The third podcast discusses the myth of “Rags to Riches” by explaining its origin. Ben Franklin, a founding father who was born in poverty, was in the printing business. At the time, paper was made from rags and paper was used for printing. This is how he went from rags to riches. The American Dream, from the perspective of those who have grown prosperous, is made from hard work. But, do all hard workers reach the American Dream? No. Luck is involved. Malcolm Gladwell demonstrates this idea of accumulative advantage, or luck, in his book Outliers. The “self-made man” is disproved as many beneficial events are highlighted and viewers see all that assist the man in his ascendance. In the podcast, a young woman who works for Domino’s Pizza is…
When Authors Tom Stanley and William Danko set out to investigate on how people get wealthy across America, they found something odd. Many people who live in upscale neighborhoods and drive luxurious cars do not have extreme wealth. The allusion of wealth happens a lot and many people are unaware of the true meaning of wealth. Many people who have great wealth do not live in upscale neighborhoods. This book examines ways to become wealthy and how wealth is not what you spend but what you accumulate.…
Andrew Carnegie talks about how the upper class have a responsibility to reduce excess wealth by being charitable to highlight the issues of wealth inequality. He suggests that society can use the wealth from the upper class more responsibly than the state. In the article, he talks about his dislike of people using money irresponsibly on material things. He suggests when the upper class distribute their wealth, they should do it in a way the promote responsible spending. He talks about how there are two types of wealthy people.…
the benefits of inherent wealth and status, can turn ideas and hard work into profit and wealth.…
SMITH, ANTHONY L. "The Super-Rich: The Unjust World of Global Capitalism."ASEAN Economic Bulletin, 18.2 (2001): 237-239.…
When I was younger, I thought money ruled everything but in reality it doesn’t. Working hard doesn’t apply anymore in today’s economy. Most of the people who are wealthy have grown into the money or inherited from their ancestor. People hold the wealthy to a higher standard/power therefore they think they are better than the middle/lower class. Even though money is a great asset to have, it can be a liability. As I read the essay about Tim Blixseth, he was an individual who was not impressed or got excited about how much money he and his family had. He wanted to be low key, an average middle class person who worked hard for what he got not just given. In the story “Living It” he tells us how he would wake up in different locations each night.…
In the online New York Times article “The Problem With Too Many Millionaires” Chrystia Freeland addresses that the group of wealthy individuals are getting richer throughout time. This “the winner takes it all” phenomena that has been occurring over the past few decades, may put even more stress on the middle class in the upcoming years.…
This is shown in the fact that 68.7 percent of the world’s population only holds three percent of the wealth in the world and only 8.4 percent of the world’s population has 83.3 percent of the wealth of the world (Doc 6). The 68.7 percent of the world with the least amount of money often works in factories for very low wages, these factories being owned by the most wealthy. This relates to how those who get ahead have to step on others, with the wealthy exploiting the poor for their wealth.…
A lot of times people think of money as a good thing, but really it corrupts. Jonathan Swift had said“A wise person should have money in their head, but not in their heart.” When people gain a lot of wealth most of the time the start to look down on people but in the end it doesn't matter because we all end up the same. Dead. “We all gonna die, we bleed from similar veins.” Tupac Shakur explains this perfectly, no matter who we are we’re going to die because we are the same, human beings. The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald shows how wealth creates social class which can ruin relationships.…
In the time period during the Gilded Age, late 18th century to early 19th century, America's industrial economy exploded, creating pioneering opportunities for individuals to erect substantial wealth. Industrial giants like Andrew Carnegie, Cornelius Vanderbilt, J.P. Morgan, and John D. Rockefeller transformed business and launched in the modern corporate economy, but also, at times, eliminated free-market economic competition through the use of monopolies. Overall national wealth increased significantly, but many saw the gap growing between the rich and the poor along with it. The disparity between the realities of the rich, big business tycoons and the poor, “The Other Half”, were substantial, while the similarities between them were very…
In the book Money and Class in America, Lewis Lapham claims that American culture idolizes the wealthy, believing that wealth is necessarily belied by quality of character and wisdom. He gives both cross-cultural and cross-historical examples to show that other cultures and at other times the highest esteem was given not only to the wealthy, but also to the intellectual, the powerful, and the artistic individuals of those societies. In contrast Lapham discusses Americans’ idolization of the wealthy, as well as their conflation of wealth and individual merit and worth. He then questions if Americans -- a supposedly egalitarian people who are all created equal. Nonetheless, this cult of wealth still pervades, though seemingly there is nothing to cause it, as similar nations are not afflicted by such an absurd ardor.…
A good friend of mine recently recommended me to watch a documentary called “The One Percent.” I do not usually watch documentaries unless I am gaining some type of knowledge out of the information presented. Unsure of what it was about and what I was going to get out of it, I turned on NetFlix and proceeded to watch the film. I soon came to realize I was enamored by this film, “The One Percent,” and it remains one of my favorite documentaries of all time. The documentary deals with the disparity between the wealthy elite and the citizenry and how they are both so far removed from one another. “As of 2010, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 35.4% of all privately held wealth.” (Domhoff, 2010, The Wealth Distribution, para. 1). The producer and interviewer presents this film through many wealthy American businessmen, critics, economists and even his own family to explain this major social gap that exists on our home front. When looking at the differences side-by-side, it is hard to grasp that we all live in the same place, the United States of America.…
In order to be successful a person has to be the best of the best at their job, it’s basically survival of the fittest. This kind of mentality creates competition between social classes and allows this idea that “we are entitled to the benefits the rules of the game promise for the exercise of our talents” to be developed (90). A person should be allowed to reap the benefits of their natural talents and should not feel bad about it because they played by the rules of the competition and came out on top because of certain skills they possess. For example, when it comes to sports, athletes are chosen based on their raw talent and ability to score points and win games. Nothing else is considered when they are signing a million dollar contract, but no one thinks about what happens to the 99% of people that do not make it and are the reason why that individual is rich and famous. The upper class “natural gifts aren’t their own doing, and are moreover profitable only in light of the value of the community places on them, they must share the rewards with the community” (88). Having support and profit from the lower and middle class is the only explanation for their success which is why the rich should willingly help their economy. The epitome of a meritocracy is that they have a one sided selection process and those that are not the 1 percent are suffering financially even though they are the cause of upper class success. The wealthy sharing their profit like in an egalitarian society will help improve the meritocratic…
Michael Cox (former chief economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas) and Richard Alm (business reporter with the Dallas Morning News) agree that there is economic inequality but they feel like it is being blown out of proportion. They argue that these inequalities are not threatening. They think we should focus on whether the bottom is better or worst off in terms of consumption, instead of focusing on the gap of wealth between the top and bottom. They feel that the wealth from the top is the reason that the bottom benefit from breakthroughs in technology such as color TV’s, VCRs, computers and answering machines that is perceived to make like better for all (pg. 337). Cox and Alm reject the saying “The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer”. They do agree the rich are getting richer but they also believe the poor are getting richer or doing better also. They give examples of people such as Bill Gates, Oprah Winfrey, Bill Cosby, Michael Jordan, as well as others, who have risen from the middle to lower class to top or…
First and foremost, let us take a look at the blessed few that constitute the .01%, .1% or even the 1% in American society. The majority of these individuals are the top corporate officials of multi-national, multi-billion dollar companies, such as General Motors, General Electric, MasterCard, Bank of America, American Express, and International Business Machines to name a few. During the last several decades, executive compensation has reached scandalous levels at certain corporations. Originally, during the 1950s and 1960s, the pay of top executives remained steady with an increase of less than 1% annually, according to economists at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. However, over the next three decades, the earnings of the top 1% increased threefold (Inequality). According to a study done by the Congressional Budget Office, “after adjusting for inflation, the after-tax income of the top 1% jumped 139% from 1979 to 2001, whereas the income of the middle fifth rose by just 17%, to $43,700, and the income of the poorest fifth rose…
