The closing statements of the article discusses income mobility and states that the current rungs separated in terms of economic inequality are outdated. This opinion holds that separation between groups/rungs of the economic later further apart is not related to a person's ability to move between class or economic success groups. This opinion however is clearly one from the top or middle of the tiers looking down rather than understanding the magnitude of climbing this later from the bottom. Opinions such as these do not necessarily take into account the lowest quintiles when making sweeping statements as to how the growing inequality is a function of the system rather than something that is external to the capabilities of the individual to move within and between groups. This opinion represents the notion that the successful have their wealth because of their hard work, and those falling lower on the totem pole must not have worked hard enough.
Nicola Konigkramer I completely agree with your statement, and it is clear that this article represents the opinion of someone outside of the lower class. Not only does the income gap represent inequality in the U.S., but if we looked at the wealth gap, we could see that the poor are unable to move upward because of their lack of wealth and inability to save their income.
People are constantly saying that "the rich" aren't paying their "fair share" and need to be taxed more, but this study shows the opposite. The charts in this article provide evidence that the richest Americans are paying their "fair share" of federal taxes. The richest 20% of Americans are paying off almost 100% of the entire federal tax burden of transfer payments and all other non-financed government spending. What's not so fair is that the bottom 60% is getting off with no tax burden and receiving transfer payments from the top 20% of about 10,000 per household. This report raises the question if the bottom 60% are paying their fair share when they aren't paying anything and receiving everything.
I do not agree that the "bottom" is getting off when it comes to paying taxes because how are they getting off when they do not have the means to provide food for their families let alone pay some taxes. And I do believe everyone pays taxes, even if it's not as much as the wealthy somebody is giving up money that they may or may not have. Some people just have more so they should contribute more and others have less, simple as that.
It's sad because we often blame people for being in the lower class but they did not get to choose to be born into that situation. Of course, people can make choices to change their lives but everyone can't be rich. Everyone can not be in the 1% which means somebody else will have to balance out that inequality; which are the rich. The lower 60% aren't receiving "everything", the lower 60% may receive some food stamps for the month or some crappy health insurance but what does that compare to someone who can buy food for a whole state. If this country did not have such a huge wealth gap then the rich would not have to provide for the lower classes. I also do not believe that those who are rich worked harder than those who are in the lower class because most of the time that is not the case at all. I believe the lower class works harder because that is their only way for survival.
Maybe it is taxes that are creating the wealth gap? America has being doing the same thing for years and getting the same results. I think it's time for a new strategy. When will things ever be equal?
I agree with De'Ja's claim that taxes are paid by everyone and while the taxes that are paid by Americans are proportional to their incomes, and the poor pay much less taxes than do the rich, this is largely in part due to the fact that even the little amount of taxes they must pay largely impact how they live. If someone who makes very little money also has to set aside some of this money for taxes, it may be hard for them to afford even some of life's basic necessities. This is why people should not criticize the taxing system because it makes the wealthy pay a larger portion of taxes. The wealthy have more money and should therefore be taxed more.
I agree with De'Ja's comments. Although it is true that people who are rich are paying more taxes it has to be understood that people who are poor are unable to pay for the taxes you want them to be paying for. And to say that they aren't paying their "fair share" doesn't make sense considering that the whole system we live in isn't "fair" to begin with. We live in a society where institutionalized racism and discrimination has a huge impact on the lives on our people and their children. So you can't say "fair" because children don't have the same "fair" opportunities the rich children do. poor people don't have the same "fair" health and living conditions. if you are born in the ghetto and raised in the ghetto with horrible living conditions and horrible education opportunities how are you supposed to pay for taxes that are "fair" when you didnt even have a "fair" beginning. -Rahel Mehreteab
The wealth gap in America is a huge problem. If wealth were distributed more evenly, i.e. raising minimum wage, there would be more mobility among the middle and lower classes to advance themselves in society. Unfortunately, children born into rich families don't have to do as much work to be successful whereas a poorer child will have to do more to prove themselves in society.
this is a good point, but it also important to know that the wealthy do pay taxes that do help the lower classes. The problem is the major tax breaks the super rich can get away with which allows them to keep more their wealth. Another problem is that the wealthy business owners can really only open new businesses and create new jobs. These new jobs are the only way the lower class can get money. Once the lower class has money, they will be able to spend it and buy goods which will increase demand and create a need for the new businesses. This will create a circular process in which new jobs are created, which pay people, who then can buy goods, and create a demand, which can lead to an increase in jobs/pay for workers
I agree with your point on the wealth gap being a seemingly insurmountable problem in the U.S.; however, raising minimum wage may create a backlash of small business owners and franchise owners. The problem would be that if the owners only have "x" amount of dollars for wages within the companies' budgets, and minimum wage increases, and "x" stays the same, that means people are losing jobs. The increase of minimum wage alone will not alleviate the wealth gap in America. That being said, why do athletes, famous entertainment stars, and CEOs earn 30 times more than the average American? If these careers were to be capped at $550,000 (the same that the presidential office earns after including the annual expense account, a travel account, and a $20,000 entertainment stipend), and the money formally lining the pockets of the top 1%, were to be reinvested into the deficit, minimum wage, housing, food, roads, the education system, etc., the wealth gap would diminish. Raising the minimum wage while capping over-inflated incomes of the 1%, would allow EVERYONE to pay their fair share, dissolving the dilemma of who is paying what. Many other countries have access to FREE COLLEGE!!! Many other countries have INEXPENSIVE HEALTH CARE. Many other countries have inexpensive pharmaceuticals. Why do medicine, healthcare, education, among other middle-class-strengthening components, become unattainable for the middle class in THIS country? Taxes are not the issue - clearly, if the rich are paying their "fair share". If the rich are paying their fair share in taxes, and there is still and wealth gap, then taxes are not the issue, wages are the issue. As I stated before, raising minimum wage alone does not close the gap, it forfeits jobs. Restructuring is the key. Once people start talking about equal anything, however, people argue it's Socialism, and dismiss it. -Secret Agent
The huge wealth gap in America is an obvious problem and I agree with you that raising minimum would help solve this problem even the slightest bit. However, this article clearly shows that the wealthiest 1% are paying their share in taxes. The wealthiest are usually the ones who helps the under class with employment, by starting up new businesses, factories, etc. I don't necessarily believe that people born into 'wealthy' families won't have to work as hard. Whose to say they won't go off on their own and try to get a name for themselves, by making their own living and not relying on their parents' money? I think it's fair that the wealthier are paying more taxes, which they evidently are, but they are also the ones that enable and catalyze job opportunities for the lower class. Again, it's a system in society and people utilize and build off others for opportunity.
The article clearly states the presence of income inequalities in the American society. According to what is the common belief, the wealthiest people, who make up just 1% of the American society have an unfair advantage of being "richer". It is assumed that they don't pay enough taxes in relation to their income. But, this article, especially the end portion of it states that the rich are indeed paying their fair-share , while the poor are being exempted from paying taxes and survive on the "grants" given to them by the government in the from of money, which it collects as revenue from the rich. Also, according to Winship and his studies show that a person is not likely to become rich even if the income inequalities reduce. This is because the status of a person in the financial ladder is determined independently of the income inequalities present in the society.
The article disputes the notion that the wealthiest 1% of America do not pay enough taxes. According to the charts, the rich are paying their fair share, while the poor are not. I think that the author disregards the fact that the rich can afford to pay a fair amount of taxes, because they are the people that are affected the least by it. Poor people may rely on grants and tax breaks, but that is because they need them.
Ryan Muscatella By reading this article, it is clear that income inequality is the highest it has ever been and seem to not be slowing down very soon. Even though this article makes it seem like the rich may not be charged enough taxes, it actually represents how the wealthier 1% of the world is paying their fair share while the poorer people are not paying the tax money they should.Therefore, this raises the question as to why do the rich keep getting ridiculed, even when they are the ones paying almost all of the tax burden in the United States? Many people argue that it is more difficult for a poor children to become rich than a rich child to become rich, however if the rich person is working harder and paying more taxes, isn't it clear who should have more money?
I think this article is very interesting because it just proves how the tax system in the United States is often very skewed and how the majority of the blame is put on the rich for not paying their share when they actually often do. The rich are in fact the people that can afford such high taxes without the least bit worry but they are often the ones who get ridiculed for their inability to pay enough. I also thought it was interesting they brought up the Gini coefficient because I am learning about that in another one of my classes and this number can range from 0 to 1. Meaning that the wealth distribution is completely fair, to the other side, where one person owns 100% of the wealth. -Chelsea Pudimott
According to the left, income has not increased for the lowest quintile since the 70's but the chart shows a 48% increase after adjustment for inflation. Rising levels of income inequality just means the average guy has a chance to get rich. Any healthy economy will have income inequality. We should push to create more of it.
I agree that income inequality is good because it gives incentive for people to work harder to achieve their goals, but as the income inequality keeps getting bigger, it makes it harder for the mobility between classes. There should only be a certain amount of income inequality in order to keep society healthy and give the option for mobility. Colleen Snitzer
I wouldn't necessarily say that income inequality is good per se. Some degree of stratification is beneficial to ensure that irreplaceable positions are filled. However, there are many wealthy individuals whose positions are not necessarily essential and their positions are not difficult to replace. Income inequality is not beneficial especially for those on the bottom end of the income spectrum. Take for instance, poverty. Poverty is cyclical in nature in that children born into a poor families have little chance in breaking into the upper end of the income distribution. For these reasons, I wouldn't say that income inequality provides incentive for people to work hard.
Nicola Konigkramer The problem of income inequality is shown through these graphics. In addition to the inequality of income in this country, upward mobility is becoming more and more difficult. We can see that it is easier for the rich to earn more and keep their wealth through finding tax loopholes. I think that this article would better represent the inequality if it focused on the wealth gap as well as the income gap in the U.S.
This article showed us how the tax system work and what surprised me the most is how much the rich have to pay. The article helped me realize the rich pays a lot and often time they are talked about because they are rich. Of course taxes won't affect them as much because they are rich but they are paying a large sum of taxes.
This article shows how the richer you are, the faster your income grows overtime. Although the U.S. has an infamous inequality of income distribution, We don't get taxed as much as Europe. I personally don't approve of this system because it makes the U.S economy more dependent on the top 1%. Which is too much power for a small group of people.
This article shows that unequal distribution of incomes across the United States. As the rich become more rich, the poor are slowly becoming more poor. Even though the rich are being taxed more, they still have a decent amount of money to keep themselves satisfied. While the poor are being taxed less, but they make less money so it leaves their households with less to live with. This article shows how our money system is unequal in the distribution of incomes, and proves that their is a gap between the rich and poor.
I agree with your point that the large gap between the rich and the poor is a major issue within our American economy, however I am not sure this article really gives a good plan on how to fix this problem. The primary focus of the article is the taxation of both the upper and lower class based on their yearly income. The wealthy are already being taxed more than the poor, which is understandable in order to help redistribute income. However, I have learned through a basic understanding of economics that this type of taxation can interfere with incentives. Incentives meaning the drive of people to want to try hard to become educated and be able to make money for themselves.
This article contains charts that are effectively comparisons of economic incomes and taxes across several different social classes in America. One interesting aspect of these graphs that I noticed was the steadily increasing gap between the rich and the poor financially speaking. The wealthy social class of America, especially the top 1% enjoy a rapidly increased income, even though they are subject to higher taxes. The same however cannot be said for the lower economic class, even though they are taxed less, they are victims of unequal income distribution. Thus, causing them to be at the bottom of the economic social ladder. The data presented in these charts highlights the unequal and ever-growing gap between income rates on the social class scale in America.
These charts are clearly showing the growing difference between the rich and the poor in America. Although the rich are being taxed at higher amounts, they still manage to have enough money to satisfy themselves. Unfortunately, the poor just keep becoming more poor even though they are taxed at lower amounts. Although I don't know if I think this uneven taxing is fair, it obviously does not seem to be making a difference in the huge, growing gap between the rich and the poor Americans. These charts and graphs are showing a trend in this growth between rich and poor Americans.
This article challenges the common belief that the wealthiest 1% does not pay enough in taxes. It goes on to argue that it is actually the poorer group that does not pay enough. It also highlights the income gap between the rich and poor and how it continues to increase. This is because mobility is easier for the rich to achieve and harder for the poor. This is why the rich continue getting richer and the poor continue getting the short end of the stick. This is because although the rich "pay their fair share of taxes" the still have enough money to satisfy all their needs and more while the poor do not. So at the end of the day, it is still very unequal. -Tita
These charts are showing the income gap in the US. It shows that although the top 1% are being taxed more because their income is higher, they can afford to pay those taxes. On the other hand, the poor are being taxed for incomes that are substantially lower than the top 1% which is not really allowing them to keep their money. So, the rich are continuing to get richer while the poor are just getting poorer. This gap is continuing to get worse and some action needs to take place to make the gap smaller.
This article shows us the difference of the income gap in the US and how the rich are are being taxed at a higher amount than the poor. The poor are unable to reach their tax rate because income inequality can hurt economic growth. The income inequality in the U.S. has been growing since the 1970's and it seems that the top 1% are receiving the amount of income.
This article shows us how the government tries to compensate the growing economic inequality in the country. The rich are being taxed at much higher rates, especially the top 1%, and the government has grown to rely on these rates. The government attempts to balance the taxes by giving the rich more transfers, however the transfers realistically have no impact compared to the taxes the rich pay. The government is aware of the economic inequality present in the country and tries to balance it by raising taxes on the rich. However, the problem isn't that the rich are too rich, but that there are too many poor that are living in impoverished conditions. Millions of people should not be living under the poverty line in one of the richest countries in the world.
This article uses charts to demonstrate the increasing gap between the rich and poor in America. It is assumed throughout society that the rich do not pay their share in taxes however the charts show the opposite. The rich are paying significantly more in taxes however it is not making a difference regarding income inequality.
In this article, the charts are used to challenge the belief that the wealthiest population of the country is not paying their share of the taxes. In reality, they are paying the bulk of the taxes. The income gap between the wealthy and the poor is highlighted to juxtapose huge difference in the population of the United States and how the less money you have, the less taxes you pay, but it is all in proportion to your total income. Therefore, the wealthier you are, the more you pay, but it has a smaller impact on your life because you can afford to pay it.
No matter how much economically ignorant citizens of the unites states complain that the rich do not pay their share in taxes are completely wrong according to the charts. The rich are paying their share and more but the income gap throughout the social classes is so big, that even higher taxes on the rich does not make much of a difference. The government shouldn't have to tax the rich more than any other social class, just to balance out the economy; that is definitely a form of inequality because it is not fair to the wealthy who work hard for their wealth to be responsible for balancing out the economy in terms of income inequality. Bryce Young
I agree Bryce. It really doesn't make sense that someone who works their tail off to gain wealth is then asked to give a ton of their back to the government to support those that cannot support themselves. However, I do agree that there are people that need the government assistance, but it seems to me like there is a large portion of people out there that live off the government because its easy and they don't really have to do anything and still get a "pay check". It's unfortunate that those that can take care of themselves resort to being lazy and nearly ruining it for those that do need assistance to survive.
To me, these charts are a signal that the economic income gap is going to be much more difficult to reduce than many think. Some simply say that the government just needs to tax the rich more, and all the problems will be solved. However these charts are proof that the wealthy are paying more taxes, yet the income gap has still increased. They need to look to other methods of fixing this issue rather than focusing on how it is the top 1% fault.
The income gap is related to the tax system but that is not the heart of the problem. We can adjust and shift taxes all we want but the only way to create an economically stable class system is to provide opportunities for the lower class. The way the system is right now, if you are born into poverty it is more than likely you will live your entire life in poverty and then give birth to children who will do the same. It is a perpetual cycle that needs to be changed. And this change can't come solely from tax breaks, there has to be a major change in the education system so that America "the land of opportunity" can actually provide opportunities for people to succeed. -Shannon Healy
The article discusses the common topic of the richer are getting richer and the poorer are getting poorer. This relates back to the misconception that the rich are not paying their fair share of taxes when in fact, the upper percentile are paying for a very large sum of the total taxes paid. In fact, it may even be the other way around where the people in poverty have higher chances of being exempt from taxes or receive aid from the federal government. -12Keys
After reading the article it seemed like a bunch of numbers that I did not entirely understand because of my lack of education in the field. But the last paragraph really did it for me. When reading this I was thinking to myself, “What is income inequality mean?” Manhattan Institute’s Scott Winship states that income mobility is the ability for an individual or particular household to move up or down the income ladder is unrelated to whether the rungs of the ladder are being more widely spread out. I agree with that, I have always been a use proponent of if your poor do something about it. There is a small percentage of those people who “come into money,” being a college kid and having not much money that is actually mine, I feel the need to do something about it for my future. My opinion is that as an American do what you can to not be put into a box, not just be a number that falls into a category and proves a point. If you have a goal, go accomplish your mission to achieve that goal.
I think that Income inequality is a big deal here in America but I do not think that it can be taken care of by taxing the richest 1% more. They are already (as the charts show us) pulling most of the weight when it comes to taxes are are paying a larger portion of their income. What would really help decrease the gap would be to raise the minimum wage and provide more job opportunities so that more Americans can rise up and lower the gap.
These charts depict the growing inequality in the US. The richest 1% are continuing to grow richer while the poorest citizens are increasingly becoming poorer. I do not believe that more taxes will completely solve the problem at hand, nor is it a problem that needs a solution. I think that more job training and opportunities for skilled work will allow the poorest Americans an opportunity for social mobility.
I agree that the richest 1% is continuing to grow. Perhaps in comparison, those not in the top 1% have a much slower rate of income increase. It is also troublesome that the highest quintile of Americans earn more than the lower four quintiles of Americans combined. I think job training will benefit those in need to a certain extent, however, there is also a shortage of jobs and wages too which must be accounted for. In the past, huge public works projects have provided the unemployed with jobs and incomes for a substantial amount of time.
I think income inequality is a problem not just in the US but around the world. While I do think the rich work hard for their money, I do not think the significantly larger difference in pay reflects how much harder a CEO works over an average middle class person. However, the charts do reflect that the rich do pay a significantly higher portion of taxes. Unlike many others, I do believe the rich do have this obligation to society not just because they have the luxury to afford to pay a higher rate but also because I think much of their economic success is due to the opportunities that they had in our nation. -Lakshmi Subramanian
The idea that the poor have a better deal because they are not paying taxes yet collecting tax money is not that new. The reason it is not a compelling argument is because the amount they do take out is only enough so that they can approach, not reach – approach the poverty line. And for those who say that the top 1% is paying more than their fair share; yes that’s true, but it is also necessary for our society to function that someone makes up for what the lowest can’t pay. An oversimplified analogy: if a system needs 6 units of something, and the only people that can give it have 20 and 2 respectively, it is not irrational to expect the one that can pay more to supplement what the other one was objectively incapable of supplying. Especially because both parties benefit. -Matthew Glazer
Regarding the first figure, there is a glaring row that stood out the most, government transfers. It is confusing and illogical that the higher quintiles also get similar amounts of money from government assistance programs, when they really don’t need the extra money. The second chart also proved how the lower quintiles did not become much richer as compared to the radical growth of the top 1%. This made me remember the chart we analyzed in class that showed how likely someone was to move from their current income group to another group- economic mobility. It does make sense that the two factors would be independent. But although we are still ways off from making the system extremely fair and equal, in comparison to other countries I think we are not doing that bad. But since we have the ability to make the situation even better, reducing income inequality and increasing mobility, I think we should strive for that.
The charts show how the rich are continuing to progress and make money while the poor and losing money and continuing to get poor. This goes back to the topic of society thinking that the poor pay more taxes than the rich do. This is not so, because the rich pay more than what they are supposed to, simply to make up for the people that cannot. Sarah Sakhi
From these charts and articles we see that the notion of the rich having the better hand given to them is slight not true. The rich help to keep the economy going for those who are inadequate (the poor) by paying more taxes than the rest of the population. But we do see that the rich are benefitting from our economy because they are continuing to make money and get richer which can not be said for the rest of the income groups. -Christina Asare
The last paragraph of this article gives the best summary of the main points in the article. Income inequality has been increasing over the past 30 years. However, the article also makes the argument that income mobility has not decreased as a result of the change in income inequality. This is interesting because one would think that the two would have more of a correlation. - Drew Brees
I thought that it was very interesting how the middle 3 quintiles received more money from government transfers than the poorest quintile. Logically, I would initially believe that the government provides the most aid to the poorest quintile. However, I watched the movie "Inequality for All," and I think I remember hearing the former U.S. Labor Secretary Robert Reich state that a strong middle class is what is necessary to build a healthy economy. Unfortunately, seeing how there is little upwards mobility available for the middle class according to the second chart, our economy isn't as strong as it could possibly be. Song Yun
The first figure in the article is especially shocking because it shows how the top 1% is continually getting richer and richer at a much faster pace than any other class. This relates to what we learned in class about how the average middle class person makes the same amount that they made in the 1970s, while the richest one percent is making many times more than what they were making in the 70s.
The article goes into the issue of how middle class americans and under are chastising and criticizing the rich or upper class for making them suffer from taxes. Yes it may appear that the rich may not appear to be paying at all or the tax system are not making a dent in their total income, however, they are still paying their taxes and if not more. However studies show that only 1% of the wealthiest americans are not paying “enough” of their share in taxes while the middle class have to deal with it. A lot of arguments and dispute are made to push the idea of having taxes be raised and solely focused on the rich. As the son of a middle class family, I wouldn’t mind this at all, however, the “unfairness” we’ve originally placed on the rich will be just the opposite because the rich are paying no less then what we would be paying. This displays how the American tax system can be unfair. The huge gap between middle and upper class continues to grow larger each year and the argument of who should pay more or less proves to be an inevitable problem.
This article consists of three charts all telling the same story in a different way. The first chart shows a reasonable difference between the first four income quintiles, about a $20,000 increase between quintiles, but a large difference between the fourth and the fifth, about $100,000 increase. The second chart shows that these figures have been increasing pretty steadily for the lower 99% percent of Americans, but has increased a lot more for the top 1% since around 1980. Both of these graphs show that the richest American's, specifically the top 1%, are getting much richer while the rest of America stays about the same. The economic system used in America is designed for this gap to grow and that must change before it gets even more out of hand.
The Pew Research Center has published that less than 1% of world's population holds 41% of the world’s wealth. This is an astounding number that speaks hugely towards the income inequality that our global society faces. What to do to try to resolve this reality and redistribute some of the wealth to the less fortunate is a major question that is up for discussion. On this blog thread I am seeing a lot of claims for total equality across the socioeconomic front. However, this Pew study interestingly notes that the major concerns toward income inequality are not leading to the rejection of capitalism. It appears that most still agree, free markets are still better than restrained ones. Even though free markets do result in an uneven distribution of wealth, it has its pro’s, namely, innovation and growth. It is difficult to find an appropriate middle grounds where we can keep the free market mentality while also serving the greater good by aiding the poor and shortening the wealth gap. -- Max Samuels
Income inequality in the United States is defined by the stagnation of the middle and lower classes and the increase of the upper classes. This is a result of the type of economy and society that the United States is globally known for, capitalism. Capitalism encourages competition, innovation, and the general ideals of a free market, which has unintentionally caused large discrepancies in the wealth gap of the socioeconomic classes that make up the United States. I believe American society as a whole must take on more austere principles yet maintain the ideals set out by the free market economy and capitalism.
United States of America, as one of the top counties that experience high economic inequality. The riches are getting richer while the poor are becoming poorer. However, those people who earn the top 20 percent incomes face income inequality that taxed them higher than middle-class men, and much higher than poor. For poor, they get tax returns, and many assistance that's mainly paid off using the tax money from the riches. Therefore, the income inequality will continue to exist as long as the working-class exists.
Income inequality in the U.S. is too real. The rich are becoming richer, and the poor poorer. One of the causes of this capitalism; it has created competition in the job market, which gives people with more skills and abilities an advantage when making money. Many people think that because of this we should take a more socialistic approach, but I think capitalism is the most fair way to distribute wealth, even though it has created a gap. Those who work hard deserve their money. However, I do think something has to be done to help the lower income families pick up their feet. Treva Thrush
The three charts on income quality presents various important aspects to consider. First of all, the notion that the top 1% of the wealthy “don’t pay enough” is wrong: it is illustrated in the graphs that they pay their portion of taxes. What should be taken into consideration here is the discussion on “hidden transactions” of federal taxes. In my opinion, this links to the unequal spending of the government on different programs (some of which proves to be inefficient in that they solved not-so-urgent problems of our society but cost high deficits), the government’s reliance on the wealthy to earn revenue instead of solving income inequality, and that the unfair distribution of resources for the lower-income class.
Before reading this article and seeing these charts I thought the solution to income inequality was simple; tax the rich. But the first table shows the rich paying their share of taxes to the country. America is known as one of the wealthiest countries on Earth, but this wealth is mostly owned by 1% of the citizens. To lower the income gap maybe minimum wage should be increased. It is being increased in DC, and so far the higher wages have been helping many people live easier. -Celia Reilly
Income equality has a huge effect on peoples life. People believe that the tax differential is not working, but in fact the rich are being taxed a fair share of their income. Even though they are still making much more money then the rest of the country they are contributing to taxes. All three charts have their own ways of describing how each class if being taxed, helping to put it in different perspective to help educate and to help people better understand. Our country is based on capitalism because it encourages competition. The wealthy should be able to keep their money because they worked hard for the money that made.
I agree that it's unfair for wealthy people to get taxed more because they worked hard to earn those money just as the working-class men. They face many stresses and challenges in earning those money, and bears higher risks in losing the money as well. I don't think the rich people have the responsibility in supporting the life of poor, because that leads to poor people not trying to work and earn their own money.
I agree that increased income inequality does not reduce economic mobility. I also believe that it is unjust how highly the top earners in this country are taxed; yes, the wealthiest individuals evade taxes and pay downwards of 10% income tax, but the average earner in the top 10% still pays a substantial amount in taxes. Income inequality is good for capitalism and democracy. It encourages competition within the business world and and all economic markets.
The income inequality in the United States increased, and the proof for it is the increase of Gini Index (1979-2011). Gini Index shows the proportion of those who have everything and those who have nothing. Higher Gini index indicates that the social gap increased. this is the reason why I disagree with article that the poor do not pay their fair share. They pay the amount that they are able to, and even more than needed, because still they lack the money that will reduce the gap between them and the rich.
The article discusses income inequality and mobility. The author of the article claims that the mobility between classes is not that difficult and the rungs separating each class is outdated. I feel that his opinion is from someone of a higher rung and does not understand the struggle families go through to make ends meet. The higher rungs may pay more taxes, but the lower rings can’t afford to pay their taxes. Families struggle to pay their bills and feed their families. The article is written in a tone that the rich are wealthy from hard work, while the poor just need to work harder to break through the different rungs. I feel that there are other factors at play that affect the ability of someone to climb the economic ladder that the author doesn’t take into account. -Foofie
The chart showed what we learnt in class- how the top 1% have most of the wealth in the whole country. But something new is that the matter gets worse after tax. As I see, what tax does is to enhance equality in society, that is to redistribute the wealth through social welfare, but the Gini Coefficient got even worse after the tax, indicating it is the rich people that set the rules, protecting their own good. And the other thing is that the income of common household hardly raised through the year while the income of the top 1% has gone up tremendously. So all we can say here is that government should work harder to benefit poor people and have a more equal society but it is clear that they won’t want to as it is the top 1% that is sponsor the government. Li
This article is about how income inequality have increase and the author provides charts to support his claims. People who were in the top and middle quantile, the inflation adjusted after tax income was 40 percent higher. While people in the bottom quantile, the inflation adjusted after tax income was 48 percent higher. This shows how it is unfair that even though there are people who are poor and do not have as much money as rich people do, still have to pay higher than them. The author of this article has a very bias viewpoint of how rich people get their money and poor people just need to struggle to get their money.
Everyone seems to have touched on the fact that this article was probably not written by someone of a lower class. I feel this statement could not be more true. Mobility from the lower economic standings is almost impossible without outside assistance that may be unavailable to most. I have many friends who received full rides to great schools due to their athletic prowess. Without athletics these kids could not receive an education or a good job and would remain in their underprivileged lifestyles. This is to say that I believe anyone under the lower middle class rank would have a very difficult time advancing in to higher economic standing.
These three charts all visually display great information about the income inequality, transfers, and taxes in this nation. In respect to these visuals, the article articulates the presence of inequalities in our society. By popular belief, most say that they feel as if the wealthiest 1% of this nation have an unfair advantage at being richer than them in regards to the amount they are taxed. However, this article does well in not being bias and states that between 1979 and 2011, the inflation-adjusted after-tax income for the top 1% increased by 200%. Because of this, some can say that they are indeed paying for their share of the tax burden. On the other hand, some people believe that the poor are riding on the backs of the rich with grants and other forms of government assistance. The thing that I found most interesting is that the status of a person in the financial spectrum is mostly determined by the income inequalities present in society. The article concludes by supporting the last statement with adding that in the past 30 years, the mobility rates haven't changed even as income inequality has increased.
I think the increasing gap in the United States is a large problem that honestly no one is able to deal with right now. The cost of being a middle-class family is actually costing the family. Minimum wage is becoming something that people are too dependent on also which I think is backwards from how it should be. I think that minimum wage is at a good place right now as to me it is something we can use as a society to better ourselves, realistically speaking. It helps to increase our standards, and incentivizes us to do more. Whether it be that we get another minimum wage job, or aspire to improve like other countries. The gap though between the quintiles to me is too much. I can see making more than someone, but more than doubling? I suppose that also depends on the type of work too. The charts don't really specify the jobs.
One graph shows the Average household income, transfers, and taxes by before tax income group. It was very interesting to me to find how the upper class seeks for transfers, or financial assistance despite the fact that they must may such a high percentage in federal taxes on before tax income. The second graph shows how there was a major increase in income inequality between 1979 to 2011. In this article, the author was able to propose that increased income inequality may correlate with the reduction of economic mobility.
This article discusses the possible correlation with income inequality with the reduction of economic mobility. As we have learned, the US is leading the world in the growing gap between the über rich and our nations poorer individuals. It has been proven time and time again that minimum wage does not properly adjust for inflation associated with the common basket of goods needed for survival in our society. This statement must also be evaluated against the bias that the writer brings to their own analysis. Those in better situations tend to view the world with "rose colored glasses", potentially ambivalent to the suffering that is occurring around them. The poorer continue to be taxed greater then ever, and their mobility is reduced as they struggle to keep pace with the economic changes in our society.
Economic inequality is a very significant problem in contemporary society that needs to be addressed. If the poor keep getting poorer and the rich keep getting richer this problem will never be solved. This is where the government needs to step in. Taxes need to change so that the rich are getting taxed heavier. Social welfare and other economic issues need to improve as well.
Economic Inequality is primarily due to those in power, namely those with the requisite capitol to pay for the change they want. Our country is so heavily privatized that essentially the party with the most money has the most power. It's up to the working class folk to use their power to inflict change. This can be accomplished by actual solidarity. i.e. walk-outs, boycotts. If you really wanna affect the powers that be in a society dominated by profit, you have to effect their profits. When they realize their pockets shrinking even at an infinitesimal rate, they will think twice about upping their salaries 500% and making sure yours don't inflate with the current cost of living. --Bl@k Thought
In my opinion the difference that rich and poor people pay in taxes can be even bigger. Let the richest pay a little more (they won't really experience a difference) and let the poorest pay a little les (which makes a huge difference for them).
The problem of Economic Inequality is created by the people in charge and people who have some form of power. This specific issue really needs to be addressed because if it is ignored it will just get worse and worse. In the United States, Parties with the most power, are the ones with the most money. Their will not be a change unless everyone in each class, whether rich or poor, decide to make an effort to change.
The closing statements of the article discusses income mobility and states that the current rungs separated in terms of economic inequality are outdated. This opinion holds that separation between groups/rungs of the economic later further apart is not related to a person's ability to move between class or economic success groups. This opinion however is clearly one from the top or middle of the tiers looking down rather than understanding the magnitude of climbing this later from the bottom. Opinions such as these do not necessarily take into account the lowest quintiles when making sweeping statements as to how the growing inequality is a function of the system rather than something that is external to the capabilities of the individual to move within and between groups. This opinion represents the notion that the successful have their wealth because of their hard work, and those falling lower on the totem pole must not have worked hard enough.
ReplyDeleteNicola Konigkramer
DeleteI completely agree with your statement, and it is clear that this article represents the opinion of someone outside of the lower class. Not only does the income gap represent inequality in the U.S., but if we looked at the wealth gap, we could see that the poor are unable to move upward because of their lack of wealth and inability to save their income.
People are constantly saying that "the rich" aren't paying their "fair share" and need to be taxed more, but this study shows the opposite. The charts in this article provide evidence that the richest Americans are paying their "fair share" of federal taxes. The richest 20% of Americans are paying off almost 100% of the entire federal tax burden of transfer payments and all other non-financed government spending. What's not so fair is that the bottom 60% is getting off with no tax burden and receiving transfer payments from the top 20% of about 10,000 per household. This report raises the question if the bottom 60% are paying their fair share when they aren't paying anything and receiving everything.
ReplyDeleteI do not agree that the "bottom" is getting off when it comes to paying taxes because how are they getting off when they do not have the means to provide food for their families let alone pay some taxes. And I do believe everyone pays taxes, even if it's not as much as the wealthy somebody is giving up money that they may or may not have. Some people just have more so they should contribute more and others have less, simple as that.
DeleteIt's sad because we often blame people for being in the lower class but they did not get to choose to be born into that situation. Of course, people can make choices to change their lives but everyone can't be rich. Everyone can not be in the 1% which means somebody else will have to balance out that inequality; which are the rich. The lower 60% aren't receiving "everything", the lower 60% may receive some food stamps for the month or some crappy health insurance but what does that compare to someone who can buy food for a whole state. If this country did not have such a huge wealth gap then the rich would not have to provide for the lower classes. I also do not believe that those who are rich worked harder than those who are in the lower class because most of the time that is not the case at all. I believe the lower class works harder because that is their only way for survival.
Maybe it is taxes that are creating the wealth gap? America has being doing the same thing for years and getting the same results. I think it's time for a new strategy. When will things ever be equal?
I agree with De'Ja's claim that taxes are paid by everyone and while the taxes that are paid by Americans are proportional to their incomes, and the poor pay much less taxes than do the rich, this is largely in part due to the fact that even the little amount of taxes they must pay largely impact how they live. If someone who makes very little money also has to set aside some of this money for taxes, it may be hard for them to afford even some of life's basic necessities. This is why people should not criticize the taxing system because it makes the wealthy pay a larger portion of taxes. The wealthy have more money and should therefore be taxed more.
DeleteI agree with De'Ja's comments. Although it is true that people who are rich are paying more taxes it has to be understood that people who are poor are unable to pay for the taxes you want them to be paying for. And to say that they aren't paying their "fair share" doesn't make sense considering that the whole system we live in isn't "fair" to begin with. We live in a society where institutionalized racism and discrimination has a huge impact on the lives on our people and their children. So you can't say "fair" because children don't have the same "fair" opportunities the rich children do. poor people don't have the same "fair" health and living conditions. if you are born in the ghetto and raised in the ghetto with horrible living conditions and horrible education opportunities how are you supposed to pay for taxes that are "fair" when you didnt even have a "fair" beginning.
Delete-Rahel Mehreteab
The wealth gap in America is a huge problem. If wealth were distributed more evenly, i.e. raising minimum wage, there would be more mobility among the middle and lower classes to advance themselves in society. Unfortunately, children born into rich families don't have to do as much work to be successful whereas a poorer child will have to do more to prove themselves in society.
ReplyDeletethis is a good point, but it also important to know that the wealthy do pay taxes that do help the lower classes. The problem is the major tax breaks the super rich can get away with which allows them to keep more their wealth. Another problem is that the wealthy business owners can really only open new businesses and create new jobs. These new jobs are the only way the lower class can get money. Once the lower class has money, they will be able to spend it and buy goods which will increase demand and create a need for the new businesses. This will create a circular process in which new jobs are created, which pay people, who then can buy goods, and create a demand, which can lead to an increase in jobs/pay for workers
DeleteI agree with your point on the wealth gap being a seemingly insurmountable problem in the U.S.; however, raising minimum wage may create a backlash of small business owners and franchise owners. The problem would be that if the owners only have "x" amount of dollars for wages within the companies' budgets, and minimum wage increases, and "x" stays the same, that means people are losing jobs. The increase of minimum wage alone will not alleviate the wealth gap in America.
DeleteThat being said, why do athletes, famous entertainment stars, and CEOs earn 30 times more than the average American? If these careers were to be capped at $550,000 (the same that the presidential office earns after including the annual expense account, a travel account, and a $20,000 entertainment stipend), and the money formally lining the pockets of the top 1%, were to be reinvested into the deficit, minimum wage, housing, food, roads, the education system, etc., the wealth gap would diminish. Raising the minimum wage while capping over-inflated incomes of the 1%, would allow EVERYONE to pay their fair share, dissolving the dilemma of who is paying what.
Many other countries have access to FREE COLLEGE!!! Many other countries have INEXPENSIVE HEALTH CARE. Many other countries have inexpensive pharmaceuticals. Why do medicine, healthcare, education, among other middle-class-strengthening components, become unattainable for the middle class in THIS country? Taxes are not the issue - clearly, if the rich are paying their "fair share". If the rich are paying their fair share in taxes, and there is still and wealth gap, then taxes are not the issue, wages are the issue. As I stated before, raising minimum wage alone does not close the gap, it forfeits jobs. Restructuring is the key.
Once people start talking about equal anything, however, people argue it's Socialism, and dismiss it.
-Secret Agent
The huge wealth gap in America is an obvious problem and I agree with you that raising minimum would help solve this problem even the slightest bit. However, this article clearly shows that the wealthiest 1% are paying their share in taxes. The wealthiest are usually the ones who helps the under class with employment, by starting up new businesses, factories, etc. I don't necessarily believe that people born into 'wealthy' families won't have to work as hard. Whose to say they won't go off on their own and try to get a name for themselves, by making their own living and not relying on their parents' money? I think it's fair that the wealthier are paying more taxes, which they evidently are, but they are also the ones that enable and catalyze job opportunities for the lower class. Again, it's a system in society and people utilize and build off others for opportunity.
DeleteThe article clearly states the presence of income inequalities in the American society. According to what is the common belief, the wealthiest people, who make up just 1% of the American society have an unfair advantage of being "richer". It is assumed that they don't pay enough taxes in relation to their income. But, this article, especially the end portion of it states that the rich are indeed paying their fair-share , while the poor are being exempted from paying taxes and survive on the "grants" given to them by the government in the from of money, which it collects as revenue from the rich. Also, according to Winship and his studies show that a person is not likely to become rich even if the income inequalities reduce. This is because the status of a person in the financial ladder is determined independently of the income inequalities present in the society.
ReplyDeleteThe article disputes the notion that the wealthiest 1% of America do not pay enough taxes. According to the charts, the rich are paying their fair share, while the poor are not. I think that the author disregards the fact that the rich can afford to pay a fair amount of taxes, because they are the people that are affected the least by it. Poor people may rely on grants and tax breaks, but that is because they need them.
ReplyDeleteRyan Muscatella
ReplyDeleteBy reading this article, it is clear that income inequality is the highest it has ever been and seem to not be slowing down very soon. Even though this article makes it seem like the rich may not be charged enough taxes, it actually represents how the wealthier 1% of the world is paying their fair share while the poorer people are not paying the tax money they should.Therefore, this raises the question as to why do the rich keep getting ridiculed, even when they are the ones paying almost all of the tax burden in the United States? Many people argue that it is more difficult for a poor children to become rich than a rich child to become rich, however if the rich person is working harder and paying more taxes, isn't it clear who should have more money?
I think this article is very interesting because it just proves how the tax system in the United States is often very skewed and how the majority of the blame is put on the rich for not paying their share when they actually often do. The rich are in fact the people that can afford such high taxes without the least bit worry but they are often the ones who get ridiculed for their inability to pay enough. I also thought it was interesting they brought up the Gini coefficient because I am learning about that in another one of my classes and this number can range from 0 to 1. Meaning that the wealth distribution is completely fair, to the other side, where one person owns 100% of the wealth.
ReplyDelete-Chelsea Pudimott
According to the left, income has not increased for the lowest quintile since the 70's but the chart shows a 48% increase after adjustment for inflation. Rising levels of income inequality just means the average guy has a chance to get rich. Any healthy economy will have income inequality. We should push to create more of it.
ReplyDeleteI agree that income inequality is good because it gives incentive for people to work harder to achieve their goals, but as the income inequality keeps getting bigger, it makes it harder for the mobility between classes. There should only be a certain amount of income inequality in order to keep society healthy and give the option for mobility.
DeleteColleen Snitzer
Hi Colleen,
DeleteI wouldn't necessarily say that income inequality is good per se. Some degree of stratification is beneficial to ensure that irreplaceable positions are filled. However, there are many wealthy individuals whose positions are not necessarily essential and their positions are not difficult to replace. Income inequality is not beneficial especially for those on the bottom end of the income spectrum. Take for instance, poverty. Poverty is cyclical in nature in that children born into a poor families have little chance in breaking into the upper end of the income distribution. For these reasons, I wouldn't say that income inequality provides incentive for people to work hard.
Oyin Adedipe, 0601
Nicola Konigkramer
ReplyDeleteThe problem of income inequality is shown through these graphics. In addition to the inequality of income in this country, upward mobility is becoming more and more difficult. We can see that it is easier for the rich to earn more and keep their wealth through finding tax loopholes. I think that this article would better represent the inequality if it focused on the wealth gap as well as the income gap in the U.S.
This article showed us how the tax system work and what surprised me the most is how much the rich have to pay. The article helped me realize the rich pays a lot and often time they are talked about because they are rich. Of course taxes won't affect them as much because they are rich but they are paying a large sum of taxes.
ReplyDeleteThis article shows how the richer you are, the faster your income grows overtime. Although the U.S. has an infamous inequality of income distribution, We don't get taxed as much as Europe. I personally don't approve of this system because it makes the U.S economy more dependent on the top 1%. Which is too much power for a small group of people.
ReplyDeleteThis article shows that unequal distribution of incomes across the United States. As the rich become more rich, the poor are slowly becoming more poor. Even though the rich are being taxed more, they still have a decent amount of money to keep themselves satisfied. While the poor are being taxed less, but they make less money so it leaves their households with less to live with. This article shows how our money system is unequal in the distribution of incomes, and proves that their is a gap between the rich and poor.
ReplyDeleteAlexandra Diggs
I agree with your point that the large gap between the rich and the poor is a major issue within our American economy, however I am not sure this article really gives a good plan on how to fix this problem. The primary focus of the article is the taxation of both the upper and lower class based on their yearly income. The wealthy are already being taxed more than the poor, which is understandable in order to help redistribute income. However, I have learned through a basic understanding of economics that this type of taxation can interfere with incentives. Incentives meaning the drive of people to want to try hard to become educated and be able to make money for themselves.
DeleteThis article contains charts that are effectively comparisons of economic incomes and taxes across several different social classes in America. One interesting aspect of these graphs that I noticed was the steadily increasing gap between the rich and the poor financially speaking. The wealthy social class of America, especially the top 1% enjoy a rapidly increased income, even though they are subject to higher taxes. The same however cannot be said for the lower economic class, even though they are taxed less, they are victims of unequal income distribution. Thus, causing them to be at the bottom of the economic social ladder. The data presented in these charts highlights the unequal and ever-growing gap between income rates on the social class scale in America.
ReplyDeleteThese charts are clearly showing the growing difference between the rich and the poor in America. Although the rich are being taxed at higher amounts, they still manage to have enough money to satisfy themselves. Unfortunately, the poor just keep becoming more poor even though they are taxed at lower amounts. Although I don't know if I think this uneven taxing is fair, it obviously does not seem to be making a difference in the huge, growing gap between the rich and the poor Americans. These charts and graphs are showing a trend in this growth between rich and poor Americans.
ReplyDeleteThis article challenges the common belief that the wealthiest 1% does not pay enough in taxes. It goes on to argue that it is actually the poorer group that does not pay enough. It also highlights the income gap between the rich and poor and how it continues to increase. This is because mobility is easier for the rich to achieve and harder for the poor. This is why the rich continue getting richer and the poor continue getting the short end of the stick. This is because although the rich "pay their fair share of taxes" the still have enough money to satisfy all their needs and more while the poor do not. So at the end of the day, it is still very unequal.
ReplyDelete-Tita
These charts are showing the income gap in the US. It shows that although the top 1% are being taxed more because their income is higher, they can afford to pay those taxes. On the other hand, the poor are being taxed for incomes that are substantially lower than the top 1% which is not really allowing them to keep their money. So, the rich are continuing to get richer while the poor are just getting poorer. This gap is continuing to get worse and some action needs to take place to make the gap smaller.
ReplyDeleteThis article shows us the difference of the income gap in the US and how the rich are are being taxed at a higher amount than the poor. The poor are unable to reach their tax rate because income inequality can hurt economic growth. The income inequality in the U.S. has been growing since the 1970's and it seems that the top 1% are receiving the amount of income.
ReplyDeleteAmeerat Olatunde
This article shows us how the government tries to compensate the growing economic inequality in the country. The rich are being taxed at much higher rates, especially the top 1%, and the government has grown to rely on these rates. The government attempts to balance the taxes by giving the rich more transfers, however the transfers realistically have no impact compared to the taxes the rich pay. The government is aware of the economic inequality present in the country and tries to balance it by raising taxes on the rich. However, the problem isn't that the rich are too rich, but that there are too many poor that are living in impoverished conditions. Millions of people should not be living under the poverty line in one of the richest countries in the world.
ReplyDeleteThis article uses charts to demonstrate the increasing gap between the rich and poor in America. It is assumed throughout society that the rich do not pay their share in taxes however the charts show the opposite. The rich are paying significantly more in taxes however it is not making a difference regarding income inequality.
ReplyDeleteIn this article, the charts are used to challenge the belief that the wealthiest population of the country is not paying their share of the taxes. In reality, they are paying the bulk of the taxes. The income gap between the wealthy and the poor is highlighted to juxtapose huge difference in the population of the United States and how the less money you have, the less taxes you pay, but it is all in proportion to your total income. Therefore, the wealthier you are, the more you pay, but it has a smaller impact on your life because you can afford to pay it.
ReplyDeleteNo matter how much economically ignorant citizens of the unites states complain that the rich do not pay their share in taxes are completely wrong according to the charts. The rich are paying their share and more but the income gap throughout the social classes is so big, that even higher taxes on the rich does not make much of a difference. The government shouldn't have to tax the rich more than any other social class, just to balance out the economy; that is definitely a form of inequality because it is not fair to the wealthy who work hard for their wealth to be responsible for balancing out the economy in terms of income inequality.
ReplyDeleteBryce Young
I agree Bryce. It really doesn't make sense that someone who works their tail off to gain wealth is then asked to give a ton of their back to the government to support those that cannot support themselves. However, I do agree that there are people that need the government assistance, but it seems to me like there is a large portion of people out there that live off the government because its easy and they don't really have to do anything and still get a "pay check". It's unfortunate that those that can take care of themselves resort to being lazy and nearly ruining it for those that do need assistance to survive.
DeleteTo me, these charts are a signal that the economic income gap is going to be much more difficult to reduce than many think. Some simply say that the government just needs to tax the rich more, and all the problems will be solved. However these charts are proof that the wealthy are paying more taxes, yet the income gap has still increased. They need to look to other methods of fixing this issue rather than focusing on how it is the top 1% fault.
ReplyDeleteThe income gap is related to the tax system but that is not the heart of the problem. We can adjust and shift taxes all we want but the only way to create an economically stable class system is to provide opportunities for the lower class. The way the system is right now, if you are born into poverty it is more than likely you will live your entire life in poverty and then give birth to children who will do the same. It is a perpetual cycle that needs to be changed. And this change can't come solely from tax breaks, there has to be a major change in the education system so that America "the land of opportunity" can actually provide opportunities for people to succeed.
ReplyDelete-Shannon Healy
The article discusses the common topic of the richer are getting richer and the poorer are getting poorer. This relates back to the misconception that the rich are not paying their fair share of taxes when in fact, the upper percentile are paying for a very large sum of the total taxes paid. In fact, it may even be the other way around where the people in poverty have higher chances of being exempt from taxes or receive aid from the federal government.
ReplyDelete-12Keys
After reading the article it seemed like a bunch of numbers that I did not entirely understand because of my lack of education in the field. But the last paragraph really did it for me. When reading this I was thinking to myself, “What is income inequality mean?” Manhattan Institute’s Scott Winship states that income mobility is the ability for an individual or particular household to move up or down the income ladder is unrelated to whether the rungs of the ladder are being more widely spread out. I agree with that, I have always been a use proponent of if your poor do something about it. There is a small percentage of those people who “come into money,” being a college kid and having not much money that is actually mine, I feel the need to do something about it for my future. My opinion is that as an American do what you can to not be put into a box, not just be a number that falls into a category and proves a point. If you have a goal, go accomplish your mission to achieve that goal.
ReplyDeleteI think that Income inequality is a big deal here in America but I do not think that it can be taken care of by taxing the richest 1% more. They are already (as the charts show us) pulling most of the weight when it comes to taxes are are paying a larger portion of their income. What would really help decrease the gap would be to raise the minimum wage and provide more job opportunities so that more Americans can rise up and lower the gap.
ReplyDeleteThese charts depict the growing inequality in the US. The richest 1% are continuing to grow richer while the poorest citizens are increasingly becoming poorer. I do not believe that more taxes will completely solve the problem at hand, nor is it a problem that needs a solution. I think that more job training and opportunities for skilled work will allow the poorest Americans an opportunity for social mobility.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the richest 1% is continuing to grow. Perhaps in comparison, those not in the top 1% have a much slower rate of income increase. It is also troublesome that the highest quintile of Americans earn more than the lower four quintiles of Americans combined. I think job training will benefit those in need to a certain extent, however, there is also a shortage of jobs and wages too which must be accounted for. In the past, huge public works projects have provided the unemployed with jobs and incomes for a substantial amount of time.
DeleteAndrew Cheng
I think income inequality is a problem not just in the US but around the world. While I do think the rich work hard for their money, I do not think the significantly larger difference in pay reflects how much harder a CEO works over an average middle class person. However, the charts do reflect that the rich do pay a significantly higher portion of taxes. Unlike many others, I do believe the rich do have this obligation to society not just because they have the luxury to afford to pay a higher rate but also because I think much of their economic success is due to the opportunities that they had in our nation.
ReplyDelete-Lakshmi Subramanian
The idea that the poor have a better deal because they are not paying taxes yet collecting tax money is not that new. The reason it is not a compelling argument is because the amount they do take out is only enough so that they can approach, not reach – approach the poverty line. And for those who say that the top 1% is paying more than their fair share; yes that’s true, but it is also necessary for our society to function that someone makes up for what the lowest can’t pay. An oversimplified analogy: if a system needs 6 units of something, and the only people that can give it have 20 and 2 respectively, it is not irrational to expect the one that can pay more to supplement what the other one was objectively incapable of supplying. Especially because both parties benefit.
ReplyDelete-Matthew Glazer
Regarding the first figure, there is a glaring row that stood out the most, government transfers. It is confusing and illogical that the higher quintiles also get similar amounts of money from government assistance programs, when they really don’t need the extra money. The second chart also proved how the lower quintiles did not become much richer as compared to the radical growth of the top 1%. This made me remember the chart we analyzed in class that showed how likely someone was to move from their current income group to another group- economic mobility. It does make sense that the two factors would be independent. But although we are still ways off from making the system extremely fair and equal, in comparison to other countries I think we are not doing that bad. But since we have the ability to make the situation even better, reducing income inequality and increasing mobility, I think we should strive for that.
ReplyDeleteThe charts show how the rich are continuing to progress and make money while the poor and losing money and continuing to get poor. This goes back to the topic of society thinking that the poor pay more taxes than the rich do. This is not so, because the rich pay more than what they are supposed to, simply to make up for the people that cannot.
ReplyDeleteSarah Sakhi
From these charts and articles we see that the notion of the rich having the better hand given to them is slight not true. The rich help to keep the economy going for those who are inadequate (the poor) by paying more taxes than the rest of the population. But we do see that the rich are benefitting from our economy because they are continuing to make money and get richer which can not be said for the rest of the income groups.
ReplyDelete-Christina Asare
The last paragraph of this article gives the best summary of the main points in the article. Income inequality has been increasing over the past 30 years. However, the article also makes the argument that income mobility has not decreased as a result of the change in income inequality. This is interesting because one would think that the two would have more of a correlation.
ReplyDelete- Drew Brees
I thought that it was very interesting how the middle 3 quintiles received more money from government transfers than the poorest quintile. Logically, I would initially believe that the government provides the most aid to the poorest quintile. However, I watched the movie "Inequality for All," and I think I remember hearing the former U.S. Labor Secretary Robert Reich state that a strong middle class is what is necessary to build a healthy economy. Unfortunately, seeing how there is little upwards mobility available for the middle class according to the second chart, our economy isn't as strong as it could possibly be.
ReplyDeleteSong Yun
The first figure in the article is especially shocking because it shows how the top 1% is continually getting richer and richer at a much faster pace than any other class. This relates to what we learned in class about how the average middle class person makes the same amount that they made in the 1970s, while the richest one percent is making many times more than what they were making in the 70s.
ReplyDeleteThe article goes into the issue of how middle class americans and under are chastising and criticizing the rich or upper class for making them suffer from taxes. Yes it may appear that the rich may not appear to be paying at all or the tax system are not making a dent in their total income, however, they are still paying their taxes and if not more. However studies show that only 1% of the wealthiest americans are not paying “enough” of their share in taxes while the middle class have to deal with it. A lot of arguments and dispute are made to push the idea of having taxes be raised and solely focused on the rich. As the son of a middle class family, I wouldn’t mind this at all, however, the “unfairness” we’ve originally placed on the rich will be just the opposite because the rich are paying no less then what we would be paying. This displays how the American tax system can be unfair. The huge gap between middle and upper class continues to grow larger each year and the argument of who should pay more or less proves to be an inevitable problem.
ReplyDeleteThis article consists of three charts all telling the same story in a different way. The first chart shows a reasonable difference between the first four income quintiles, about a $20,000 increase between quintiles, but a large difference between the fourth and the fifth, about $100,000 increase. The second chart shows that these figures have been increasing pretty steadily for the lower 99% percent of Americans, but has increased a lot more for the top 1% since around 1980. Both of these graphs show that the richest American's, specifically the top 1%, are getting much richer while the rest of America stays about the same. The economic system used in America is designed for this gap to grow and that must change before it gets even more out of hand.
ReplyDeleteThe Pew Research Center has published that less than 1% of world's population holds 41% of the world’s wealth. This is an astounding number that speaks hugely towards the income inequality that our global society faces. What to do to try to resolve this reality and redistribute some of the wealth to the less fortunate is a major question that is up for discussion. On this blog thread I am seeing a lot of claims for total equality across the socioeconomic front. However, this Pew study interestingly notes that the major concerns toward income inequality are not leading to the rejection of capitalism. It appears that most still agree, free markets are still better than restrained ones. Even though free markets do result in an uneven distribution of wealth, it has its pro’s, namely, innovation and growth. It is difficult to find an appropriate middle grounds where we can keep the free market mentality while also serving the greater good by aiding the poor and shortening the wealth gap.
ReplyDelete--
Max Samuels
Income inequality in the United States is defined by the stagnation of the middle and lower classes and the increase of the upper classes. This is a result of the type of economy and society that the United States is globally known for, capitalism. Capitalism encourages competition, innovation, and the general ideals of a free market, which has unintentionally caused large discrepancies in the wealth gap of the socioeconomic classes that make up the United States. I believe American society as a whole must take on more austere principles yet maintain the ideals set out by the free market economy and capitalism.
ReplyDeleteJialun Lin
ReplyDeleteUnited States of America, as one of the top counties that experience high economic inequality. The riches are getting richer while the poor are becoming poorer. However, those people who earn the top 20 percent incomes face income inequality that taxed them higher than middle-class men, and much higher than poor. For poor, they get tax returns, and many assistance that's mainly paid off using the tax money from the riches.
Therefore, the income inequality will continue to exist as long as the working-class exists.
Income inequality in the U.S. is too real. The rich are becoming richer, and the poor poorer. One of the causes of this capitalism; it has created competition in the job market, which gives people with more skills and abilities an advantage when making money. Many people think that because of this we should take a more socialistic approach, but I think capitalism is the most fair way to distribute wealth, even though it has created a gap. Those who work hard deserve their money. However, I do think something has to be done to help the lower income families pick up their feet.
ReplyDeleteTreva Thrush
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe three charts on income quality presents various important aspects to consider. First of all, the notion that the top 1% of the wealthy “don’t pay enough” is wrong: it is illustrated in the graphs that they pay their portion of taxes. What should be taken into consideration here is the discussion on “hidden transactions” of federal taxes. In my opinion, this links to the unequal spending of the government on different programs (some of which proves to be inefficient in that they solved not-so-urgent problems of our society but cost high deficits), the government’s reliance on the wealthy to earn revenue instead of solving income inequality, and that the unfair distribution of resources for the lower-income class.
ReplyDeleteBefore reading this article and seeing these charts I thought the solution to income inequality was simple; tax the rich. But the first table shows the rich paying their share of taxes to the country. America is known as one of the wealthiest countries on Earth, but this wealth is mostly owned by 1% of the citizens. To lower the income gap maybe minimum wage should be increased. It is being increased in DC, and so far the higher wages have been helping many people live easier.
ReplyDelete-Celia Reilly
Income equality has a huge effect on peoples life. People believe that the tax differential is not working, but in fact the rich are being taxed a fair share of their income. Even though they are still making much more money then the rest of the country they are contributing to taxes. All three charts have their own ways of describing how each class if being taxed, helping to put it in different perspective to help educate and to help people better understand. Our country is based on capitalism because it encourages competition. The wealthy should be able to keep their money because they worked hard for the money that made.
ReplyDeleteI agree that it's unfair for wealthy people to get taxed more because they worked hard to earn those money just as the working-class men. They face many stresses and challenges in earning those money, and bears higher risks in losing the money as well. I don't think the rich people have the responsibility in supporting the life of poor, because that leads to poor people not trying to work and earn their own money.
Delete- Jialun Lin
I agree that increased income inequality does not reduce economic mobility. I also believe that it is unjust how highly the top earners in this country are taxed; yes, the wealthiest individuals evade taxes and pay downwards of 10% income tax, but the average earner in the top 10% still pays a substantial amount in taxes. Income inequality is good for capitalism and democracy. It encourages competition within the business world and and all economic markets.
ReplyDeleteThe income inequality in the United States increased, and the proof for it is the increase of Gini Index (1979-2011). Gini Index shows the proportion of those who have everything and those who have nothing. Higher Gini index indicates that the social gap increased. this is the reason why I disagree with article that the poor do not pay their fair share. They pay the amount that they are able to, and even more than needed, because still they lack the money that will reduce the gap between them and the rich.
ReplyDeleteThe article discusses income inequality and mobility. The author of the article claims that the mobility between classes is not that difficult and the rungs separating each class is outdated. I feel that his opinion is from someone of a higher rung and does not understand the struggle families go through to make ends meet. The higher rungs may pay more taxes, but the lower rings can’t afford to pay their taxes. Families struggle to pay their bills and feed their families. The article is written in a tone that the rich are wealthy from hard work, while the poor just need to work harder to break through the different rungs. I feel that there are other factors at play that affect the ability of someone to climb the economic ladder that the author doesn’t take into account.
ReplyDelete-Foofie
The chart showed what we learnt in class- how the top 1% have most of the wealth in the whole country. But something new is that the matter gets worse after tax. As I see, what tax does is to enhance equality in society, that is to redistribute the wealth through social welfare, but the Gini Coefficient got even worse after the tax, indicating it is the rich people that set the rules, protecting their own good. And the other thing is that the income of common household hardly raised through the year while the income of the top 1% has gone up tremendously. So all we can say here is that government should work harder to benefit poor people and have a more equal society but it is clear that they won’t want to as it is the top 1% that is sponsor the government.
ReplyDeleteLi
This article is about how income inequality have increase and the author provides charts to support his claims. People who were in the top and middle quantile, the inflation adjusted after tax income was 40 percent higher. While people in the bottom quantile, the inflation adjusted after tax income was 48 percent higher. This shows how it is unfair that even though there are people who are poor and do not have as much money as rich people do, still have to pay higher than them. The author of this article has a very bias viewpoint of how rich people get their money and poor people just need to struggle to get their money.
ReplyDeleteEveryone seems to have touched on the fact that this article was probably not written by someone of a lower class. I feel this statement could not be more true. Mobility from the lower economic standings is almost impossible without outside assistance that may be unavailable to most. I have many friends who received full rides to great schools due to their athletic prowess. Without athletics these kids could not receive an education or a good job and would remain in their underprivileged lifestyles. This is to say that I believe anyone under the lower middle class rank would have a very difficult time advancing in to higher economic standing.
ReplyDeleteConor wetzel
These three charts all visually display great information about the income inequality, transfers, and taxes in this nation. In respect to these visuals, the article articulates the presence of inequalities in our society. By popular belief, most say that they feel as if the wealthiest 1% of this nation have an unfair advantage at being richer than them in regards to the amount they are taxed. However, this article does well in not being bias and states that between 1979 and 2011, the inflation-adjusted after-tax income for the top 1% increased by 200%. Because of this, some can say that they are indeed paying for their share of the tax burden. On the other hand, some people believe that the poor are riding on the backs of the rich with grants and other forms of government assistance. The thing that I found most interesting is that the status of a person in the financial spectrum is mostly determined by the income inequalities present in society. The article concludes by supporting the last statement with adding that in the past 30 years, the mobility rates haven't changed even as income inequality has increased.
ReplyDelete- Louis Pardo
I think the increasing gap in the United States is a large problem that honestly no one is able to deal with right now. The cost of being a middle-class family is actually costing the family. Minimum wage is becoming something that people are too dependent on also which I think is backwards from how it should be. I think that minimum wage is at a good place right now as to me it is something we can use as a society to better ourselves, realistically speaking. It helps to increase our standards, and incentivizes us to do more. Whether it be that we get another minimum wage job, or aspire to improve like other countries. The gap though between the quintiles to me is too much. I can see making more than someone, but more than doubling? I suppose that also depends on the type of work too. The charts don't really specify the jobs.
ReplyDelete-Kenny Perez
One graph shows the Average household income, transfers, and taxes by before tax income group. It was very interesting to me to find how the upper class seeks for transfers, or financial assistance despite the fact that they must may such a high percentage in federal taxes on before tax income. The second graph shows how there was a major increase in income inequality between 1979 to 2011. In this article, the author was able to propose that increased income inequality may correlate with the reduction of economic mobility.
ReplyDeleteThis article discusses the possible correlation with income inequality with the reduction of economic mobility. As we have learned, the US is leading the world in the growing gap between the über rich and our nations poorer individuals. It has been proven time and time again that minimum wage does not properly adjust for inflation associated with the common basket of goods needed for survival in our society. This statement must also be evaluated against the bias that the writer brings to their own analysis. Those in better situations tend to view the world with "rose colored glasses", potentially ambivalent to the suffering that is occurring around them. The poorer continue to be taxed greater then ever, and their mobility is reduced as they struggle to keep pace with the economic changes in our society.
ReplyDeleteEconomic inequality is a very significant problem in contemporary society that needs to be addressed. If the poor keep getting poorer and the rich keep getting richer this problem will never be solved. This is where the government needs to step in. Taxes need to change so that the rich are getting taxed heavier. Social welfare and other economic issues need to improve as well.
ReplyDeleteEconomic Inequality is primarily due to those in power, namely those with the requisite capitol to pay for the change they want. Our country is so heavily privatized that essentially the party with the most money has the most power. It's up to the working class folk to use their power to inflict change. This can be accomplished by actual solidarity. i.e. walk-outs, boycotts. If you really wanna affect the powers that be in a society dominated by profit, you have to effect their profits. When they realize their pockets shrinking even at an infinitesimal rate, they will think twice about upping their salaries 500% and making sure yours don't inflate with the current cost of living.
ReplyDelete--Bl@k Thought
In my opinion the difference that rich and poor people pay in taxes can be even bigger. Let the richest pay a little more (they won't really experience a difference) and let the poorest pay a little les (which makes a huge difference for them).
ReplyDeleteThe problem of Economic Inequality is created by the people in charge and people who have some form of power. This specific issue really needs to be addressed because if it is ignored it will just get worse and worse. In the United States, Parties with the most power, are the ones with the most money. Their will not be a change unless everyone in each class, whether rich or poor, decide to make an effort to change.
ReplyDelete