In The Great Escape: Health, Wealth, and the Origins of Inequality, author Angus Deaton describes the ongoing struggle of progress and inequality. The essence of the book is to explain that progress itself is the reason for inequality. I found that as I read more I began to relate to some of the principles that were stated. I didn’t understand a lot of the economics behind the book but, this book allowed me to take the economic doctrines and convert them into things that I notice happening everywhere around me. While reading this book, I found three major takeaways; people are generally doing better than before, someone always gets left behind, and equal opportunity is different than equal circumstances. First, people are doing better off …show more content…
I had never thought about the difference between equal opportunity and equal circumstances. I have always heard everyone talk about equality but, until reading Dr. Deaton’s book I had never thought about the roots of equality. No one has the same set of circumstances but generally to obtain something it must be worked for. I believe that in most cases if one wants equal opportunity, they must create it for themselves. For example, I love sports, everything about them. People come from all sorts of backgrounds and circumstances because they all worked hard enough to create the opportunity to play at a competitive level. To make it to the MLB/ NBA/NFL there is no minimum parent salary or minimum education level, just athletes that outworked their circumstances. However, I think that differences in circumstances can be a main cause for inequalities. For example, my older sister and I went to the same high school where if you want to learn something, of the time you must teach yourself because the curriculum wasn’t difficult and athletics were praised more than academics. A combination of my family’s disapproval of my high school and my dad’s new job, my younger brother now gets to attend the local private school whose academics surpass my high school. My brother, in the long run, will have a higher opportunity than my sister or myself because of the education he will receive based on the progress of our family not because he outworked my sister and I. Progress created the inequality. For everyone to have equal opportunity, everyone either must have equal circumstances or must work hard enough to overcome their circumstance, equality doesn’t create
The Economist. “Inequality and the American Dream”. They Say I Say. Gerald Graff, Cathy Birkenstein, Russel Durst. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2009. Print.
The first standard of equality is ontological equality which is the notion that everyone is created equal at birth. Ontological equality often justifies material inequality. In fact, this type of equality is sometimes used to put forth the notion that poverty is a virtue. A second standard of equality is equality of opportunity meaning that “everyone has an equal chance to achieve wealth, social prestige, and power because the rules of the game, so to speak, are the same for everyone”( Conley, 247). Therefore, any existing inequality is fair as long as everyone plays by the rules. The standard of equality is equality of condition, which is the idea that everyone should have an equal starting point. The last form of equality is equality of outcome which states, everyone should end up with the same outcome regardless of
Inequality, itself, may seem like an aspect that is surrounding the academic subject of history. An American economist, Paul Krugman, substantiates that inequality exists within our society through connections to several important historical movements. “One of the best arguments I’ve ever seen for the social costs came from a movement [...].” (Page 562) He implies how inferior inequality could be, and discusses why he along with a wide array of an American audience, may give some attention to its rising. Krugman makes “Confronting Inequality,” interesting, challenging, and enjoyable. This author approaches the audience by giving a powerful inception, and appealing to the senses of ethos and pathos.
Aristotle said, “ The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal.” True equality is hard to come by when there are so many things that make people so different. The word equality has a very general meaning. That meaning however, can be interpreted in many different ways. To some, the interpretation can lean more towards a sense of freedom. This freedom has been something society has been fighting for throughout the entirety of history. To others, such as author Kurt Vonnegut Jr., it could mean the complete opposite. In Harrison Bergeron, Vonnegut portrays equality as a sort of societal imprisonment.
Briefly state the main idea of this article: The main idea of this article is that economic inequality has steadily risen in the United States between the richest people and the poorest people. And this inequality affects the people in more ways than buying power; it also affects education, life expectancy, living conditions and possibly happiness. Another idea that he brought up was that the American government tends to give less help to the unemployed than other rich countries.
“Confronting Inequality” by Paul Krugman opens up our eyes to the fact that, in America, we are becoming more and more unequal based on our standings in society. Our standings in society is directly related to amount of money that we make and what class our parents were in while we were growing up. However, being judged based on our parents’ status is not justifiable. America is full of injustice when it comes the social structure of it’s’ citizens. The majority of America used to belong to the middle class, now there is less middle class and a widening gap between the high class and the low class of people. Yet not much is being done to correct this injustice. In fact, it seems that the more we do, the farther the gap widens. Why is
Wealth inequality did not always exist in human life. In fact, “Human life have not only been changed, but revolutionized, within the past hundred years” (Carnegie 1). There used to be
What is learned in school, be it public or private, determines, for the most part, what position an individual will find themselves in - in the future. In “White Privilege and Male Privilege,” Peggy McIntosh, an author known for doing something that is rarely done in the white community--speaking of her race--makes references to education, to her privileged education, to support her argument on white and male privilege. Sometimes I wonder what society would look like without education; would there be any norms, or rules? Education is so deeply instituted into most Americans' lives that those questions will probably never be answered. One thing is certain; some people are able to get a better education than others.
Firstly, she states that the inequality in the U.S. is tragically rising even though it was already high compared with other developed countries. Then, to form dissatisfaction, she provide the stats of the rich 1% of the country taking a whopping 21% of the country’s income and accounts for 35% of its wealth. Next, she indicates that unemployment rate is pervasively upstretched in recent years plus the fact that “For the first time in 20 years, the percentage of the population employed in the U.S. is lower than in the U.K., Germany and the Netherlands” to further support her case. After that, the article provide a finding by The Pew Charitable Trusts' Economic Mobility Project that says “if you were born in 1970 in the bottom one-fifth of the socioeconomic spectrum in the U.S., you had only about a 17% chance of making it into the upper two-fifths” These are some of the solid facts and statistics given in the article to grabs the reader’s attention about how the situation in America is nearing a climax of diminishing equality and stability. I believe that the author is trying to make the audience conscious about the gravity of this problem because the first big step in fixing a problem is realizing there is one. Hence providing these unpleasant
In Confronting Inequality, Paul Krugman discusses the cost of inequality and possible solutions. Krugman argues to say that it is a fantasy to believe the rich live just like the middle class. Then, he goes into detail about how middle class families struggle to try to give their children a better life and how education plays a factor in children’s future lives. For example, children’s ability to move into higher education could be affected by their parents economic status. Also, He discusses how politicians play a role in the inequality, because most of politicians are in the upper economic class. Finally, Krugman says how we could possibly have solutions to these various inequalities, but how America won’t get
Equality and equal opportunity are two terms that have changed or have been redefined over the last 100 years in America. The fathers of our constitution wanted to establish justice and secure liberty for the people of the United States. They wrote about freedom and equality for men, but historically it has not been practiced. In the twentieth century, large steps have been made to make the United States practice the ideals declared in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. The major changes following Rosa Park’s refusal to give up her bus seat to a young white man and the Brown v. Board of Education trial in 1954.
Drawing from the difference principle, inequalities in wealth and income can be justified if all parties benefit as a result. In comparison to the alternative interpretations of natural liberty and liberal equality, a system of democratic equality holds to “pure procedural justice…[although] this still leaves too much to social and natural contingency” (Rawls, 69). Given this notion, however, the difference principle is fully “compatible with the principle of efficiency” (Rawls, 69). When tying the difference principle with fair equality of opportunity, it ensures that while individuals may have drastically different situations, the situations themselves are justified as long as the structure serves to “improve the expectations of the least advantaged...
Horace Mann, an advocate of American public education declared that "education...beyond all other devices of human origin, is a great equalizer of conditions of men—the balance-wheel of the social machinery…It does better than to disarm the poor of hostility toward the rich; it prevents being poor."(Mann 3) All americans do not see education as being equal. Several different views come into place when equal opportunity is thought. Some factors like, finance, environment, a social background may play a part. When looking at public schools, elementary and high school are free for all who wants to attend, except when pursuing a college degree, the responsibility lies on the student. Paying for college is not always an option when thinking about all the other responsibilities in life. Another factor may be there are not enough qualified teachers, resources, and funds that are available through government resources to obtain a good education. Whatever the reason, we must do our part. Education can be a "great equalizer" if curriculum’s was designed to fits the need in all communities.
It is also important to note that if we construe of resources more broadly, we can amend equality views to encompass factors that adequacy views do. By doing this, we can minimize a perceived gap between equality and adequacy theories. This has implications for education reform and policy making as well.
Income inequality continues to increase in today’s world, especially in the United States. Income inequality means the unequal distribution between individuals’ assets, wealth, or income. In the Twilight of the Elites, Christopher Hayes, a liberal journalist, states the inequality gap between the rich and the poor are increasing widening, and there need to have things done - tax the rich, provide better education - in order to shortening the inequality gap. America is a meritocratic country, which means that everybody has equal opportunity to be successful regardless of their class privileges or wealth. However, equality of opportunity does not equal equality of outcomes. People are having more opportunities to find a better job, but their incomes are a lot less compared to the top ten percent rich people. In this way, the poor people will never climb up the ladder to high status and become millionaires. Therefore, the government needs to increase all the tax rates on rich people in order to reduce income inequality.