Arguments against inequality is simple, people believe everyone should have the same opportunities to succeed, especially in the early age as the reading “Manza Mobility’ talks about. Opportunity inequality refers to the ways in which inequality shapes the opportunities for children and young adults to maximize their potential. Which equal opportunity would all children having similar chances to succeed in life, regardless of whether they were born in wealthy or poor families. If every children had the opportunity to attend a good school regardless of their background of social class, then opportunities are truly equally distributed. Other than education inequality, lower class in general have less political influence, because they don’t contributed as much as higher class to lobby groups or fundraises and campaigns. …show more content…
People believe that being poor gives you an incentive to work harder, because the rewards are greater and more satisfaction of earning something you had to work for. Because if people just hand you opportunities and money, you wouldn’t treated the same way as someone who had to work for, it wouldn’t be no competitive for people to outwork others to make more money, because that’s what gives you the satisfaction and motivations to keep going when things get hard, the reward. Therefore if we didn’t have income inequality, the world would be different and even technologies wouldn’t be this advanced as it is now, because workers taking their jobs seriously and some even work harder to impress the boss for raise. In my opinion I favor income inequality but I’m against inequality at early age, because I experienced the struggle of inequality opportunities in the early age, and I believe no children should. Poverty in America are caused by two structural, one is by individual, people