Download file to see previous pages...
The blame game going on is deep-rooted in the inappropriate structure of the American economy that cultivates inequality. Economic inequality can be gauged by comparing the earnings of a worker at the top with those of a worker at the middle. The economic inequality has grown more than two-folds from 1978 to 2010. Today, 400 Americans have more income than half of the total population of The US. In the economic boom from the Second World War up until 1978, economic benefits were widely distributed and the whole society benefited. But as the US started to recover from the economic recession of 2008, 95% of the gains went to the top 1% people. Something happened in the early 1980s that altered the relationship between economic growth and wages for the worse.
Along with the stagnation of wages for the middle-class, costs of housing, education, healthcare and other facilities have soared up. Multinational companies are not increasing their products or services’ range so that more people would be hired because more and more people are aspiring to join the middle class while the purchasing power of the massive middle class in the US is decreasing. The stringent tax laws of the US serve as a disincentive for multinational corporations to bring their money to the US, so they instead spend their money buying other companies e.g. Microsoft buying Nokia. Some inequality is desirable in a capitalist system to motivate people to work hard and rise up economically, but the real problem is rooted in the inequality of opportunities in the US. The inequality of opportunities is much attributable to biased tax laws determined by the top 1% in their own favor. The existing economic structure of the US is shattering Americans’ confidence in democracy at large. An economy cannot be stable without having a strong middle-class. When adjusted for inflation, the median wage in the US is declining, and that is increasing the
...Download file to see next pagesRead More
However, there is a great amount of criticism for the idea of nationalism as not everyone agrees on what constitutes a nation. This particular debate came to the forefront during the 2010 Olympics which were held in Vancouver. In particular, the controversy centered around the discontent felt by the Indian tribes of Canada and the perceived inequalities experienced because of the Olympic games.
Recuperating the living standards, conditions, and patterns of individuals are the plausible measures that can be adopted for improving the living standards of the people of a nation. Provision of a broader range of economic opportunities to them can also contribute in reducing the inequality among the society.
Accordingly, the very first section of this research paper will focus upon the means by which inequality has impacted upon my own life and the way in which class distinction, gender discrimination, racial discrimination, and ethnicity all work together to categorize and denote expected and stereotypical behaviors from groups of individuals.
Both essays touched my heart, as I felt for those women and their children who need help and seem to be unjustly deprived of it. The system appears to be treating men more favorably than women.
Nancy Fraser's essay "Women, Welfare and the Politics of Need Interpretation," argues that the social welfare system in the United States has been affected by gender norms.
The three main classical sociologists Weber, Marx and Durkheim had made predictions on how social inequality would affect the modern society. These predictions though distinct in nature had couple of similarities as well. Today the inequality has acquired several more dimensions.
Problem: Ozark Furniture Company can obtain at most 3000 board feet of maple lumber for making its classic and modern maple rocking chairs. A classic maple rocker requires 15 board feet of maple, and a modern rocker
Income may result from wages, rent, bank account interests, salaries or even profits made in business transactions ( Stiglitz, 2012).
In his hypothesis, Karl Marx foresaw income inequality in a capitalistic as a
For instance, people who are in the bottom 10% of the country’s population earn an income of approximately 8000 pounds while the top 10% earns ten times which is approximately 80000 pounds. The 10% holds 44% of the country’s wealth (Schuerkens 2010). This is a robust
3 Pages(750 words)Essay
GOT A TRICKY QUESTION? RECEIVE AN ANSWER FROM STUDENTS LIKE YOU!
Let us find you another Essay on topic The inequality for FREE!