Often times we associate material gain with enjoyment and fulfillment, but we fail to understand the side most affected by the uninhibited pursuit of gratification. In F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby, the wealthy do just that; they climb the steps of social class by stepping over those who are poorer. In the novel, the lower class face degradation caused by the wealthy’s selfish desire for pleasure and satisfaction. Specifically, the Valley of Ashes symbolizes Fitzgerald’s criticism for that very inconsiderate pursuit of self-gain, which creates dire consequences for the poor. Fitzgerald uses figures of speech to describe the Valley to condemn the inequality created by the wealthy’s pursuit of self-growth.
From the “rags-to-riches” dream, to becoming a rugged individualist, America’s dreams exceed pure commercialistic desires. However, any of these alternative versions of the American Dream are based off of money in some way. The fault of the “rag-to-riches” dream lies within its objective. Similar to social mobility, this dream relies on the poor to sit at the bottom and wish for the top, focusing on money. Even those who have reached success in this dream and become enormously wealthy still only care about their wealth.
Not only are the percentages that the middle class is taxed are high. The percentages never go up again after reaching a certain annual income. This is a fundamental flaw in the US tax code. But some people mostly upper class tax payers and political lobbyist do not think it is real. Our newest civil rights struggle is the income gap between the rich and the poor.
Carnegie stated that it is “much better this great irregularity than universal squalor” (Andrew Carnegie, “Wealth”). I believe that Carnegie contradicts himself with this statement, and I feel that it could be considered to create an ethical situation. Through his works he emphasizes the importance of sharing wealth for the greater good of society and to bridge the gap between the classes, but yet this statement seems to say that only a few are chosen to be wealthy while the rest of society is not. It in some ways undercuts the capabilities of the lower class. The giants of industrialism made their fortunes because of the labor of those worked for them.
Conflict sociologists see this skewness as a problem in society. The people who become of wealth stay in wealth because they control the power due to the mass amount of money they have compared to the rest of the population. When we say wealthy, we are discussing the top two percent of wealthy people in America. The top two percent of people own over half the total wealth in the United States. Many cities and even states do not contain a single person that qualifies as being a part of the top two percent of wealthiest people in this country.
Like an investment, the government puts money into society, hoping to get a more substantial amount of money back. But with unemployment low the government is investing money into society and the investments are not paying off. The unemployed (7.8 million people) can’t or won’t pay and middle class doesn’t make an effective salary. If a significant amount of people are not working that means the government is missing out on vital income tax. And the middle class alone can’t fight off the $19.3 trillion dollars of debt.
Unfortunately, the productivity growth only leaves a bigger pay gap. The factory workers are still low paying jobs. According to Davidson, their paychecks should grow as productivity grows, but of course the companies are going to be greedy with their money and take the extra cash for themselves. These low paying jobs will never change and that is why a higher education is important in order to get a well paying job. This cycle is hard to break and many do not.
In examining the aspect of price gouging, he further argues that greed plays a significant role in supporting the practice of price gouging as the rich become richer. He posits virtue as a response and alternative to price gouging from two standpoints: (1) that we (society in general) are furious when people receive things they are not deserving of, and (2) that greedy people who capitalize on humans that are helpless and take advantage of their circumstances should be penalized and should not be compensated (Sandal, p.9). In essence, the best possible solution would be the endorsement of a society that is fair and that provides virtue and social justice for its
The Outsiders Have you ever wished you could be rich? Or have a bigger house? Do you think that those who are not rich are a menace? Well in the book The Oustiders by S.E Hinton, The socs are more of a menace than the greasers because of the money they have, their parents mindset, and the society’s popular choice. The socs are a menace because of the money they have.
The psychological principles on which this leadership style is based is of Pavlovian and Skinnerian. The basic premise of transactional leadership that marketplace demands reciprocity, flexibility, adaptability, and real time cost-benefit analysis (Burns, 1978) makes it inappropriate to use it in today’s dynamic knowledge economy. However, if the supply of skilled labors are higher than the demand, for example in a country like India, then leaders usually resort to transactional style wherein carrot and stick policy is applied and people are merely thought of as being motivated by monetary gains and not more than what scientific management theorist or McGregor’s Theory X, had the view of humans. This leadership style also works in military, police wherein people have to work within a set parameter and a defined structure. This leadership style is a prescription of short term gains with severe negative implications for long term existence of organization.
In order to become a CEO like Michael Duke, you will likely have to be born rich. Successful startup companies require a great deal of high profile connection in order to succeed. Millionaire investors do not typically invest in poor people causing many these hard working individuals to continue to live in poverty. This is just one way the rich stay rich and the poor stay poor. Ivy League, private, and overall prestigious schools cost a fortune.
1. Should we raise federal minimum wage? A big topic that has been on the news a lot was if we should raise minimum wages or should we keep them the same. Tons of people are working hard but the workers don 't make enough money to make a living they need help from the gov’t to help pay their expenses. Lots of people think that getting a high pay wage will help them and the gov’t because then the government won 't have to spend as much because they would be making more money but people also think that would just hurt them more and make the government spend more because if people make more than the cost of living would go up.
Today, most Liberals see poverty and the unjust distribution of private property as the main limitations on the freedom of the common man (Harrison, et al., 2003c, p. 205). Thus, Liberals believe that “… there is an important role for the welfare state to ensure a degree of equality and fairness” (Harrison, et al., 2003c, p. 205). One should note, however, the phrasing “some degree” because Liberals do believe in some variation of wealth due to the unequal distribution of talent and ability of individuals (Harrison, et al., 2003c). Though Liberals believe in the necessity of a moderate welfare state, they are still supporters of the free market. They see it as an essential part of a free society, especially in terms of internationalism and removing walls that would prevent an international free market, as well as of the right of an individual to engage freely in economic activity (Harrison, et al., 2003c).
The rich are able to run an economy on their own, as they do not need a government to support them or hold their hand like the poor do. This leaves the lower class almost lost in a society as rich are able to succeed in life, as the poor struggle to find a job to bring home food. Krugman also states that rich are more likely to go to college and graduate, compared to the poor. This prompts the middle class to buy a house in a good school district, even if it is out of their price range. At the time, Krugman says that health care and repealing the Bush tax cuts would allow the United States to, “use the revenue to pay for more benefits that help lower-and middle-income families.” At the time, an uniform health care system and increased minimum wage could bridge the gap between poor and rich.