The Price Of Inequality Summary

Stiglitz identifies dwindling opportunity, monopoly power and tax treatment, and the investments of the government as the effects from manipulating the economy to exclusively benefit the top 1%. The societal impact becomes clear when the author states that the ultimate price is the “erosion of our sense of identity,” which includes “fair play, equality of opportunity, and a sense of community” because a majority of people realize the importance of these topics related to the success of themselves and their country (Stiglitz, “Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%”). The article concludes with the significance of paying attention to common welfare as a “precondition for one’s own ultimate well-being” that the top 1% have a history of failing to grasp before meeting their

Throughout the article, Stiglitz approaches the topic of the 1% and how that prestigious group rarely tries benefiting anyone besides his or her self. Joseph Stiglitz gets that point across and explains it well within his article. The topic of the 1% only benefiting his or her self is extensively explained in the statement about the rich not caring about common problems. The rich has a large sum of money that they could invest into infrastructure, education, war and technology, but the upper 1% does not want to do that because it does benefit that group enough. I

In William Domhoff’s article, Wealth, Income, and Power, he examines wealth distribution in the United States, specifically financial inequality. He concludes that the wealthiest 10% of the United States effectively owns America, and that this is due in large part to an increase in unequal distribution of wealth between 1983 and 2004. Domhoff also states that the unequal wealth distribution is due in large part to tax cuts for the wealthy and the defeat of labor unions. Most of Domhoff’s information is accurate and includes strong, valid arguments and statements. However, there is room for improvement when identifying the subject of what is causing the inequality.

Joseph E. Stiglitz’ The Great Divide: Unequal Societies and What We Can Do About Them is a compilation of the plethora of his essays and articles on the growing inequality gap. Like Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the 21st Century (without the historical breadth), The Great Divide is a contribution to the conversation on inequality broadly considered. Inequality is the outcome of differences in the way the society responds to the 1 percent and the rest of us in terms of education, health care, and the legal system. The contours of the conversations on inequality are mainly ideologically and formulated by the 1 percent for their benefit. A CEO receives a mammoth payoff even as the company files for bankruptcy projection. Bankers are bailed out by the tune of $700 for wrecking the U.S. economy. An important quality of the book is that it is written largely

Social inequality can either be considered natural and necessary as inequalities creates incentives for individuals to work harder, or it can be considered systematic, an integral feature of social order that creates winners and losers. The former view would not consider inequality a public matter, therefore does not require governing. The latter however, would consider inequality a public issue that can only be reduced by government implementing policies to so. This essay will compare and contrast Hayek’s view of governing inequality with that of Stiglitz.

Wealth inequality in the United States has grown tremendously since 1970. The United States continuously reveals higher rates of inequality as a result of perpetual support for free market capitalism. The high rates of wealth inequality cause the growing financial crisis to persist, lower socio-economic mobility, increase national poverty, and have adverse effects on health and well being.

America is one of the world’s largest and prosperous developed countries in the world, but take a closer look and you realize that the great United States of America has an alarmingly large amount of poverty. Where there once used to be an “American Dream” there now lies the cold hard truth, there is less and less opportunity every day and growing inequality every second. Joseph E. Stiglitz how America has turned into a country that would be unrecognizable to any of the founding fathers. In The Price of InequalityStiglitz visits this problem and searches for the source of the economic inequality that the United States is faced with today. Stiglitz came to the conclusion that America is declining and turning into a society like the one

In the essay, “Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%” by Joseph E. Stiglitz, Stiglitz criticizes the wealthy, and how the economy protects them. The government has reduced taxes for those wealthy people, but not working Americans that are poor. The government is giving more money to the wealthy, while taking opportunities from the less-educated. Everyone in America is not equal in society. America has went from a society that everyone worked hard to earn money to an economy that is predictable. The rich know they will stay rich and their legacy will continue. The poor knows their hard working and still struggling legacy will continue. Many people that aren’t rich depend on the government for certain things, but rich people have the money to pay

Along with globalization market forces has had the greatest impact on income equalities in the United Sates. Thomas Piketty says that “by definition, in all societies, income inequality is the result of adding up these two components: inequality of income from labor and inequality of income from capital. The more unequally distributed each of these two components is, the greater the total inequality ... [a] decisive factor is the relation between these two dimensions of inequality: to what extent do individuals with high income from labor also enjoy high income from capital? Technically speaking, this relation is a statistical correlation, and the greater the correlation, the greater the total inequality, all other things being equal” (Piketty & Goldhammer, 2014, p. 242). In the U.S. the correlation between the two dimensions has become so astonishing that “President Obama called economic inequality “the defining challenge of our time.” But while Americans acknowledge that the gap between the rich and poor has widened over the last decade, very few see it as a serious issue. Just five percent of Americans think that inequality is a major problem in need of attention” (Fitz,

Capitalism has been the central force behind the growth of the United States’ progressive economy. Within such advanced economic system the chances of economic disparity are significantly high. In fact, over the past three decades there has being a steady increase in unequal wealth distribution among the economic classes. To sustain the current unequal wealth distribution among the classes of the American population, there are numerous factors that influence and shape this trend. For some members of the population it is alarmingly disturbing to know that recent statistics have shown that, “In the US [alone] the wealthiest 1% of its population owns more than the bottom 95 %” (Gutman). As for the difference in economic wealth, it resulted

“One reason to care about inequality is the straightforward matter of living standards. The lions share of the economic growth in America over the past thirty years has gone to a small, wealthy minority…”(Krugman 586).

In Robert Reich documentary “Inequality for All” he makes a compelling discussion about the serious crises that the United States faces due the widening economic gap. He looks to raise awareness of the U.S. economic gap between the rich and poor. According to Reich the widening divide in America is real and growing. Income levels at the middle and labor class is stagnant and are at it’s lowest levels compared to upper class incomes since the beginning of WWII and is growing wider each year. Reich suggests that the economy runs more smoothly when the middle class has jobs with fair wages, when unions are strong, and when middle class workers have some extra money to spend if possible when the government uses the tax policy properly and when it raises the minimum wage regularly to control the income gap between labor and management. In other words Reich argues that economically healthy middle and labor class equality is the foundation of a thriving economy and is necessary to maintaining a sound national infrastructure and educational system within

This “middle-class nation” is struggling to support all those who live in its borders and the misconceptions about wealth are vastly overrated. Furthermore, the idea of wealth and stability is incorrect, and there is a very sharp contrast between the rich and poor in the country. As the richest twenty percent of American hold ninety percent of the total household of the total household wealth in the country, those at the bottom have managed very poorly and suffer to get through the days.

In other words, America has a widening gap between its wealthy and poor. As the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, there is a problem emerging: the disappearance of the middle class. Low-wage workers continue to fall behind those who make higher wages, and this only widens the gap between the two. There has been an economic boom in the United States, which has made the country more prosperous than it has ever been. That prosperity does not reach all people; it seems to only favor the rich. Rising economic segregation has taken away many opportunities for the poor to rise in America today. The poor may find that the economic boom has increased their income; however, as their income increase so does the prices they must for their living expenses (Dreier, Mollenkopf, & Swanstrom 19).

The highest earning fifth of U.S. families earned 59.1% of all income, while the richest earned 88.9% of all wealth. A big gap between the rich and poor is often associated with low social mobility, which contradicts the American ideal of equal opportunity. Levels of income inequality are higher than they have been in almost a century, the top one percent has a share of the national income of over 20 percent (Wilhelm). There are a variety of factors that influence income inequality, a few of which will be discussed in this paper. Rising income inequality is caused by differences in life expectancy, rapidly increases in the incomes of the top 5 percent, social trends, and shifts in the global economy.