In a recent article by the New York Times, Eduardo Porter examines the historical context of American income. Since the onset of the Great Recession, 2015 marks the first time the Census Bureau reported an increase in median U.S. incomes. Even more optimistic, though, incomes of the poorest fifth of the population increased by 6.6% and poverty decreased from 14.8% in 2014 to 13.5%. Although these statistics elicit a positive outlook for the years ahead, Porter cautions the reader to examine why it has taken 8 years for the country to recover. One of the main causes of this lag, he determines, is income inequality. Today, while the richest 5% keep 21.8% of the nation’s income, the bottom fifth of the population hold merely 3.4%. This pales in
…show more content…
Most importantly, Marx believed in a dichotomous society where only the capitalists and the working class exist. However, while this article supports this notion of there being very opposite classes, it brings in another variable. Even with growing inequality, the middle class exists, and the premise of this article is also based on a “median” income. Thus, modern society isn’t as bipolar as Marx would predict. Furthermore, Porter discusses previous recessions and income recovery from those events. He also shows that the portion of national income owned by the bottom fifth of the population changes in both directions (although more heavily downward) over time. This reflects processes of ebbs and flows, which once again contrast Marx’s vision of a one-way street toward equality through the breakdown of class. Finally, Marx argued that the proletariat would gain a sense of “class consciousness” and rebel against the bourgeoisie, giving way to a more equal society. In this article, though, there is no mention of any revolutionary sentiments among the working class against the capitalists. This may add a level of complexity to Marx’s theory where there may be other factors that promote solidarity other than class. Therefore, even though Marx’s theory of class conflict explains the inequality discussed in this article, there are numerous factors that also need to be considered including the existence of a middle class, the dynamic nature of inequality, and the role of class in people’s
Most importantly, Marx believed in a dichotomous society where only the capitalists and the working class exist. However, while this article supports this notion of there being very opposite classes, it brings in another variable. Even with growing inequality, the middle class exists, and the premise of this article is also based on a “median” income. Thus, modern society isn’t as bipolar as Marx would predict. Furthermore, Porter discusses previous recessions and income recovery from those events. He also shows that the portion of national income owned by the bottom fifth of the population changes in both directions (although more heavily downward) over time. This reflects processes of ebbs and flows, which once again contrast Marx’s vision of a one-way street toward equality through the breakdown of class. Finally, Marx argued that the proletariat would gain a sense of “class consciousness” and rebel against the bourgeoisie, giving way to a more equal society. In this article, though, there is no mention of any revolutionary sentiments among the working class against the capitalists. This may add a level of complexity to Marx’s theory where there may be other factors that promote solidarity other than class. Therefore, even though Marx’s theory of class conflict explains the inequality discussed in this article, there are numerous factors that also need to be considered including the existence of a middle class, the dynamic nature of inequality, and the role of class in people’s