Essay On Wealth Disparity In America

A crucial controversy of America today is the growing gap between the wealthy and the poor, and the discrepancy is caused by capitalism run wild and only the helping hand of the government can only fix the problem. A question that turns the tables is what if the growing wealth disparity in America is actually caused by the government? For years, the idea that inequality is economically neutral has been the prevailing view not just among traditionalists but also between most Americans outside the further reaches of a political audience. There could be ideological or moral reasons to object to a growing gap between the wealthy and the rest but for economic reasons, there are no such. Furthermore, there are many ways inequality places itself in America. In our society, a good amount of the population is forced to stand up and work for our country while hardly being redeemed for their time and effort, thus the problem of income inequality. An estimate of these people live from paycheck to another, barely coping with life itself, not because they cannot manage their money well, but the reason is that
the value of their time at work is insignificant. A handful of people sacrifice happiness at work to find a job that pays better simply because it is all they have at their current job. In addition, some people will do anything and sacrifice their mental health just to keep them from going broke. Segregation also has another cause in the wealth gap, such as women specifically the African Americans who make less than the higher class and middle class. On the other hand, actors and actresses make an abundant amount of money just being in the entertainment industry. An industry that make thousands of millions of dollars per year creating the same number as the same kind of entertainment some people could get watching plays and such as shown in figure 1. However as a contradictory, inequality may restrain growth as shown in figure 2.
A positive aspect would be one reason is the incentives there are to achieving higher status of income. You are referred as successful in the eyes of your peers, and if your financial security is achieved, your life can be a lot less stressful. It is the pursuit of these incentives, this kind of greed, which keeps the economy running strongly. People work hard if they will be rewarded for it, so they pursue a higher education to get better jobs, to create a business, and we all benefit from that. An article, The Truth About Income Inequality by John H. Hinderaker and Scott W. Johnson, which is based completely on statistics from the government, proves that income has not fallen for Americans. In fact, the distribution of income is no worse than it has ever been, and certainly better than when the country was first being settled. Without unequal distribution and rewards for those who pursue a higher income, people would have little reason to work and the economy would become stagnant. There are many large firms that make a lot of money, but there is no trickle-down effect. The few on top make most of the money while the average worker does much of the work. According to the real annual income of Americans, about 95% of the benefits of economic growth over the last 25 years have gone to the rich. Should not the hard worker on the bottom get more? These firms are controlling because they only give out as much as necessary to keep the workers employed. Many of these same firms have companies in other industries, such as entertainment or retail, and a lot of the money they pay out comes back to them through these other industries. In addition, women and African-Americans make less money than white males for working the same jobs. Income should certainly not vary with gender or race. As mentioned in the article “The Simple Truth”, women make 74% of what men make for doing the same job. For blacks the gap is even larger, they made only 63% percent of whites during the same time period as the women as mentioned in the same article. These biased practices are pure evidence of income inequality.
Another negative effect of income inequality is social segregation of class.
People are described as “bad poor” because of their financial position and their failure to overcome it as shown in figure 1. However, that is easier said than done. Children who are born into poverty are already poor and they have no control over that. They have to work very hard with little assistance just to get to the point where a change can be made or an upgrade in class is possible. People of low class are generally regarded as less valuable or even disposable. They are the subject of much ridicule and prosecution due to their financial status. This sort of classification is attempt to be stabilize by welfare and other government money programs, but the taxpayers fund that, so the money is taken back away from them. Income inequality is one of the main causes of social segregation of
class.
So inequality might suppress growth. It might also cause instability. In a democracy, politicians and the public are unlikely to accept depressed spending power if they can help it. They can try to compensate by easing credit standards, effectively encouraging the non-rich to sustain purchasing power by borrowing. They might, for example, create policies allowing banks to write flimsy home mortgages and encouraging consumers to seek them. Call this the “let them eat credit” strategy.
How then do we find the value of work in our society? One-way, the way that is most prominent in the working world today is salaries are higher where more money is made. That is, people will make more money at Warner Brothers than at a Dairy Queen simply because of the contrast in revenue between the two firms. To say a person flipping burgers should make the same or even similar amount of money, as a corporate officer of a large firm would be incorrect according to our society’s standards. When it all comes down to it, demand or labor force is where the money is. Most people would agree that income should be based on education and experience. However, this formula applies to minimum wage workers as well as to the CEO of a large corporation. It is true that the roles of most every individual in society are important. People are needed to work minimum wage level jobs just as much as stockbrokers. In today’s fast paced society, however, there is a higher demand for people who have learned a specific trade or skill. CEO’s make more money than fast food workers do because there is a more limited supply of people who are capable of running multi-million dollar corporations. Both work equally as hard but one has a higher-level of skill. This skill is more valuable to society so the income is higher. Regardless, those who work minimum wage jobs still need to support themselves or their family, the CEO and others still want to eat fast food, Therefore, both must be maintained so that they are allowed to live comfortably.