Amazon.com Widgets

Is income inequality really a problem in the U.S.?

  • If we had more income equality the housing crisis wouldn't have hurt as much

    If we had a stronger middle class income then they wouldn't be as dependent on home prices for their wealth. The real estate bubble hurt us so bad because incomes have not been rising with productivity. People hadn't noticed or cared because with housing going through the roof they felt profitable. When that camouflage went away people saw the reality of their situation and the fact they are living week to week.

  • It is a symptom of a dangerously inequitable system.

    Income inequality may not a problem in itself, but excessive income inequality such as the kind that is worsening every day in the United States is a symptom of an inequitable system in need of correction. Income inequality of the kind the United States is producing is what one finds in highly stratified class-based systems or banana republics. If it continues, it could lead to a revolution and a transition to a less desirable system of government. It has often been said that FDR's New Deal programs to create necessary work for the jobless and put restrictions on the excesses of capitalism didn't just save America, they saved capitalism itself.

  • It Is a Huge Problem.

    Income inequality in the United States is one of the worst problems in modern society. The inequality is reaching levels comparable to failed nation states like those in Africa and other unstable regions. It is terrible that CEOs are often making hundreds times more than their own employees. This means we are creating a dangerous class system and destabilizing the economy.

  • Playing devil's advocate

    The cause of income inequality is the difference in the individual's economic production. I once heard a simple description which went like this.. to criticize income inequality is to complain that an iphone has a higher value than a paper clip. The price is not arbitrary, rather it reflects an object’s market value. Likewise, the money/salary an indiv. earns reflects the market value of his work. There isn't a set amount of $ that is allowed to flow into the bank account of the robber barrons.
    What does this mean? You might say that it is unfair that the top 5% of the pop has 10x the wealth of the bottom 5%, but this is bc they produced roughly that much more. Their skills, talents, and ideas are simply worth more to the marketplace.

  • It is not a problem.

    A desire to earn more motivates people to innovate, create, and start businesses to contribute to the economy and the standard of life in some form. It motivates people to become leaders of companies. Most CEOs spend their lives going to school, spending summers interning, and working their way up to be leaders and earning the wages of leaders. I agree that no one should be living destitute, but someone with little to no education should not be earning the same as someone who worked for it and has valuable skills. As long as a laborer is at least making a livable minimum wage (and an average worker that has valuable skills will not work for unfair wages), then all is fair. As a person who advocates for the free-market, after the company provided its services/goods and properly paid its employees, it should be able to allocate its resources as it chooses.

  • It is not a problem.

    A desire to earn more motivates people to innovate, create, and start businesses to contribute to the economy and the standard of life in some form. It motivates people to become leaders of companies. Most CEOs spend their lives going to school, spending summers interning, and working their way up to be leaders and earning the wages of leaders. I agree that no one should be living destitute, but someone with little to no education should not be earning the same as someone who worked for it and has valuable skills. As long as a laborer is at least making a livable minimum wage (and an average worker that has valuable skills will not work for unfair wages), then all is fair. As a person who advocates for the free-market, after the company provided its services/goods and properly paid its employees, it should be able to allocate its resources as it chooses.

  • Truth about income inequality

    Unfortunately the basis of the income inequality is envy. Ask any income inequality zealot if he would like to be a 1 percenter. You might have to administer truth serum to get his true answer but undoubtably he would say yes, who wouldn't? So there simply exposes the real truth: he wants to bring down the class of people that he would like to be a member of.....Envy. I wish people would spend more time trying to be a 1 percenter than complaining about how unfair the system is.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.