Is Income Inequality Fair?

1248 Words3 Pages

Income inequality has become a common subject over the past year. Many people say that the wealth that the top 1% has is not fair. I am not concerned about fair or unfair, frankly many of these people have earned the money they have. That being said, what I am interested in is just how the economy is affected by the wealth of the 1%, or the disparity between them and the working-class person. Far too often this issue is brought up and normally shot down, or pushed to the side. I believe that it is their approach that is causing this. If they would approach the issue at hand by stating factual evidence of why the inequality is harmful to the economy instead of crying about how unfair it is, they would drastically increase the quantity of listeners. …show more content…

Human capital is the experience, skills, and knowledge that people have. It is looked at like a person’s cost or value to a company or country. As income inequality increases, so do education opportunities for the poor. When they cannot afford to send a child to college or trade school because of tuition and fees it means they will have no value as anything other than a menial worker. It will hinder the growth of human capital, meaning, there will be a lower level of specialization, highly skilled, or knowledgeable workers. When the level of human capital is lower it can’t reach a level of which is optimal for the growth of the economy. Also, it will lead to higher levels of unemployment and other social problems. Examples being higher rates of crime or rioting. People feel like the only way for them to make it in the “unfair” world is to take from others. Thus, becoming unproductive members of society and keeping human capital low. However, the poor are not the only ones affecting human capital. The rich are doing the same. Inherited wealth is a big problem as well. When someone inherits wealth, they are given an advantage. This “unfair” advantage can also lead to them becoming unproductive members of society. They can become lazy, and lose the drive and desire to get an education or gainful employment. They can simple coast off dividends, while never making an attempt of their own …show more content…

They will speak very highly of “trickle-down economics” a popular form of which was “Reaganomics”. Essentially what is believed is that with large tax cuts and looser regulations, typically affecting businesses, dividends and people earning high incomes. These people are believed to be where real growth comes from. The freeing of some of their money allows them to purchase even more stock or companies. The owners will then push more money into these companies increasing operations. The increase in operations leads to the need to hire more workers. The new workers then use their new wages for goods and services. This increases demand and will drive economic growth. Truly an excellent theory. In theory, it appears to be the end all. It is not. Upon further investigation, you will see that while Reagan did successfully end the 1980 recession, which saw not only double digit inflation but also double digit unemployment. However, this is not the only thing that came out of Reganomics. We also had the privilege of seeing the Federal Debt triple in only 8

More about Is Income Inequality Fair?

Open Document