Income Inequality In The United States

1301 Words6 Pages
Throughout all of history wealth has never been distributed evenly; no monarchist kingdom, communist utopia, socialistic society, or modern free market has ever existed in a state of equilibrium. The laws of the land have always seemed to operate in a manner of some sort of prejudice. The rich generate wealth at a much higher rate than the poor. Income inequality has existed, in some form or another, since the first trade transaction. Since, we have begun record keeping, statistics show the rich controlling increasing amounts of the total income. The only two discrepancies being global catastrophes--The Bubonic Plague and World War II-- the only reason being economy-wide setbacks putting everyone on much more even playing fields. Given the…show more content…
As the debt surpasses the GDP, inflation is all but a coming reality. Economists on both sides accept this reality and, as a nation, Republicans and Democrats must accept this preface and any policy must correlate with this accepted fact before being enacted. Krugman claims forward mobility is a past-reality in the United States, “We may believe that anyone can succeed through hard work and determination, but the facts say otherwise.” Krugman offers studies examining forward mobility through a very one-dimensional perspective. The conservative thinking in-regard to forward mobility generally states anyone who works hard will receive their share in life. This statement, for the most part, is true in the United States, as many would say it should be. Statistically, you have a 2% chance of being in poverty, and a 75% chance of being middle class should you follow these three rules: graduate high school, get a job, and wait until age 21 to get married and have children. This statistic was published by the Brooking’s Institute. Throughout the Brooking’s Institute article, they stress the importance of marriage and the effects on kids’ lives being born out of wedlock. Throughout Krugman’s book, he also references research done by the Brooking’s Institute, particularly, a study measuring the Bush tax cuts in which he explains ending the Bush tax cuts could result in enough revenue to fund universal health care, “The nonpartisan Urban-Brookings Joint Tax Center estimates that letting the Bush tax cuts expire for people with incomes over two hundred thousand dollars would be worth about $140 billion a year starting in 2012. That’s enough to pay for the subsidies needed to implement universal health care.” Krugman explains the benefits of universal free healthcare relating to income inequality explaining it
Open Document