"The Upside Of Inequality" vs. "Why the Rich Are Getting Richer"

The essays “The Upside of Inequality” and “Why the Rich Are Getting Richer” both addressed the issue of income inequality from a different stand point than previous readings. These essays focused more on the actual aspects of the economy. However, each of these essays do also have a different tone when it comes to their approach. “The Upside of Inequality”, which was my favorite out of the two, seemed a lot more useful and believable. The main idea behind this essay was that the reason for the widening income gap is because of the increasing demand for a higher education. Jobs are requiring undergraduate and even graduate degrees, so naturally these are the people who are making the most money. There was a lot of data and statistics used in their justification. For example, take this quote “In 1980, an American with a college degree earned about 30 percent more than an American who stopped education at high school. But, in recent years, a person with a college education earned roughly 70 percent more”. Statistics like this make the facts and their approach meaningful. Another approach that I noticed about this particular essay was that towards the end of the article, it gave an alternate solution, which essentially gave it purpose. The second essay “Why the Rich Are Getting Richer” was also similar. It provided a lot of statistics and data as well. It relied more however, on certain situations and previous states of the economy to support the idea that it is simply capitalism and competition that is contributing to the income gap. Due to the fact that these actual situations were more prevalent than “The Upside of Inequality”, a visual picture is painted of how the economy has changed. For example, the author referencing throughout this essay about “mid-century America”. 

Serving in Florida

I believe Barbara Ehrenreich, author of "Serving in Florida" would agree with the statement "America has a problem with income inequality that must be fixed." I feel this way, due to the fact that Barbara experiences the hardships of working two jobs, all while only making minimum wage. Along this short, but very educational journey she experiences all kinds of issues that are happening in America, including income inequality. For example, when Barbara meets George, she notices he is young and doesn't know much English at all, so she jokes around and attempts to get to know him. She learns George is an 18 year old boy from Czechoslovakia, who works as a dishwasher for $5 an hour and lives in a home with other Czechoslovakian men who work as well and some nights, George  is even forced to wait to sleep until another man leaves for work. Barbara herself was only making $6.10 an hour, while working as a maid. How are people supposed to live off that amount? Barbara certainly couldn't, so she was forced to try and balance working two jobs. One as a maid and the other as a waiter. I found the scenario that Barbara had brought up over her salary as a waiter and the amount of gas she has to spend daily interesting. She states, "I make the decision to move closer to Key West. First, because of the drive. Second and third, also because of the drive: gas is eating up $4 to $5 a day, and although Jerry's is as high-volume as you can get, the tips average only 10 percent, and not just for a newbie like me. Between the base pay of $2.15 an hour and the obligation to share tips with the busboys and dishwashers, we're averaging only about $7.50 an hour. " This woman works her tail off for only $7.50 and $6.10 an hour? She later discovers how much pressure and stress comes while working two jobs, as she just walks out from her waiting job, due to all of the chaos and commotion of a busy restaurant. As a server Barbara probably felt the feeling of "Why am I doing this to myself? It's not even worth it anymore." She was working for minimum wage and forced to deal with major amounts of stress on a daily basis, while knowing that some people make much more money than her, and don't have to deal with nearly as much adversity. It's a terrible feeling when the amount of gas you use a day is pretty close to your hourly salary. Income inequality plays a major role as well, when George is under paid, due to him being a young Czechoslovakian immigrant. As a human being,  you just tend to question yourself on whether the situation is actually worth all of the effort and in her case it just wasn't worth the exhaustion anymore, not even after a day.

March 1st blog

“The Upside of Income Inequality” by Gary Becker, Kevin M. Murphy and “Why the Rich Are Getting Richer and the Poor, Poorer” by Robert Reich both talk about money in America. One of the key aspects of these articles are the wealthy, middle-class, and the poor and how the gap is increasing. Analyzing the way that both of these articles communicate is different but the same. The authors of “The Upside of Income Inequality” uses graphs of statistics to make his points while introducing the information linked to the point they are trying to make. The graphs in this article in my opinion, are effective as it shows that there is evidence over time that can back up their argument about higher education being the reason for the wage gap. By providing a visual of just how many more Americans are going to college and how much more money is being made from high school v. College helps to communicate the authors point. On the other hand, compared to “Why the Rich Are Getting Richer and the Poor, Poorer” the authors communicated by giving examples of companies that search for low-wage workers in foreign countries decreasing their spending costs and increasing their profit. The author uses examples of companies and facts to back up their reasoning of why there is an increasing wage gap. This article also communicates by giving examples that the reader could relate to and possibly be effected by such as companies hiring robots for jobs instead of humans decreasing serving jobs.

Along with communication in “The Upside of Income Inequality,” there lies Authority with the authors. The authors make their points with cited information, but with this information the authors are also “economists who have won the Nobel Prize and the Clark Prize.” This piece of information at the beginning of the article makes the authors have more authority and credibility in their argument. I could say the same for Reich author of “Why the Rich Are Getting Richer and the Poor, Poorer” because he served as The Secretary of Labor for the Clinton administration and has written many books on economy. The authors of both of these articles have established authority from the beginning and continue to maintain it throughout their argument with facts. Although Reich communicates with more facts and information than Becker and Murphy, they both maintain their points and authority throughout.

March 1st Blog

Both essays that i read "Why the Rich are Getting Richer" and "The Upside of Income Inequality" Were useful in their own way. Both spoke upon the substantial difference in Economic growth and income inequality throughout out America, which then relates to the world. The Article "The Upside of Income Inequality" centers its argument of why the gap in income is some great around education. The authors Gary Becker and Kevin M. Murphy believe that because some Americans went further in getting their education, by attending college, they was able to make a better income from the investment in having an degree. It's a proven statistic that in recent years a person with a college education earned seventy percent more money than a person with a high school education or lower, and a person with a graduate degree earned about one-hundred percent more. The essay "Why the Rich are Getting Richer" is just as useful, it also claims that education is key in fixing the income gap but in a different way. The essay says that we as people are in different boats; one is sinking rapidly, one sinking more slowly, and the third one rising more steadily. These boats would refer to jobs that are being lost substantially to machines, people in other countries, and people who have a lower education than others. These essays are very useful in how they give a direct reasoning of the income gap, even if this explanation isn't favored by everyone, it still causes you to evaluate and think about the reasoning behind them. They are also useful in giving areas of decline and rise in jobs that would be helpful in people trying to come from the bottom to the top. The communication techniques in these articles varied in how "Why the Rich are Getting Richer" they explained by using the boat methods and going through the various career fields; in "The Upside of Income Inequality" the authors communicate by using percents more and using graphs that show the statistics a little more effectively. In the end both essays revolved around one solution, education.

March 1st blog

In both essays, "The Upside of Income Inequality" and "Why the Rich are Getting Richer and the Poor, Poorer", the authors exhibit and discuss the problems of income equality. Although they are among the same subject, they seem to be different in their own ways. I analyzed them differently and tended to think both of them differently, although discussing the same things. The author's styles are different and they discuss the problems differently. Robert Reich's "Why the Rich are Getting Richer and the Poor, Poorer" article dives straight into facts and remains the same way throughout the reading. Although it sounds like a "controversial" story, the title is general and doesn't really argue the main point. There are several facts about industries and doesn't really stand out to me. Whereas the other article, "The Upside of Income Inequality",  another controversial title, has a biased argument to inequality. Although I don't agree to the title in any manner, it shows facts that I wasn't aware of basing in other countries. The article provides graphs and statistics and has more of an argument that the reader may or may not agree with. I like this article because it challenges my views. The thing i noticed common in both articles are that both authors established their credibility well.

March 1st Blog

Both essays "Why the Rich are Getting Richer and the Poor, Poorer" and " The Upside of Income Inequality" are very useful. Robert Reich, Gary Becker and Kevin Murphy are all researchers with knowledge to share. Each one of these essays talk about the income inequality that we have in the United States. Even though they both are talking about the same thing each author has their own specific point of views that they focus on in their essays. Gary Becker and Kevin Murphy main focus is on education. They have many graphs the depict the situations happening with income inequality. They make the graphs so easy to read that anyone could follow it just by looking at it. They also have these major aspects on African American and women. I found this odd that they had their own section on it but its what ever. Robert Reich had more of a direct approach in his essay. It seemed a little more objective to everything. He is more set on things in the past more than in the future. He has a more historical aspect on life. Each and every one of these authors clearly have the skills and qualifications to right about these issues. They all wrote a little bit about themselves in the beginning of there essays to show their skills and qualifications.

March 1st Blog

In both “Why the Rich are Getting Richer” by Robert Reich and “The Upside of Income Inequality” by Gary Becker and Kevin M. Murphy are useful readings for research by authors with the qualifications and authority to back up their work. Both readings talk about income inequality in the U.S., although Becker and Murphy’s article is centered more around the payoff of education and other skills. Becker and Murphy’s article is well organized and keeps the reader interested with easy to follow graphs and explanations of these graphs. These graphs also get more specific with African Americans and woman graduates if you needed to do specific research. Reich’s work is more broad and take more of a historic approach. Reich also gives us comparisons of what he would believe or believed the effects of economic inequality will have on us. For example, Reich writes, “By 2035, twice as many Americans will be elderly as in 1988, and the number of octogenarians is expected to triple.” (Reich 492). Why should you bother reading what these men have written, what qualifications do they have? All three of these men have put their qualification at the beginning of their work to prove to their readers that they are quaffed. Gary Becker won the Nobel Prize in 1992, teaches at the University of Chicago and is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford. Kevin M. Murphy is Becker’s colleague at Chicago and Hoover and was also the winner of the 1997 John Bates Clark Medal of American Economic Association, which is awarded to outstanding economists under the age of forty. Robert Reich is a professor Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley, served as secretary of labor in the first Clinton administration and, before that as a professor of economics at Harvard. Reich has also written numerous books on economics and has been a lectures for over a dozen years. 

March 1st Blog

While both the essays "The Upside of Income Equality," and "Why the Rich are Getting Richer and the Poor, Poorer," seem to tackle the same topic of income equality, upon reading the two works become drastically different. To begin, "Why the Rich are Getting Richer and the Poor, Poorer," seems to be very objective in presenting its information. Although the title suggests an argument being presented, there is very little argument at all. Instead, the essay consists of mainly, albeit a bit dry, objective facts. The author makes no hypothetical statements about the future, only observations about what has occurred in the past. If there is a bias in this work, it is well hidden. However, "The Upside of Income Equality," seems to have a bias in its own favor. This may seem silly to point out, why wouldn't a work argue in its own favor after all? However, the illustrations presented in this essay are a bit of a stretch to work into the argument. For example, a large section of this work shows the correlation between education levels and income. While there is a strong correlation and it is provable, this evidence has a weak tie to supporting the upside of inequality. The author loosely states that because college-educated people at the top of the spectrum are earning more, they are more productive with the economy. There is no evidence suggested to prove this statement and any facts in the body are showing trends in earnings and education. This shows that this work is not only biased in its own favor, making connections that aren't quite there, but also that the work has lost most of its authority, as any expertise they have are not relevant to the actual argument being made. On the other side, it seems that "Why the Rich are Getting Richer and the Poor, Poorer," regains most of its authority even when scrutinized. This work tediously spells out every connection between every fact presented. While this essay may be a bit of a boring read, it is obvious that the author knows the material and what it implies.

Serving in Florida

I think the author of "Serving in Florida" would agree with the statement, "inequality will always exist: some people will always be rich, and some people will always be poor" because of her experience working at the Hearthside. She witnessed multiple people from different races, genders, and ages all working minimum-wage jobs and barely affording a place to stay and not ever having money left over to save. Even if one of them, such as Gail or Joan, were to be promoted and replace Phillip, they would not make enough money to save and "get rich." In Barbara's experiment, she leaves her Florida Key's lifestyle to work a minimum-wage job as a waitress in a restaurant connected to a hotel. She was originally wanting to be a maid but then deemed suitable as a waitress. In the reading it states, "I am at the wrong end of some infallible ethnic equation: most, but by no means all, of the working house-keepers I see on my job searches are African Americans, Spanish-speaking, or refugees from the Central European post-Communist world." Barbara believes that you need to be a white English speaking person to get a job that has human interaction. A job that pays more from tips and would be easier to get promoted. All of the workers have their own struggles, weather it's the Haitian men living in crammed quarters or the host, Joan, living in her car behind a shopping center. No matter what a person looks like or how they dress, they could be in worse conditions than someone in torn clothes. Joan wears nice clothes and gives the appearance of having a better lifestyle, but buys all of her clothes from a thrift shop and lives in a car. Some people can work their entire life and always be poor.

Serving in Flordia

From the reading, “Serving in Florida” by Barbra Ehrenreich, she lives the life of a lower-class woman trying to get by day by day. I think she would agree with the statement that moving up the socio-economic ladder is too difficult in America, which she states in the beginning of the article. She would agree with this because she couldn’t even find a regular job to pay regular bills. By regular bills I mean rent, light bill, water bill etc. Jobs that she applied for were minimum paying jobs that didn’t hire her for reasons of their own. She wasn’t a bad person or anything, no misdemeanors, she was a U.S citizen and she passed the pee tests. This shows how hard it is just to get a job, let alone a minimum wage paying job. If it’s so hard to get a low paying job, just think of how hard it is to gain a high paying job and the requirements. Not only do you need degrees, you also need experience which is also hard to gain because it goes back to getting a low paying job. To be able to move up the socio-economic ladder you need a high paying job or some high amount of income. When I think of high class, I think of really rich people in fancy cars and I know that they aren’t surviving on a minimum wage pay check. I also know that they, if not most of them, aren’t school dropouts, druggies, etc., unless they were born into the riches of course. She would agree with this statement because she lived it. When you experience things, you can then put your life into agreements or disagreements. Almost like living testimonies. 

Serving in Florida

I think Barbara Ehrenreich would disagree with the idea of everyone in America already having an equal opportunity to be successful. Ehrenreich discusses her experiment in which she experiences the life of a lower class minimum wage worker. She delves into a local area in Florida in which the local residence share most of the same struggles; money being the the primary struggle. She would disagree with the claim that everyone has an equal opportunity by using the fact that certain circumstances are limited by environment. During her experience Ehrenreich discusses the limited availability of prospect employment opportunities  as well as insufficient living quarters in the local vicinity. Without the initial opportunity of a viable employment there is no opportunity for somewhere to live. Ehrenreich gives the example of the Key West area, where the experiment takes place, having only flophouses and trailer homes- like the one, a pleasing fifteen-minute drive from town, that has no air-conditioning, no screens, no fans and no television (Ehrenreich 918). This example shows the truly deficient availability of residency on the island. Insufficient compensation also follows the acquisition of one of the few jobs in the area. Minimum wage in a high expense area is no where close to covering monthly financial responsibilities. Ehrenreich compiles a list of her coworkers living situations most of which are rooming with one or several other people. The reason for all of these disadvantages can be contributed to the region. Obtaining a stable livelihood in a remote region such as an island can be very difficult. With no savings and no higher education to help someone job opportunities grow smaller.  It is this fact in a disadvantage that Ehrenreich illustrates through her experiment of becoming a minimum wage worker that not everyone in America has an equal opportunity to be successful compared to another region advantaged with better opportunities. 

Income inequality from Barbara Ehrenreich

The Author of “Poverty in Florida” would most likely agree with the statement “America has a problem with income equality that needs to be fixed”. Barbara Ehrenreich says, “During a month of poverty no one recognized my name…” This means that in society people do not care for the poor, as they should and that there is a huge inequality gap between the rich and the poor. She also states that it is very hard to move up in the income gap. She believes that when somebody is poor it is very hard to move up to then become rich and have money. She undergoes the struggles of being poor and says that at one point she would be $100 short on rent, which could possibly make her not have a home. She believes that life in poverty is a had life in which it is very hard to acquire wealth, which then makes it even hard to sustain life off of such a little income furthermore make it very difficult to sustain a family off that income. This leads to my conclusion that Ehrenreich would agree that America has a problem with inequality in income that needs to be fixed in order for the poor to stop struggling as much as they do.

Equality Much?

The author in “Serving in Florida” would most likely disagree with the statement that “ Everyone in America already has an equal opportunity to be successful”. In terms of money not everybody is treated equal. Now that is not to say that we should change ourselves into an all equal sharing economy like communism. No, what we must see is that not everybody is given the same opportunities as others. It is very likely that someone coming from a middle-class or wealthy family would receive more opportunities than somebody in a poor family. That doesn’t mean that nobody can  get out of being poor, it just means that more opportunities are more likely coming from a wealthier position that someone starts on. That is the key, “where do we start?”. The authors experiment and background are examples of 2 different starting points. Where she references that in this parallel universe , where her dad didn’t get out of the mines and she didn’t get a college education, explains the 2 starting points. One where she starts in a capable position to get a college degree and likely be paid more. Or one where she has to start from practically the opposite and gets the , very rare, benefit of having $1000 help start. Now after considering where you start, we have to understand that getting a job is even more of a challenge to equal opportunity. The author states that finding a job is about being at the right place at the right time. Which is true because dependent of your level of education , even then you can never surely secure a job. Its more about timing and being lucky enough that the interviewer likes you enough to higher you. However this still doesn’t mean that everybody has equal opportunity to be successful because in reality who would have a higher chance to gain a regular grade office job? A person with at least a degree in said profession , or the just new immigrant who is looking for a start up to the American dream?

The Equality of Opportunity

I think that the author of “Serving in Florida” would disagree with the statement “everyone in America has an equal opportunity to be successful” because of her personal experience in the minimum-wage marketplace. I believe that everyone in America has the opportunity to be successful, and I’m sure the author would too, however, this opportunity is not always equal. The author talks about how most of the employees that she works with are in financially desperate situations because of prior experiences they have had that negatively impacted their lives. Although I agree that people “make their own path” through life, sometimes there are outside elements that are out of their control and really can limit opportunity. The author also talks about how if she had not had a little over $1,000 in buffer money starting out her low-wage lifestyle she most likely would have been in really bad shape. There are always money-related problems that arise in everyday life that the minimum-wage salary does not take in to account. One’s potential opportunity can be limited to prior financial stability, educational experience, networking connections, etc. There are so many factors that can influence potential success in America, even one’s gender or race can have a profound effect on the limiting of opportunities. Although these limitations can be mildly annoying at times, they are not an excuse, the opportunity is still there it might just require more effort. The author also talks about the way the employees are treated, and I think that this sheds light in to how people are categorized by their social class. Minimum wage employees are often treated as “disposable” because of their lack of wealth and influence. Even though a large number of minimum-wage workers might be felons or drug addicts, it is unreasonable to cast this label on every poverty-stricken person. Respect is oftentimes directly related to one’s financial well being, and it is becoming increasingly easier to de-humanize people based on their economic standing. Overall, there is opportunity for everyone but it is not necessarily equal and might be more visible to some than to others. I think that the author would certainly agree that America offers more potential opportunities to the average person than a place like Afghanistan might, however, we cannot allow this to blind us from positive social change. 

Feb 27

I believe that Barbara Ehrenreich would agree that the American dream is still accessible to the majority of Americans. If one wants to be successful in life then they are going to have to work for it because nothing comes easy in this world and nothing is entirely free. Barbara is living on her own and she is looking for a new place to live in Florida but all of the real estate is well out of her budget. This means she must work for what she wants, otherwise she will most likely be living out on the streets. So she takes it upon herself with no help from anyone to get a job and work to earn the money she needs to pay for living. As she searches for a job she soon makes a list of all the jobs that she would not enjoy doing and all of the jobs that she would enjoy doing. Barbara chooses as her last resort to go back to waitressing. As a teen she waitressed through high school and all she can remember is that it tires her out and she did not enjoy herself like she would. Barbara needed money so she wasn’t passing up on any offers. Barbara is showing that here in America you can choose the occupation you want to fit your needs and desires in life. She will work for her “car, house, rent, food, and other needs” to satisfy her desires. Once she has all of these things that she wants she will soon realize how happy she will be because she has worked for these things and nothing was given to her. Instead of sitting on her but looking for a hand out she decides to take action into her own hands and goes to work. Not everyone can go to work so she is an example of how to live the American dream in order to be happy.