“I don’t believe in a redistribution of wealth” (B. Schneider). One deserves all the earnings and acknowledgement for their hard work. People will strive to do the best they can achieve. People work with determination and success to build their lives and provide a future. A few people find that it is too much work for them to accomplish. For they want to do a little amount of work as they can for a great amount of wealth. For the hard working men and women, they want to enjoy the wealth they have earned. They do want to redistribute their wealth to those who do not deserve it. This is similar to the redistribution of student grades. A group a students work day and night to earn the grades they have obtained. They put in countless hours of study …show more content…
Fleischer). Ari Fleischer describes another way for the poor to gain wealth. The poor will occasionally rely on the income tax that is passed down from the people with high taxes. Otherwise, the wealth that they earned is not really being taxed. So they earn more money in a sense, since they do not pay high taxes as a high achiever would. As well in the case of student grades, the low academic students want the high academic students’ grades to be taxed, in order for their grade to increase. These students typically do not want or try to study. If it came down to a vote, whether or not for grades to be taxed, they surely would vote for the grades to be taxed. To illustrate, if grades were taxed and the class average was taken, their mark would increase without a doubt. If a student had a 57% on their essay and the class average was 78%. That student’s marked would increase by 21%, giving this student a 78% with doing little amount of work. Surely, this type of student would be affected in a positive way if grades were taxed. For that reason, they would continue to do little amount of work because they would know that their marked would increase from the students with high …show more content…
They wish to keep all of their money that they have worked for. But there are people who do not work as hard and they receive little tax on their money and earn a portion of the high roller taxes. This will create a disturbance between the two groups. The group that acquires a plenty of money do not want to spread their wealth because they have earned every penny. Clearly seen above, the high academic and low academic students would be affected in different manners. This might cause a conflict between the two types of student. The high academics do not wish to give their grades away because they have endeavoured hard work and time to achieve these grades. Whereas, the low academics put in a lack of effort and time. These two groups would be against each other in argument because the high academics would vote against grades being taxes because their grades would decrease. But the low academics would side with grades being taxed, so that their grade would increase. “I need you to be happy. I need one of us to be happy” (H. Black). Holly Black points out in the long run, one of the groups will eventually be happy. Whether it is the Dean’s Honour Roll students not receiving their grades taxed or the group who wishes for the grades to be taxed. In the end, both the students’ lives would be affected in different ways and with different
The film “Inequality for all” directed by Jacob Kornbluth, begins with Robert Reich asking students three questions to consider in a lecture when talking about the uneven distribution of wealth. First, what is happening regarding the distribution of wealth? He then inquires to why this is happening. Last of all, he asks the students if the distribution of wealth is a problem in America. He addresses these questions as well as many others in his lecture on the growing divide between America’s rich and poor. Robert Reich is an economist, author, and educator as well as public policy professor who served in the Ford, Carter and Clinton administration. He has dealt with this particular topic for over three decades and continues to spread his political views as a professor at the University of Berkley. Furthermore, he talks about the widening gap between the wealthy and the poor/middle class. He goes beyond the obvious facts to show us why this is happening and uses statistical data to display this growing problem. He gives concerning evidence that wages are declining, and that America’s weakening economy is based on consumerism.
This is a very prideful way to view society. I believe that if a man works hard, he should be rewarded and can accumulate wealth that way. Not given money from the rich who worked hard to get wealth.
In the United States there are four social classes : the upper class, the middle class, the working class, and the lower class. Of these four classes the most inequality exists between the upper class and the lower class. This inequality can be seen in the incomes that the two classes earn. During the period 1979 through the present , the growth in income has disproportionately grown.The bottom sixty percent of the US population actually saw their real income decrease in 1990 dollars. The next 20% saw medium gains. The top twenty percent saw their income increase 18%. The wealthiest one percent saw their incomes rise drastically over 80%. As reported in the 1997 Center on Budget's analysis , the wealthiest one percent of Americans ( 2.6 million people) received as much after-tax income in 1994 as the bottom 35 percent of the population combined (88 million people). But in 1977 the bottom 35 percent had about twice as much after tax income as the top one percent. These statistics further show the disproportional income growth among the social classes. The gr...
Wealth inequality is a real issue that needs to be fixed. The imbalanced growth of the upper class compared to the middle class is a danger to American society as a whole. The rich becoming richer while the middle class remains the same leads to a power imbalance, with the rich using their money to run the country the way they see fit while the middle class speaks to ears that do not listen. The issue of wealth inequality needs to be fixed by raising taxes on the rich.
Income inequality not only harms us fiscally, but also affects our mental and physical wellbeing; therefore, it is important to identify the right ways to control wealth distribution among people.
Inside of this video, this guy really targets an issue nobody has really been presented. He shows charts that talk about how we Americans think our wealth is distributed. We think distribution is doing alright. Americans think that the bottom 40% is getting a bit of money. They also believe that the middle class is doing reasonably well. Unfortunately, that is not the case. In the video, he breaks it down a little bit getter. He shows a graph that shows how money is actually being distributed. The poorest of poor don 't even register on the poverty line. The middle class is barely making it. And then there is this huge difference between "the rich" and the poor. It is proven that the 1% of America has 40% of the entire nation 's wealth ("Wealth Inequality in America."). The bottom 80% of America only share 7% of the nation 's wealth among themselves. The top 1% has 50% of the stocks, bonds, and mutual funds. The bottom 50% of Americans only own 0.5% ("Wealth Inequality in America."). The poor is not just getting by but they are scraping and fighting to get by. Now that it is clear that there is a lot of poor people in America, it is important to figure out how to fix
In this documentary, many of the individuals were “born rich,” meaning that they have inherited an excessive amount of money, not because of their intelligence and talent, but because they are heirs to wealth. The director of the film, Jamie Johnson highlights the life of the rich, in which the wealthy 1% have more than the rest of the 99% of people. Meritocracy is non-existent in the life of the rich. A rich person has many educational benefits, because they have the networks and connections that those of the middle and lower classes do not have. The rich have the right access to schools because of their wealth and power that comes from their wealthy status. For example, in the documentary one of the rich kids, Luke Weil, attended Brown University and was describing his entry to the Ivy League as expected. He did well on the boards, but it was “incidental” (Weil, movie) because without it he would have still went to Brown University or any other Ivy League University because of his inherited wealth. Interestingly, even when he attended Brown University, he was not a good student, where in his first year he did not attend more than eight academic events, including tests and exams. As a result, he was put on academic probation because he was not attending classes so he was
...ome of the wealth from the richest people to the poor but it does not eliminate poverty as a whole. If there’s not enough wealth, distribution can be hampered. Instead of improving the living standards for all, it actually lowers the income of the richest to reduce the divide and fall close to income levels of the poorest. As it provides the poorest higher levels of income it discourages them from working hard (encourages incompetence). It also creates negative feelings in the minds of hardworking individuals as they gain no extra incentives for working hard because lazy people get paid equally as they do. This negatively impacts productivity and thus economic growth.
Before entering into defense of the argument, it is important to communicate that the current situation is one which demands reform. It must be understood that the state of the public school system is not simply confined to the domain of education but is instead very much interrelated with the distribution of wealth. The current opportunity gap-which affords those who are middle and upper class greater access to higher quality education-is the cause of the inequality seen in the distribution of income. “Children born into the top fifth of the income distribution have about twice as much of a chance of becoming middle class or better in their adult years as those born into the bottom fifth (Isaacs, Sawhill, & Haskins, 2008)”.
The unequal distribution of wealth is seen as a negative and ongoing problem and debate within American politics and society. There is a great deal of evidence to back up why wealth distribution is damaging the American ideals of life. It also carries inevitable and undetermined consequences for our nation. How resources are distributed within a country depends on where the resources were found. For example, numerous people will move to an area that is rich with resources in order in ensure job security. Just because a country is fruitful in a resource does not mean that that particular country is wealthy. In fact, the laborers are paid very minimal...
Alteration of wealth from the high-income earners to the low-income earners so as to reduce inequality.
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.
With their increased wealth, the rich, from 19762 to 2006, have increased their spending on enrichment activities for their children by 151 percent, compared to only 57 percent for poor families (O’Brien). This gives rich children an advantage over poor children. This gap is further extended in public education. Rich children often go to better schools that provide opportunities that children in poor schools do not receive. This is “an educational system that provides such privilege to some students, while willfully and purposefully denying it to others” (Strauss). The current education system allows rich children to succeed while it tells the poor children that “they are inadequate instead of educating them” (Strauss). Even when poor children achieve in school, they are just as likely to succeed later in life as rich children who have dropped out of school (O’Brien). This creates an atmosphere where the education provided to the poor is woefully inadequate when compared to that hoarded by the rich. This, in turn, continues to place poor children in a situation that keeps them
In spite of the privileged getting anything money can buy, an underprivileged person gets the important things money cant buy. Many people have heard the expression “if you give a man a fish you can feed them a day, if you teach a man to fish you can feed them a lifetime.” Well I believe privileged people are given fish and the underprivileged taught to fish.
school than a wealthy kid. With money, all the rich student needs to do is