The fact is that there is becoming a large gap in the wealth of united states citizens. over the last 30 years the share of national income going to the wealthiest 20 percent of households went from 45.4 percent to 53.5 percent. But meanwhile the share for the bottom 20 percent decreased from 5.8 percent to 4.1 percent. The problem exists when the cost of living has gone up while wages remain low. Experts list a number of causes to the issue including globalization, technology, education, and tax policy. Most of the impact is effecting the middle class. Some think that the government should restrict some trade and outsourcing which would keep some jobs in the united states. We call this attempt to protect domestic jobs and markets Protectionism. Some think that the more wealthy should be taxed more heavily than the middle and low income families. Also they think that adding additional job retraining programs, wage insurance, and unemployment benefits will reduce the damage done by globalization. The other side of the argument believes that this would simply reduce business profits and leave less to distribute to employees. Also they believe that raising taxes will simply slow economic growth and hurt all workers. Some opponents also say that with federal spending on entitlement programs and other social safety net efforts already consuming nearly half of the federal budget, the nation cannot afford new social programs.
Now my opinion. The problem is evident, too much variation of wealth in this nation. So I believe the solution is simple. We do need to tax the poor less and the wealthy more. Why should someone who is struggling to make it by and living paycheck to paycheck have to pay the same percentages in taxes as someone who gets a 26 million dollar bonus because he is the ceo of a big corporation. More money will come from the rich to the government which will help us pull out somewhat of the deficit we have dug for ourselves. Also, I think that we should be a country that can take pride in knowing that everyone is given a fair chance. So the guy that is working at 711 and can barely afford his appt. and his car shouldnt have to give his money to the government if he hasn't got that much to give. But the ceo should have to make up for these people that have it more difficult when they can go out and frivilously go out and buy whatever they desire. No one needs millions of dollars a year to live. But people do need a minimum amount to survive and that is why the people at the bottom should have a chance to climb up that ladder so one day they can help the people that are struggling. Programs should be passed that puts more money into the education system and more directly to teach classes such as economics that teach people to budget their money better. I believe this will decrease some of the gap with the poorest of people because it will keep more people out of debt which has become a huge issue in this country with credit cards. Also more money should be put towards college to offer more grants and cheaper loans to encourage more people to continue education to put more people into higher paying jobs rather than graduating high school simply to start a minimum wage job. Another possible solution is that there be a limit on the amount of wealth and land a person can own. Examples of this practice go back at least to the Roman republic in the third century B.C. when laws were passed limiting the amount of wealth or land that could be owned by any one family. The Romans had the right idea I believe. and so did Robin Hood and i believe that is the central idea here, you can have so much wealth and land but when a person reaches a certain point that wealth should be given to the poor. However this would outrage the wealthy people it would benefit the poor and suffering.
