Income Inequality

Some people would argue that the inequality gap of the rich and the poor do not affect our democracy, while others would say the opposite. Either way, there is a huge wealth gap between the rich and the poor in the United States today. While this gap between the classes expands, citizens are discussing whether something should be done, or should be left alone. On one side of the spectrum, people believe that great inequality is incompatible with our democracy. Democracy is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as, “a system of government in which all the people of a state or polity ... are involved in making decisions about its affairs, typically by voting.” Voting is one of the most important ways of expressing a person’s right of

6). This indicates that the poor do not have the time or the ability for political participation, they are focused on working to help keep their families afloat. While the rich have the time and money to vote and even to support their favored politicians. When the rich contribute money to their politicians, it allows them to express their voice, more so than just voting. This is a strong advantage against the poor, they do not have the ability to contribute in a way that the wealthy do. This is supported by the fact that “56 percent of those with incomes of $75,000 and more reported making some form of campaign contribution compared with a mere 6 percent among Americans with incomes under $15,000” (American Political Science Association, pg. 7). Also, since the wealthy are a politician's main contributor, the politician’s will become more dependent on “their financial favors, the greater is the willingness of such politicians and their appointees to

Today, “the upper 1 percent of Americans are now taking in nearly a quarter of the nation’s income every year” (Stiglitz). While the poor, even if they are working, are barely able to get by. According to a study conducted by the Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education at the University of California, “nearly three-quarters of the people helped by programs geared to the poor are members of a family headed by a worker” (Cohen, pg. 1). These low paid workers could be seen working at big corporate chains like Walmart or McDonald’s. These businesses practice the “low-wage business model” which creates “‘...many working families unable to afford the basics, but also imposes significant costs on the public as a whole’” (Cohen, pg. 2). Americans believe if it is not affecting them right now, they should not have to worry about it. They will say that “what matters...is not how the pie is divided but the size of the pie” (Stiglitz). Joseph Stiglitz, author of the article “Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%,” believes that this view is wrong; what Americans should be thinking is known as, “self-interest properly understood.” He describes this as, “...appreciating that paying attention to everyone else’s self interest-in other words, the common welfare-is in fact a precondition for one’s own ultimate well-being” (Stiglitz). Stiglitz argues that if