For many decades the economic growth of American has shifted to different standards. Each generation of growing up in America can and will face different economic situations than the generation before them. It is a part of circular flow of economics. One factor that is brought up, especially in recent years is income inequality. During a debate hosted by intelligence squared, two sides argued the notion the rich in America are taxed too much. Beginning with the side for the notion that the rich are taxed enough was Robert Glenn who took a straightforward approach to the argument. He stated that historically when people begin to tax something you end up producing less or getting less out of it. He suggested that it be better for the rich to
Nowadays the goal of the republican party is to keep conservative values in the american people and the government; this was one of the main reasons why Ronald Reagan won his presidency in 1981. One of Reagan’s policies while in the presidency was the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981, this act was implemented to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 to encourage economic growth through reductions in individual income tax rates, the expensing of depreciable property, incentives for small businesses, and incentives for savings, and for other purposes. However, even with this the rich still had ways to keep their taxes low. According to the documentary, “Inequality For All,” Robert Reich says, “The rich will find ways to avoid paying more taxes, courtesy of clever accountants and tax attorneys. But this has always been the case, regardless of where the tax rate is set.”
Since individuals and businesses are required to pay various kinds of taxes, it is important to understand how tax laws shaped American society. America was tax-free for much of its early history; only after the Revolution did we have a government that was cautious on taxation. These laws has influenced our society in many positive ways, but has also had many negative outcomes. One way these laws has shaped American society is through the economic risks that we take which helped our tax preferences be taken accounted for and stand the test of time. It also maximizes opportunity through initiating social mobility and a wider range of institutions.
By 1940, a child raised in an average American household had a 92% of making more money than their parents. As time progressed the averages began to decline. In the 1950s, the average still maintained to be elevated but receded to 79%. Rates dropped to 50% in the 1980s and the numbers presently continue to deteriorate (Leonhardt).
One interesting thing the author notes is the wealth inequality in the United States. Even though “1% of the population own nearly half the wealth in the country the American dream persists” (Golash-Boza, pg. 269). People still believe that if you work hard you will succeed. At first glance, it’s clear that white people have a higher percentage of home ownership than any other race. However in saying that, I would like to know what the population totals were by race for each state as well.
One of the arguments used is that we could regulate and tax the 1% income because that would be “fair” but these numbers show how harmful that way of thinking is. 18% of taxes for the “bottom” of the bracket which is around 20% of the U.S population.
Inequality has been around since man first started to gather in groups. Since the time of the hunter gathers into the middle ages. Today in the United States inequality is worse than it has ever been, even with the significant dip between the 1940s and the 1970s. The increase in inequality is not limited to the United States but it is happening the fastest here. We have to look at the different factors that have played a role in the increase which are: technology, the decline in manufacturing and increase in globalization, and government policy.
The meaning of the free enterprise on trial means to achieve success by hardwork and taking risks. In his book, “From beyond Outrage”, Robert Reich speaks about how wealth is concentrated among the top wealthiest people in American leading to a wide gap between the rich and poor by increasing inequalities in income. This has not only disgusted Reich, but he is outraged too with the statistics that suggest how the top rich Americans are only getting richer, while those at the bottom of the line are suffering. The inequality gap has grown consistently over the years in America making more than half of the public change their opinion about the wealthy families in U.S. People now believe that those with money need to be taxed heavily and there should be an equal re-distribution of wealth.
The decline and rise of inequality has varied between the Great Depression and World War II (Kopczuk & Saez 2004). Because of the limited fluidity in both ends of distribution it is more likely that the children of poor families will remain poor and the children of wealthier families are more likely to remain wealthy in the United States than any other wealthy country (Couch & Lillard 2004,
1. Introduction Income inequality has grown significantly during this past decades and this phenomenon continues to increase over the years. This problem is constantly discussed in the daily news all around the world. Several consequences of this increase of inequality between people leads to economic problems such as high unemployment rates, lack of work for young people, fall of demand for certain product. The gap between rich and poor is increasing, the rich are richer and the poor are poorer as a result politicians and economists try to adopt certain policies in order to reduce this gap.
Wealth and Inequality in America Inequality The inequality in America has increased over time; the gap between the rich and the poor has become a problem that many Americans don’t see. Inequality is the extent of income which is distributed unequally among the citizenry. The inequality of the United has a large gap between the poor and the rich making it unfair to the population, the rich are becoming wealthier and the poor remain poor. The article “Of the 1%, By the 1%, For the 1%”, authored by Joseph E. Stiglitz describes that there is a 1 percent amount of American’s who are consuming about a quarter of the United States income in a year.
This past summer I spent a week at Dirigo Girls State, and while there I had the opportunity to meet many girls with very diverse backgrounds. The focus of the week was to learn and understand the workings of government, although ultimately that week showed me what it meant to truly accept others. Each speaker that week addressed, in some way, the ever growing problem of social inequality in America. While those speeches mostly pertained to the importance of our generation equalizing women’s rights in America, I realized their words carried deeper and broader meanings.
America prides itself on being one of the most effective democratically governed counties. The idea of the American dream is that all people have equivalent political freedoms and a responsive government. However the effectiveness of social equality is being threatened by increasing inequality in the United States. Economic inequality in the US has expanded drastically. The wealth gap has had drastic changes over the past 35 years.
The rich are the ones who benefit the most from the government. Those big corporations and industries make billions of dollars from the public, and guess who owns them, rich people. So how do we solve our problem? You can’t make the poor pay more taxes, they don’t have the money. We also can’t really flatten the tax rate fairly because the only way to reduce the riches tax pay is to soak the middle class.
The concept of a dual economic system in democratic countries, especially the United States of America, often is misunderstood and unseen because many Americans associate this country with the core of capitalist ideology. However, the inclusion of socialistic elements outweighs those of the capitalistic elements in our nation. In the past fifty years, industry and business, in general, have been one of the greatest targets of the U.S. Government, including the IRS. The proof that we are very “progressively” socialist is given that we have the highest tax rate of among all other democratic nations in the world ranging between 35% to 38%. The idea that these private companies’ wealth and assets belong to the government and its people is evermore eminent with the mainstream American populous.
Do you ever think of why should or shouldn’t the rich people pay more tax than others? Nowadays, people are arguing about the fairness of paying more tax. Statistics have proven that the rich have paid the majority of U.S. income taxes. A person making $100,000 will pay a higher percentage of his income in taxes than a person making $20,000 for instance. According to the Congressional Budget Office, “The 10% of households with the highest incomes pay more than half of all federal taxes.