealth distribution in the United States, specifically financial inequality. He concludes that the wealthiest 10% of the United States effectively owns America, and that this is due in large part to an increase in unequal distribution of wealth between 1983 and 2004. Domhoff also states that the unequal wealth distribution is due in large part to tax cuts for the wealthy and the defeat of labor unions. Most of Domhoff’s information is accurate and includes strong, valid arguments and statements. However, there is room for improvement when identifying the subject of what is causing the inequality.
The main concepts of the article are describing the corporate welfare system and how it is responsible for growing economic imbalances between the poor and rich populations. The article elaborated on how we cannot ignore the issue anymore because of the substantial loss that we are facing by letting the gap grow (Huff, 1993). The article also goes into the IRS and how there are tax exemptions and deductions that people qualify for and what is allowed.
Although many Americans believe the top one percent should have higher tax rates there are also many people who believe that the wealthy pay more than their fair share of taxes.
"How Economic Inequality Harms Societies." Richard Wilkinson:. TED Talks, July 2011. Web. 26 Feb. 2015.
It can be said that money is power in the United States, and this is brought out in the essay, “Class in America---2012” written by Gregory Mantsios. He says that even though many Americans do not like to discuss class, “it can determine where people live, who their friends are, how well they are educated, and what they do for a living” (Mantsios). Many Americans do not speak about class type, and most find it unacceptable (Mantsios). Unfortunately, we can see that there are laws that are built to help and better the wealthy, while it cripples the rest of us. According to the Economic Policy Institute, “The richest twenty percent of Americans hold nearly ninety percent of the total household wealth in this county” (Institute) Gregory Mantsios without reserve describes the majority of people are at a disadvantage in their social class, while the upper class is compensated.
There is no doubt that wealth inequality in America has been escalating quickly; the portion of total income earned by the top one percent has doubled since the beginning of the 1970’s. The wealthy are the main beneficiaries
Today in America, income and wealth inequality has continued to grow at an unsettling pace. The rich continue to get richer, while the number of people categorized as lower class grows exponentially. As Joseph Stiglitz has explained, many theories that are seen as strongly Republican, such as the trickle-down effect, has caused the rich to take money from the poor, and as a result the lower class grows and the middle class disintegrates. The top 1 percent of America’s households currently holds 30 percent of America’s economy, which is much more than other first-world countries and helps to emphasize the extremity of inequality currently in America today. This increased inequality has in turn caused America to become a much more divided society; those born in poverty typically stay in poverty, with little to no chance of self-improvement due to a lack of education provided in their areas. In contrast, those that are born wealthy typically go to better schools, have better health care, and are all but spoon fed information on how to remain wealthy. These two sides of society almost never cross, and this causes the country to be more divided than ever. In order to limit this inequality, drastic changes must be made, such as large corporations paying their fair share of taxes and giving back to the lower class, and minimum wage should be raised. If everyone in America works together, we can raise social mobility and re-unite what has become an increasingly divided country.
The article is about how unfair income inequality is in today’s society. In the article, Timothy Noah also discusses that wealthy people are handed everything; whereas, the middle class have to work hard for what they have and where they stand. Timothy Noah also says that with income inequality follows poor economic growth, bad health for those who cannot afford it, and causing the middle class to slower drop into the lower class. (252). Timothy Noah disagrees with Richard Epstein in the regards of income inequality being a good thing. Timothy Noah disagrees with Richard Epstein, because he believes that the tax policies end up making the people worse off.
The comparison between rich and poor people is a topic with an enormous gap. The bridge between the two is longer than most see it, and is increasing steadily. Michael Sandel wrote a book discussing his opposition to the market society in the United States. The focus of Sandel’s book lies within the title, What Money Can’t Buy. He believes that everything seems to be for sale and that we are a society that revolves around the idea of every person for themselves. Sandel also states that inequality is rising faster than ever. Even though everything is for sale in this day and age, that does not mean everyone is able to purchase whatever they want. Inequality comes in many forms like race, gender and age. Income inequality affects
In his article “Stop Coddling the Super-Rich”, Warren Buffett criticizes the fact that billionaires in United States actually pay less percentages of taxes than those working-classes. Buffett believes the government needs to stop protecting the “super-rich”.
This “middle-class nation” is struggling to support all those who live in its borders and the misconceptions about wealth are vastly overrated. Furthermore, the idea of wealth and stability is incorrect, and there is a very sharp contrast between the rich and poor in the country. As the richest twenty percent of American hold ninety percent of the total household of the total household wealth in the country, those at the bottom have managed very poorly and suffer to get through the days.
Capitalism has been the central force behind the growth of the United States’ progressive economy. Within such advanced economic system the chances of economic disparity are significantly high. In fact, over the past three decades there has being a steady increase in unequal wealth distribution among the economic classes. To sustain the current unequal wealth distribution among the classes of the American population, there are numerous factors that influence and shape this trend. For some members of the population it is alarmingly disturbing to know that recent statistics have shown that, “In the US [alone] the wealthiest 1% of its population owns more than the bottom 95 %” (Gutman). As for the difference in economic wealth, it resulted
A major social problem in America today is its inequality of the distribution of income. "Income inequality refers to the gap between the rich and the poor. The United States has the most unequal income distribution in the industrialized world, and it is growing at a faster rate than any other industrialized country" (Eitzen & Leedham, pg. 37). The main reason as to why income is distributed so unequally is because of the gap between social classes.
When it comes to income taxes, the focus is usually on jobs, personal investments, and savings. The debate on who should bear the greater burden when it comes to income taxes is timeless. If all types of tax are aimed at developing the economy, it should be everyone’s equal responsibility to engage in taxation regardless of one’s economic class. Both parties involved proclaim the legitimacy of their arguments. The articles under discussion are representative of this debate. On one side of the debate, there are those who feel that the rich should pay more taxes. Then there are those who feel that the rich should not be punished by shouldering the burden of taxation (Benson and White 1). From an economic theorist’s point of view, both articles articulate valid arguments. However, this does not nullify the significance of the prevailing economic situation. The above debate can be based on various economic contexts.