After watching the viral video we watched in class respond to the following questions:
1. Is this level of inequality good or bad for America? How so? Explain.
2. Should the government do anything about it? Why or why not?
3. Does the government have the right to do anything about it? Why or why not?
4. How do you think wealth should be distributed in America or is it good as it is? Why?
5. Is this distribution of wealth "fair" for hardworking middle-class Americans? Is this "unfairness" what drives people to achieve wealth?
47 comments:
It is reasonable because the level of inequality shows that the American economy is divided according to wealth and status with unemployment as a major problem.
The lowest twenty percent falls below unemployment because some of those people are currently out of work or not even trying to find a job. The highest twenty percent is skewed because these people are of major influence in investment and development.
In terms of unemployment, since the poorest twenty percent falls below the government should increase spending and decrease taxes. The government should also open up more accessible employment agencies for people that are currently out of work.
Good point! The wealthiest one percent are the job creators, so should we care if they have all the money? Is that not a good thing?!
1. I think that having some level of inequality in society is good. It encourages hard work and supports the capitalist system. I think that the level of inequality we have currently however is not good. The difference between the wealthiest and the poorest Americans, or even the wealthiest and the middle class is not good. This level of inequality is so drastic that it allows for little if any social mobility in America.
2. Think the government should do something about it or companies should reevaluate the salaries of their employees, but what CEO is going to decrease his own salary. Thus, the government should step in.
3. The government does have the right to do something about it because this level of inequality in wealth distribution causes economic problems for the entire country.
4. I think the wealth should be distributed somewhere between the "ideal" and what people "think the reality is". This level would allow for a decently healthy middle class wi a smooth transition into wealth but it would also allow slightly more wealth for the poorest classes.
5. I think inequality is fair because it promotes social mobility. Alex de Toquevile wrote about the importance of social mobility in America. Today we do not have nearly that same amount of mobility because of howbdrastice the difference in wealth is. So I do think its fair for hard working middle or low class americansnto see there is a difference in wealth, it gives them a goal to work toward. However, with the gap as large as it is rig now that goal is nearly impossible to reach.
1.) This level of inequality is very bad for America, in that only the top 20% of Americans are contributing the majority of the wealth into the economy. The bottom 80% can't put as much money in because they don't have as much.
2.) Of course the government should do something about the inequality because it would be beneficial to the health of the economy. More people would be able to afford the commodities that the rich can, which would put more money into economy.
3.) Or government really isn't in a position to make any kind of drastic change or reinforcement to change the distribution of wealth. They can't force the wealthy to give to the poor and they can't force the poor to work their way up to higher paying jobs. There are things that our government is already doing, such as financial aid for scholars or welfare for those who can't work, but any other kind of intervention would be seen as socialism if the government were to tell the classes what to do with their money.
4.) I think that wealth should be distributed more like the way Americans thought that it was distributed; with the poor having obviously the least, but enough to get along, and the top percentage having the most, but not the 300% more that they do in reality. This would help the economy in that more money would be going in from all groups, and the government wouldn't have to invest as much money into those who, in our current state, receive government aid.
1. I think that this level of inequality in America is bad because it makes America a more divided country and that is the opposite of what we are supposed to be.
2. I don't think that the government can do anything about it because the government only has so much money to "give out." We are in a huge amount of debt and giving less money to the rich and more money to the poor is not really going to solve our problems.
3. I think that the government kind of has the right to do something about our inequality, but they also kind of don't. The government has control over the money, so they could decide to give more to the poor and less to the rich, but I don't see this happening. CEOs are always going to get more money than people who do not have jobs.
4. I think that wealth should be distributed a little more evenly than it is now, but not too much. A CEO should not be paid 380x more than the average person, but they should get a little less. The poor, as long as they're working or trying to find a job, should get a little more than they do now. Currently, the wealthy make a little too much money.
5. I wouldn't call this distribution of wealth necessarily "fair," but it's the way things work. Those who work harder and have higher positions are obviously going to make a lot more money than people who don't have great jobs, or any job at all. So, the distribution should probably look like this, but not as much money for the wealthy and not as little money for the poor. I don't really think that this unfairness drives people to achieve wealth, or else there would be more wealthy people. I think working hard helps people become wealthy, but not really unfairness or jealousy.
1. The level of inequality is bad for America. This is because the actual fact of the matter is that it is next to IMPOSSIBLE to actually make and hold a good portion of the country's wealth due to the fact that only 1 out of every 100 people will own a good portion of the country's wealth.
2. In reality, I feel as though the government should do something about it, but in truth, I don't feel as though it would help much at all. This is because people will still be living as they have for the past 40 years, and therefore the distribution of money will not change. The only way to actually make the living of the bottom 40% of the people better is for the top 1-5% of people to decide for themselves that they hold way to much and to act upon it themselves to provide the poorer people with more money and resources.
3. I feel that the government does not have the right to do anything about it. This is because "the people" are essentially the ones who are deciding for themselves how the money is distributed. Although I agree that the government should provide some help in creating ways for more money to get into the hands of the bottom 50 but it should not step in too much because it would be infringing on those who actually made the money and worked hard for it.
4. I think that it should be a little more evenly distributed but still not all equal. This is because like the video said, it gives incentive and motivation for people to climb the ranks of social status. So I'd say that the top 20% obtain like 50% of the money and the bottom 80% obtain the other 50% (this obviously being more evenly distributed but still not equal.
5. I think it is unfair for the hard working middle class because most of the time they are working just as hard and getting a lot less money than the higher class workers. But this unfairness does provide a strong drive for Americans to work hard because it allows for a sort of "prize" and it provides a means to always reach higher no matter your rank of life.
Social and economic mobility! That is a major component of any argument about inequality. If we do not have an economic ladder then no one is going to work hard to climb it! The problem here is that the bottom rungs of the ladder are so far apart it becomes difficult to climb!
1. I think this is bad for America because everyone wants to be wealthy but realistically there is only that 1% who is really doing well and the is uninspiring to the poor and middle class knowing that getting to that one percent is really really hard.
2. I feel as though this money has been earned by the wealthy, so the government shouldn't try to control it but I do feel as though the money should be more evenly distributed among all the workers instead of the CEO getting so much.
3. No the government does not have the right to do anything about it because people have worked hard to get this money so they do deserve it but they could start putting a limit on things.
4. I think the "ideal" situation is how wealth should be distributed but I don't see any way of how we are going to get better, so this might be as good as gets.
I think this level of inequality is bad for America because the "American Dream" is the reason that people move to America in the first place. The chart basically shows that even if you move up classes and work hard, your pay wouldn't even compare to a boss or an CEO of a company.
I think this is a problem for a company boss to make sure people get the money that they need. I'm pretty sure the CEO already has enough money to support his family. I think the government should keep an eye on the the companies to make sure they are paying people the way they should.
It is the responsibility of the government to respond to the major problems on the policy agenda. Since the poorest twenty percent falls below the line of unemployment, the government must act in cooperation with the skewed American economy. The government should get involved, but should not make drastic cuts and changes to the middle and upper classes.
I think that there should definitely be an obvious lower, middle and upper class but not to this extreme. Americans need an incentive to work harder and if there is no blatant transition between classes, our work ethic will diminish.
It is fair. If the hardworking middleclassman is that hardworking, then there will be an opportunity for them to move up into a higher class of wealth because this is America.
The distribution of wealth should reflect the relative amount of income for all the people active involved in the American economy. The skew ness of the current economy seems unfair but in reality is fair and reasonable.
The level of inequality is probably not as bad as people make it out to be, even after watching the video, mostly because the very poor are usually unemployed and may not even be looking for a job, and the very wealthy actually hold certain assets crucial to the functioning of the economy. If the government can do anything to "curve" the curve in the favor of the common people, that would be simply divine, but any dramatic change does not seem possible. There's really no reason to be talking about the government's rights in this case.
1)I think that this level of inequality is bad for America. As the video stated, the amount of money that a CEO and other people around their level of wealth has increased greatly within the past few years alone. I think that with this increase the Americans at the bottom have lost the incentive to even try to live the "American dream" and work their way up to the top. A lot of these people in the top 1% are CEOs but in my opinion I think a lot of them are the family of the men/women who actually worked their way up and these family members just inherit the business without having to have put as much work in. So my problem here is that a lot of the people at the extremes of both ends aren't putting in the amount of work necessary. The bottom has lost the incentive and the top has had it given to them. However, you have the middle, the average, people who are working very hard and the people at the top are making "380 x what the ever age man is making." And that's why I think it's bad for America.
2) I thnk it's tricky to debate over whether or not the government should get involved. I have mixed emotions, because while I believe this distribution is unfair, I also believe that the government should not have the right to attempt to take away anyone's money. Essentially, if this problem were to be fixed that's what would happen- the money would be taken from the highest percentage of wealthy people and distributed. I just believe that the dope of the government should be limited in its actions when concerning this issue as to not lead to a type of socialist system.
4) I don't think that the distribution of wealth in America is good, it obviously has some issues. I don't think that the amount of money that the top 20% has should dictate how poor the poor are (causing them to be pushed past the poverty line). The top 1% should not have 40% of the wealth in America. A more distributed curve like the one shown in the video would make more sense, and would be a more fair way of doing it.
1.Although I would usually disagree, I believe that this level of inequality is actually good for America because it does provides the incentives for Americans to do better. People only have the motivation to work harder when they know that the economic system would reward them. We have to let people fail and succeed in order to advance in the system. Changing the distribution to where there is more equality would only makes things worse because people would not work as hard and provide the innovations and I centimes that are needed to grow the economy. In order to advance, we need both financial rewards and consequences.
2.The government really should not do anything about it because Americans will be less likely to create new innovations, ideas, and investments that helps the economy grow.
3.The government does have the right to change the level of inequality if they believe that is hindering economic growth.
4.This level of inequality is good as is because as stated, Americans have the incentive to actually work harder and help improve the economic system.
5.This distribution is not fair but nothing ever is. The top 1% may have 40% of the nations wealth, but they worked extremely hard to achieve their status. And yes, this unfairness is what drives people to achieve wealth because they know that working harder equals a greater payout. I think this is how the American system should work, work hard to get to the top.
1. I feel as though this level of inequality is certainly an issue regarding the current state of the United States. As I view the the graph of the distribution of wealth among our fellow Americans it is blatant that this absurd level of inequality isn't healthy for our society. If you have the wealthy making 380 times more than the average citizen's pay that's an issue. The wealthy contain 40% of the wealth in Amercia while the poor are not even established on the graph due to their incredibly small amount of wealth. This huge separation between these classes is a significant problem with the wealthy only receiving benefits -____________________________________________________________-
2. They should but I don't think they can
3.How can they if the wealthy earned their money ? They can't put a restriction on how much they make.
I do feel as though the level of inequality in America is not good for the country because it takes away from the ideal of the American dream. However there is nothing in the constitution that gives the federal govt power to do anything about it. Also in America there is a idea of "majority rule minority rights and so in this case the govt should not do anything to attempt to redistribute the wealth. Also I do agree with the " ideal " way that money should be distributed . It is not "fair" what it does is it gives a rather pessimistic view on the way that one could be socially mobile.because it makes one believe that unless you are in that top 1% one will never have a considerable bit of wealth.
1. I feel that this level of inequality is not good for Americans, because the poor stay poor as the rich continue to get richer. This is going to be a constant battle for Americans to be able to reach the "American dream" with so much inequality between the social classes. With the way it is now, no matter how hard a person works on average, they will still not be up there with the top 2% of Americans.
2. The government should do something about it because the more people that they or struggling middle class, the more financial government assistance they will have to shell out. The government constantly complains about people being on welfare and needing their assistance, but with so much inequality between the classes the poor need that help.
3. The government has the right to step in and help the struggling Americans be able to try to advance in wealth., because they are raising the taxes for the poor and lowering them for the rich and that is going to solve anything.
4. Wealth should be distributed as equal as possible, because right now it is not fair. The wealthy are less that 80 percent of Americans, and while they are advancing the poor are continuing to struggle just to make it through the month.
5. This current distribution of wealth is not fair at all. The poor people are below the poverty line, with the middle class right there behind them. But the rich are off the charts. There is not type of fairness between that and that's sad to think about.
1) This level of inequality is terrible for America, creating a society first known as one where the poor get poorer and the rich get richer into a society where poor are all in need of welfare and the rich even surpass whole countries' wealth.
2) The government should do something about it to ensure large amounts of people don't end up on welfare, but the probability the government is able to do anything to stop this statistic of inequality is slim.
3)The government doesn't have the right to take away specific people's money, besides taxing the rich more. The rich will find a tax evasion anyway to avoid losing their money anyway, but the government cannot take away money for no reason because the ones losing their wouldn't easily go for the idea of redistributing their wealth to others beneath them on the wealth scale(socialistic idea).
4) The wealth should be distributed as what people think the wealth should be. This distribution would keep competition very high, but could have a drawback of the ever so high welfare state of America.
5) This distribution of wealth is not fair for middle class Americans, but this is what keeps the drive going for everyday Americans; the idea of making it big one day. This distribution isn't fair but it reflects the unfairness of the global wealth unfairness and ultimately life's harsh circumstances.
Christian Carter 4B
I think that the person who made this video made a good point at the end of this video, that the CEO does not work 380 times as hard as the average worker. This is a major point because what the distribution of wealth should reflect is how hard a person has worked. This is not to say that that CEO didn't work hard to be at where he or she is at, but they still shouldn't be making that much more. There are also some CEO's that feel the same way, like the former CEO of Costco was one the lowest paid CEOs and costco's workers are one of the highest paid. So, I think that the system works when people don't get too greedy and understand that a person only needs so much to live and there is such a thing as excess wealth. The government does have a right to do something, but they probably won't get much support for it... Especially from those who want to keep the distribution the way it is because it is beneficial to them. The people with the most money can be the most influential. That doesn't mean I don't think they shouldn't do something, I really think they do. But what can they do?
Americans need an incentive to work, this is irrefutable. But, the way the clip illustrated American in its current state seems ridiculous to me. All Americans need to learn a good work ethic in order to gain more money. But, they shouldn't have to completely suffer while 1% of Americans have an excessive amount of money. True, the inequality in America should be distinguishable, but clearly not by almost 380x more! Although I do feel the distribution of wealth isn't necessarily fair, I do understand that SOME of those people in the top 1% do deserve to own 40% of America's wealth because they had enough drive, motivation, and determination to earn it. The goal for most Americans is to try to move up the social ladder through out their lifetimes, but how can they possibly do so when there is a 380x difference?! They say "get rich or die trying"... But this seems like social suicide to me!
1. This level of inequality is not good for America at all. If we're supposed to be encouraging the American dream, we should make that dream attainable. If the top 1% is 380x better off than the bottom 20% of Americans, how are people from the bottom ever supposed to achieved that? They can't. They are too close to the poverty line, some of them not even registering; therefore, they don't have the funds to invest and the type of jobs to hep them move out of the low class they're in. It also creates an unstable middle class who is barely getting by, but still won't qualify for government assistance because they aren't actually classified as being poor, but the slightest thing (like losing a job) could lead many of those to being a part of the lower class, increasing the lower class.
2. The government should do something about it. Although they will get some unhappiness from the top percentile, they still have an overwhelming majority of people that are either poor or struggling to not becoming poor.
3. The government does have the right because it is for the well being for the country. This could affect our national security because to provide for the growing lower class, the government will in turn have to take funding from elsewhere like the military (or something else).
4. I think wealth should be distributed as people earn it, but it shouldn't be so hard for people to achieve and get out of the lower class.
5. The distribution is completely unfair to the hardworking middle class. It doesn't drive them to achieve wealth. It drives them to keep their head barely above water because its what they have to do if they don't want to be considered poor. These are the people that put in the work to make their CEO's that are making 380 times more than them look good. , if a company can afford to pay their CEO that much more money than the average employee, they can definitely afford to increase the pay of these hardworking citizens.
1. This level of inequality is bad for America because the gap between poor and wealthy is too big. This makes America more divided and is not good for the economic situation for America. Some inequality is good because it allows Americans to strive and work hard to climb up the socioeconomic class ladder.
2. I believe the government should do something about it. However, they should not allow Americans to become dependent upon their help nor abuse the system.The government should help because helping might boost America's economic status, lessen the division amongst Americans, and lessen economic struggle.
3. The government does have a right to do something about it because it is their responsibility to make sure all of America's financial needs are met and when the level of inequality is as high as it is, the government should step in and do what is necessary to keep America functioning properly.
1) The level of income inequality is bad in America because it furthers the divisions between the classes and will shrink the middle class until it does not exist.
2) The government should step in because the wealthy business owners are not going to regulate themselves when it comes to the wages they get or give to their employees.
3) I would say that the government has the right to step in because it is their job to protect its citizens while stoping corruption and greed and should preserve the capitalist system in America.
1. This level of inequality is a mixed bag. Inequality provides incentives for work hard and achieve but also make it harder to climb the rings of the social ladder. This spread of inequality could convince people to quit trying to achieve wealth with the gaps in the distribution.
2. No, the government isn't in a position to redistribute wealth that was earned, it may not be fair but it's not the government's place to intrude in what people are paid. The CEO of Walmart may make what an employee makes in a month in an hour but he is also leading a company with 15 billion in profits in the US alone the return in his salary is relatively small compared to the profit the company made under his leadership.
3. The government doesn't really have a right to intrude on what people get paid. People still work for the money and as unfair as it may be, people who mange their money well and are paid well still deserve to keep what they have and earn.
4. Ideally wealth should be distributed in a more fair manner but the change would be up to individual companies who pay the CEO not the government so the chance of this changing is slim.
5. This distribution isn't fair to many hardworking middle class Americans but there is little to do to change it, it is just another incentive to achieve wealth. The incentive to become wealthy is promoting social mobility even though the rings become further spaced closer to the top 1%.
1. Inequality is very important in a nation. Without differences in income and social status, everyone is the same, and there would be no reason for anyone to work hard or even try, which would not be good for that said nation. In terms of the US, this level of inequality is very large, and should not be so. The rich deserve their share for the higher paying jobs that they work, and the poor definitely deserve their share as well, but unfortunately it isn't working out that way, for the poor at least.
2. The solution however, shouldn't be to take from the rich and give to the poor, because while the poor deserve the money that they work hard for, treating the rich unfairly and taking money from them only solves things temporarily, and is unfair to the rich as well. The fact that there are more poor than there are rich shouldn't justify this theory. Instead, the government should create more jobs, and higher paying jobs at that.
5. I believe that this distribution of wealth is a little unfair, but it's the way it works. Social status reflects wealth, and wealth reflects social status, it's how it is. Not to say that someone in a poor upbringing can't achieve wealth, but it's how things are set. This unfairness definitely drives people to achieve greater wealth and greater social status. There are many stories of how people came from poverty stricken homes to achieve great wealth and success, because they were driven to achieve greatness.
The level of inequality is bad for America because it makes it harder for people (mainly middle to lower class to hold a standing position in the economy while also trying to move forward on the ecomomic ladder. It would be nice if the government could do something about the money problems in America . However what all can be done? Economy problems has been a major problem in America there is no easy fix. If the e onomy was to ever be properly fix it would take many years
Devin Staples said
1. I believe this level of inequality is bad for america because the majority of the people are living pay check to pay check or scrapping up pocket change. This makes it more difficult for the bottom 80% to contribute in building the economy. If the economy isn't getting better then the percent that is unemployed will still have a difficult time finding a job, while that top one percent has more money then everyone put together.
2. I think that the government should do something about the inequality because it would be beneficial for the majority of the americans. If the government increases taxes on the rich, then the distribution could become more equal because the rich have the extra to spend. Or if the government increased spending and decreased taxes that could encourage more american spending and help boost the economy.
1. The level of inequality is bad for America. It's bad because it shows that there are a lot of people that are unemployed. As seen by the video, there are quite a bit of people that are poor or making the bare minimum.
2. @zoe sellers, that's a good point. A rich person that's making a lot of money, for example a CEO, isn't going to cut his salary. However, if there is a hard- working middle class worker is still making the bare minimum well that's not good. The government should step in and evaluate salaries or provide jobs for people who aren't working so they can contribute to the economy.
3. The government does have the right to do something because with the help of the government, the economy will get better. But, just because the government does have the right to make this inequality better doesn't mean they will.
4. I think the wealth of America should be fairly evenly distributed because everyone has bills to pay other expenses. If the wealth of the country were evenly distributed, homelessness would decrease because people would have a sustainable way to live in a home
5. The distribution is not fair for hard working middle class because if they are working hard and making the bare minimum well that's just not right. It's unfairness is what drives people to achieve wealth because then they would work even harder to get the money or wealth that they deserve.
1) this level of inequality SEEMS bad. But it really is not that bad. I am probably in the lower middle class. Just above the "poor". I am part of a family of five. Living is not that bad. We have food, water, clothes etc. Sure we may not be able to afford some luxuries but that's alright. Although there is inequality in America. If you think about it, we are all pretty much okay. Is it bad for America? Not necessarily. Is it good for America? Not necessarily.
2) the government should do nothing. The video said that the CEO of a company hardly works as hard as the average employee. Yea, that's true, but before they were CEOs they had to work extremely hard to get to the top. The government should do nothing. The people of America need to learn that you must work hard to rise. The harder you work the better the benefits. "You reap what you sow".
3) I do not think that the government has the right. It is through people's own blood and tears that they got to the top. So why should the government penalize them for the people who don't try and work?
4) America is good as is. However it would be nice if the wealth was distributed by work and importance of occupation. For example I believe people such as teachers should be closer to the top. After all without them CEOs could not be where they are now. I think this should be done this way because it rewards those who are hard-working and those who impact the country and consequently the world.
5) I believe this distribution of wealth is unfair as there are plenty of hardworking people who are just unlucky and cannot rise any further. I believe money can be distributed a little more evenly but otherwise where we are now is okay. This "unfairness" does not drive people. After all you often only hear people wanting to achieve more wealth to help their family or help someone, never is the reason to make things fair.
1. This level of inequality is good for America because it gives lower class and middle class citizens that incentive to work toward achieving that higher status.
2. I don't really think the government should interfere with how much these people makes. I do believe that the top 1% shouldn't be allowed to use tax loopholes to get out of paying their taxes. When they use loopholes this forces our government to rely on the middle class to contribute a large percentage of what they make.
3. The government does not have the right to do anything about this distribution of the wealth because the top 1% makes so much money to where government intervention couldn't really affect their incomes or their companies.
4. I think the distribution of money should be the way we "think" it's distributed, rather than the reality. The CEOs, doctors, lawyers, etc. are already going to have a large income and that's great because they worked for it. I believe that if every person who makes a yearly income had the same tax rate then the distribution will level out on its own.
5. I think it's fair that the wealthy people make the amount of money they do, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they work harder than someone in the middle class. I also think that the inequality of the incomes drive middle class workers to obtaining wealth. There are different ways of doing that, and that all depends on the motivation that person has.
1) The level of inequality is somewhat bad for Americans. Because the wealth is skewed it may make people not want to work as hard knowing the job they have will never make them rich or help them financially, and knowing they can never become the CEO of a Fortune 500 company.
2) The government is already doing something about it, they have "lower" tax rates for the rich than the poor. This means if someone makes $10,000 a year and this persons tax is 10% then they pay $1000. But someone richer who makes $100,000 has taxes at 5%. Their taxes are lower but they still pay more. This rich person pays $5000 in taxes. If this were switched then the middle class can have more money which in turn can be used to invest and buy things.
3) The government has a right to tax alone. If they were to just take the wealth and redistribute it then this becomes socialism. If people get money without working hard then they will not work at all.
4) The wealth should be distributed with 50% of the wealth among the lower 70% of the population. But this needs to happen naturally without any direct interference by the government.
5) The distribution of wealth is not fair. CEO's shouldn't be paid the same as all their workers, they still have a more important job which requires critical decisions, but at the same time they shouldn't be paid so much when compared to their average employee. This unfairness doesn't really drive most people either. Unless you know you have a chance to become a CEO your goal is not to become one. Most jobs do not hire and promote as often for this to be possible so the idea of becoming a CEO is not on people's mind when they get up in the morning for work
1. I think that this video very accurately shows in the plainest way how the wealth is distributed in America, but I think it leaves out 1) how much of that the top 1% actually spend for themselves and 2) how much of it gets donated or redistributed to lower classes. Yes, that is a stupendous amount of money for a few people, but we can't see how much of that money is used to promote the advancement of lower classes.
2. I don't think it is fair that the wealthy have to pay lower rates of tax, so yes I think the government should intervene in the most minute way possible in order to skew that graph at least a little bit because the wealthy are completely able to sustain proper living even if more of their money goes to taxes.
3. On the subject of changing tax rates, yes, the government has the right to do that, but if we're talking about taking money away from the top 10% unfairly, no, I don't believe the government has a right. Those top 10's have found a way to climb the ladder of the system, making large sums of money that almost anyone else in this country has the same ability to make.
4. I think it should be a small bit skewed towards the lower Americans, because when the top 10% are making that much of America's money, I don't think there is any excuse to why any United States citizen is living in poverty.
5. No, this is not fair, because the people at the end of the rope are struggling to stay on while those at the top are gold plating their Bugatti's and almost completely disregarding those at the bottom. The hard workers don't get their fair share of the pot, because without construction workers and air condition repairmen, the wealthy would not be able to look out of their high rise penthouse suite and enjoy the cool a/c air, and the top 10% don't thank the lower classes enough for their contributions.
1. This level of inequality is bad for America, it puts unnecessary stress on the poor and middle class and causes the wealthiest 1% to have a much larger share of the wealth than they proportionally deserve. The rich should be able to be rich, but not to this extravagant extent, and not while millions of the lower classes are suffering as a direct result.
2. It's a difficult question whether or not the government should interfere. We live in a free market economy, and therefore less interference is generally a good thing, however the invisible hand of capitalism has lead us to an unsavory result. It would be nice if the government could do "something," however it's all too likely that there is no simple or easy solution for the government to pursue without compromising the principles that our economy stands on.
3. The government, as it stands, doesn't really have the ability to change this situation. It has the right to increase benefits for the poor, and raise taxes on the rich, which are rights that our government has always recognized, however no large amount of change in these policies will happen as a result of the partisan politics in our government. Without compromise, nothing meaningful can happen.
4. Ideally, everyone would be above the poverty line, and those who wish to work for better wages have the ability to excel.
5. Yes, it is unfair for the average worker. A CEO puts in a large amount of effort for sure for his job, and the work to get there is not insignificant, however calling it "fair" that the CEO earns 380x the amount of the average worker is inaccurate. That being said, fairness has never really played a role in success.
This level of inequality is obviously bad for America because it makes it hard for the poorer Americans to represent themselves in the government because they don't have the money to do it. They also wouldn't have the time to do it either because they need to be working for whatever money they can get.
Our government shouldn't do anything about it because its based on a capitalistic society so it is out of there jurisdiction to do anything. I wouldn't want them to do anything either because if the government has a lot of control over the economy that's too much power.
It would be ideal if wealth were distributed more evenly, so the poorer Americans could have a little more say. But the distribution got there naturally so it would be too crippling to the economy as a whole to unnaturally shift it to an even stand point.
The middle class probably feels it is unfair, but if you work extremely hard your whole life, through school and your career you will have caught a break somewhere allowing you to reach the top 20%. But I do agree that the "unfairness" does keep people working hard hoping to catch that break. It also keeps people hungry trying to achieve more, versus staying complacent and getting lazy.
1. Is this level of inequality good or bad for America? How so? Explain.
On the one hand, a level of inequality within America is, like the maker said, suggestive that the harder you work, the more you make but the extent to which there is a large separation between the lowest and highest (and even middle to highest) groups shows that the current system within America doesn't allow for 'hard workers' to get their respective earned amounts of pay because so much of the wealth is secured in the top 1% of Americans who are obviously not going to choose to give it up for a system that they don't perceive as fair.
2/3. Should the government do anything about it? Why or why not? Does the government have the right to do anything about it? Why or why not?
While ideally income could be more equal, the government doesn't necessarily have the constitutional right to decide that the wealthiest people don't 'deserve' the pay they are receiving and even if they did, there is not really a method of implementation that wouldn't cause an uproar.
4. How do you think wealth should be distributed in America or is it good as it is? Why?
I pretty much agree with the person who made the video in that while a socialist level 'each of the 5 20% dividends of America has 20% of the wealth' system would not be reasonable because America is so engrained in its 'the harder you work, the more money you have' ideal, thus having these different in wealth may encourage those individuals on the upper middle or lower classes to do things to better themselves such as get an education to improve their opportunities, I do, however, feel that our current system excludes way too many Americans from even the opportunity to try and work harder so that they can earn more because there isn't much to be dine when someone is working as hard as they possibly can and are still below the poverty line.
5. Is this distribution of wealth "fair" for hardworking middle-class Americans? Is this "unfairness" what drives people to achieve wealth?
Perhaps "fair" isn't the best way to describe this distribution of wealth in regards to the middle class, but I feel that even the notion of a 'middle class' is a misnomer based on the current wealth distribution in that there is essentially no reasonable chance that someone would move from 'middle' to upper class and also that the top 1% of our nation has 24% of the wealth. I feel as if this "unfairness" does drive people to achieve wealth within the lower and middle classes because movement between these two classes can be so fluid, however, I don't think that upper class should be included in this assessment because essentially whoever is in the upper class (especially the 1%) stays there.
1) I think this level of inequality is bad for America because I think it in some ways discourages hard work. Your average citizen isn't going to be a CEO or big time investor, but rather an honest worker who just needs to make enough to support their family. If they know that despite their hard work the chances of them making a decent earning is slim, what point is there in working that hard?
2-3) I believe that the government should do something about this, and that it has a right to. I don't mean that it's fair for those in the top one percent to be stripped of their earnings or anything, but I do believe it should be easier for those willing to work to have more to show for it because this is the majority. These are the people who are contributing to the economy and to society and who influence it the most.
4) I believe wealth should be distributed the way "most Americans think" in the video. The wealth should reflect the hard work of the middle class and even the self made millions of the upper class, but people should have enough money to eat. To send their kids to college. To not lose sleep over the idea that they could lose their house. The poor should have incentive to change their reality, but maybe this can only be accomplished if they're not worried about where they're next meal is coming from.
5) I honestly think it could go both ways. I believe that it is unfair for those who work for their lifestyle and their family, but while it can sometimes drive them to pursue that wealth sometimes it has the opposite effect and discourages instead of encourages.
1)The level on inequality can be healty to so degree. I believe It can motivate people to work harder and achieve more. However I also believe that the level of inequality America has reached within the past 30 is unnatural. For 1% of American citizens to have over 40% of America's wealth is highly dangerous. No small group of people should have that much power. Such a economic structure breathes corruption and negligence Which can be a primary reason why political culture has been so negative over the last few years.
2-3) The government should be mindful of these statistics. Whether not they are in the right to do something about it is hard to say, I would need more time to make a concrete descion about how much control the government should have over America's economic system. Like I said earlier, it is highly dangerous for so few people to have that much power and influence.
4) I believe wealth should be distributed as evenly as possible. I don't believe in socialism but I do believe that money easily represents how much power you have. With that said we should try to distribute wealth evenly so that most people's voices can be heard. If we really believe that ever man is born equal( which is of course false) then every man should have some sort of economic equality.
5) I believe that there is a healty and unhealthy drive for wealth. It can be hard to say who is on what team but I the economic situation America is currently in would most likely have majority of American citizens hungry for money in an unhealthy way. The middle class that carries the labor force of America should be represented more fairly in the economic system. If they didn't get up and commute to their 9-5 job everyday a lot wouldn't get done. I believe it is unfair that a CEO canearn what a normal employee makes in a couple of month and a couple of minutes,
1) This level of inequality is very bad for America because that shows that most of the money the lower class, middle class, and part of the upper class is redistributed to the top 1%. This, I'm any economy can not be considered as good.
2) The only thing the government can do at this point in time is to tax them more, but to actually take the money that they earn out of there pockets is completely out of the government's jurisdiction.
3) The government has no right to take money from anyone. For example, how would you feel if you just sold your car for an enormous amount of money, and that you have so much money, you moved up a social class, and the government came in and took half of the money before taxes? The government can't take money out of Americans bank accounts and pockets whenever and to whom ever they want.
4) I believe that wealth should be distributed as such that there is an upper, middle, and lower class, but not to the extent that the top 1% in the upper class have more wealth than all of the other classes put together.
5) As a part of the middle class, a person who is hardworking should be able to compete with a CEO that just sits behind a desk . But in America, "fair" is never possible because of all the opportunities offered here. I believe that "unfairness" is what drives people to work hard because if they work hard then they know what it's like to achieve things, and once you achieve things, you just want more, which is one of the reasons we have such a disproportioned social class.
1. Let's begin with the fact that 1% of Americans have 40% of Americas wealth. That statistic is outstanding, and not in the good way. America's founders wanted a fair democracy that represented the whole nation, not just a small percentage. So if only 1% has that much of the nations wealth, then policy makers will pay more attention to them - not the whole nation. Therefore, the level of inequality is bad because with it there is and will not be justice for all, just justice for some.
2. We hear it all the time, all Americans have the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit to happiness." However, if the nation is not bringing justice for all (notice that I am not saying equality) then that saying really is not true. It is not possible for those who are under huge financial issues to break out and become the next CEO.
3. The government is here to protect all citizens. If it is not, then it is not doing its job.
4. Keeping justice in mind and knowing that no human being should be living in extreme poverty, the wealth should be distributed. It's a matter of taking care of fellow citizens and treating others as you would want to be treated. Humans are all equal, and yes if you work for your money then you should be able to keep it, but others at the same time should not be suffering if you(the 10% and government) can help it.
5. If the poverty line was moved back, middle class was not simply "scraping by," and the 1% was not the priority of policy makers, then yes the distributed of wealth would be fair. However, it is not there not so the distribution is not fair. To certain extent, yes this unfairness drives people. All people are striving to a life that brings them more happiness and money is a main factor for many. I think that is already imbedded in most. I just do not think people at the bottom should suffer - once they know justice and kindness they hopefully will carry that out themselves and work to pass on that care.
1) This level of inequality in America is bad because it causes class warfare. High levels of poverty have been has been linked to higher levels of violence or a higher chance to commit a crime. The people that scrape the bottom are forced to do crazy things to survive and feed their families.
However, it is not like people at the bottom have not had a chance to change who they came out to be. A proper education and hard work can do wonders.
2) No, we already spend enough on welfare. People seem to believe spending is good, and it is, but not on stuff like entitlement checks and welfare.
3) The government can do whatever they want as long as it's constitutional and doesn't infringe on the private rights of Americans.
4) Honestly, there are some people that make insane amounts of money because they can set their own salaries. Those people earn a whole lot more than they need to. Instead of raking in $300000 a year, those CEOs could try to spend money to improve institutions and increase worker performance. Higher worker performance = higher production rates = more money to the company which should be used to increase the pay checks of hard working workers.
5) Everyone wants to be at the top. It is a little unfair because people in the middle class don't really make a whole lot of money, but they still make enough to not be eligible for welfare checks and food stamps. Also since they have full time jobs they are not able to go to school full time to earn a better degree.
1/4.I think that an unfair distribution of wealth is acceptable and healthy for society, but not to the extent that the top 1% has 40% of the wealth in the nation. While I disagree with the "fair" distribution graphs in the video, I do acknowledge that the current distribution of wealth is bad for the environment because the bottom 50% of the nation is not wealthy enough to actively participate in the economy without fear of not being able to get by.
2/3. The government has no right to say someone has "too much wealth," or something similar, as long as the wealth is attained fairly and legally. However, considering that most of the wealth is accumulating with the top 1%, who are notorious for not paying taxes by taking advantage of loopholes, the government should be doing something. The top 1% should abide by the same laws that we abide by and should by paying the proper amount of taxes like the rest of the country does. If the government does fix this problem, the bottom 50% would have enough to actively participate in the economy.
5. Of course this distribution is not fair for the hard working middle class, but i don't think it will ever be fair for them. The top 20% do not work harder than the rest of the nation, they more than likely work a lot less, the reason they are so much better off is because they work smarter; because of this, it will never be fair for the hard working people because its not about how hard you work, but how well you work. I do think that this "unfairness" definitely motivates people to make more money, because thats what the entire economy and society is based on, coveting materialistic goods. Of course we don't need the new iPhone that just came out, but we want it, and because of this, we will always strive to be in the top 20%.
1. I feel that this level of inequality is bad for the USA because a majority of people are scrapping by although inequality in wealth may keep us from socialism but having the top 1% holding 40% of the wealth is ridiculous.
2. Yes the government should do something about this because big business owners and such have no done a good job of regulating themselves and paying other fairly.
3. Yes the government should protect against inequality but i don't think that they can do anything about it because wealth runs freely.
4. I think wealth should be distributed like the ideal model or at least close to it. Because I feel that model is fair.
5. I believe this distribution of wealth is not fair because there are plenty of hard working people out there who are stuck in the same economic position and may remain there for most of their life. This unfairness may drive some people but it may discourage people that believe that wealth will always be unfair so they is no point to achieve higher because it won't make a difference.
1. This level of inequality is not good for America. I believe that in order for America to strive and for the middle class to prosper there needs to be a more evenly distribution of wealth.
2.Yes, the government should do something about this because this situation has gotten so big that leaving it up to citizens to handle wont do the job (I.e. occupy wallstreet). The government has to take control of the economical situation and help distribute the wealth for others.
3.yes the government has the right to do something about it. The inequality of wealth, in which the wealthy are taking in 24% of American wealth, has gotten out of hand. It is almost impossible for someone who is in the middle class to progress. This defeats the whole purpose of the "American dream".
4.i believe the wealth should be distributed like the "ideal" graph in the video. This way the economy can function properly, people will have motivation to move up in life, and everyone can have a chance at getting the "piece of the pie".
5.No the distribution of wealth is not fair at all toward the hardworking middles class in America. the distribution is set up so that the wealthy takes all The money and only a few dollars are left for the middle class. I believe that this extreme "unfairness" does not drive people to become wealthy but only discourages them to achieve wealth. Only 1% of Americans are wealthy and the other 99% are left to dreaming and hoping that they may actually win the "super-wealthy lotto".
1. Is this level of inequality good or bad for America? How so? Explain.
This level of inequality is bad for America because the difference between the top 1% of earners in comparison to the rest of the United States is so great that it allows them to have the greatest power and influence on the government.
2. Should the government do anything about it? Why or why not?
If the government could do something efficiently and effective then yes they should. If not then they shouldn't do anything
3. Does the government have the right to do anything about it? Why or why not?
They have the right to do anything if it is constitutionally correct.
4. How do you think wealth should be distributed in America or is it good as it is? Why?
I think the wealth in America should be distributed similar to the the "ideal" distribution that was discussed in the video. I think this will allow for each citizen to have more of a similar say in government.
5. Is this distribution of wealth "fair" for hardworking middle-class Americans? Is this "unfairness" what drives people to achieve wealth?
No, this distribution is not fair. For some the unfairness can drive them to achieve wealth but not for all.
1. This level of inequality is bad for America. It creates an unbalanced distribution of wealth that makes the poor poorer and the wealthy wealthier. The rich do not need more money just as we should not have people living in poverty when we have people as wealthy as the 1%.
2. I think the government should do something about it since such a wealth disparity creates would could become dangerous resentment between a lower class getting poorer while the rich get richer.
An example of this growing dissent showed with the appearance of the Occupy Wall Street movement.
3. I do not think the government has the right to do something. The American political system is not an economic system though it most closely resembles a capitalist structure. This being said, although America can be seen as a capitalist nation, that does not alleviate the wealth disparity from being the country's burden. While a capitalist structure may setup such a disparity it remains the duty of our country to protect the general welfare of the country. It is not doing it's job if it has so many of its citizens living beneath the poverty line. Thus the government has the right to help the lower end of the spectrum but not necessarily to affect the upper end.
4. I think wealth should be distributed much in the ways that people in the video believed it should be at, and what they thought it actually was, or somewhere between the two. It is okay for the upper class to be wealthy, but I do not think that a country such as America should have a lower class that earns as much as it does.
5. I do not think that this distribution of wealth is fair for hardworking middle-class Americans. It results in few and few making it pass that stage. It is true that inequality of wealth is what drives people to attain a higher state of well-being, but I think that such a massive inequality does as much harm to that drive and the effectiveness of such a drive than perfect equality would.
Post a Comment