In the United States money is a representation of the amount of power that a specific individual possesses. In today’s society people are striving to live an average life opposed to living the “American Dream”. Recent studies have shown that there are more people living in America who believe that the idea of going from rags to riches is simply unachievable. The new representation of the “American Dream” is obtaining economic stability for the future. As a result of the rise of income and social inequality over the past few decades, many economists and scholars believe that the gap separating the wealthiest Americans from everyone else will continue to widen unless the United States government puts forth effort to reverse it. Economists, such
…show more content…
David Leonhardt brings up this point in his essay where he cites French economist Thomas Piketty and his idea which he identifies as “Piketty’s First Law of Inequality”(545). This law suggests that over time there is a possibility that wealth inequality could continue for decades until there are isolated economic classes. Although this seems like the route that America is on, both Leonhardt and Piketty believe that as a society we have the ability to resist inequality. Ultimately, it is the obligation of our country to determine our future. Although this seems like a very daunting task, Leonhardt believes that there are ways to disrupt this vicious cycle including war, depression, and a new system of …show more content…
Foroohar references Joseph Stiglitz, the Columbia professor and former economic advisor to Bill Clinton when she shows how both “Republican and Democratic administrations have been at fault in crafting not only policies that forward inequality, but also a narrative that tells us that we can’t do anything about it” (Foroohar). This idea further supports the belief that the government must be challenged in order to create new laws and rules to structure our economy so that it is more balanced. Stiglitz emphasizes this idea when he explains how “it’s about the choices we make with the rules we create to structure our economy” (Foroohar). One of the reasons that the United States has not put forth effort in order to change the inevitable outcome of the lower classes, is the fact that they do not actually know how wealthy the upper class is. If the lower class was aware of the economic gap between classes there would be “riots in the streets” (Fitz). This brings up the issue of education in America. David Leonhardt references Thomas Piketty in his essay when he concludes that the more individuals there are who seek out education the smaller the gap between the upper and lower classes worldwide (Leonhardt). In other words a governmental push to create a more educated population will result in a smaller gap between classes across the
David Leonhardt brings up this point in his essay where he cites French economist Thomas Piketty and his idea which he identifies as “Piketty’s First Law of Inequality”(545). This law suggests that over time there is a possibility that wealth inequality could continue for decades until there are isolated economic classes. Although this seems like the route that America is on, both Leonhardt and Piketty believe that as a society we have the ability to resist inequality. Ultimately, it is the obligation of our country to determine our future. Although this seems like a very daunting task, Leonhardt believes that there are ways to disrupt this vicious cycle including war, depression, and a new system of …show more content…
Foroohar references Joseph Stiglitz, the Columbia professor and former economic advisor to Bill Clinton when she shows how both “Republican and Democratic administrations have been at fault in crafting not only policies that forward inequality, but also a narrative that tells us that we can’t do anything about it” (Foroohar). This idea further supports the belief that the government must be challenged in order to create new laws and rules to structure our economy so that it is more balanced. Stiglitz emphasizes this idea when he explains how “it’s about the choices we make with the rules we create to structure our economy” (Foroohar). One of the reasons that the United States has not put forth effort in order to change the inevitable outcome of the lower classes, is the fact that they do not actually know how wealthy the upper class is. If the lower class was aware of the economic gap between classes there would be “riots in the streets” (Fitz). This brings up the issue of education in America. David Leonhardt references Thomas Piketty in his essay when he concludes that the more individuals there are who seek out education the smaller the gap between the upper and lower classes worldwide (Leonhardt). In other words a governmental push to create a more educated population will result in a smaller gap between classes across the