Chapter 3 : Endless Different From 2013.11.19
Decline or social mobility in USA
1) The growing awareness of economic inequalities (since 2005) is a real in the USA. In July 2006, the US Congress voted to do something’ that he hadn’t done in 10 years (minimum wage: 5$ an hour). There were something in exchange, attached to the legislation was a close, a provision that would permanently reduce the estate tax (taxe foncière). This reduction would actually would extend the fiscal exemption on aerated wealth by 5 Million $. Actually Republicans only agreed to raise the minimum wage as long as taxes for the rich would be lowed. Connecting to these measures, Republicans hoped to trick the Democrats into accepting social inequalities. The law was not voted. It was a symbol of economic inequalities & the way they are death by the republicans.
In 2006, she published a book : white-colour job with blue colour-job. These 2 books were influential. Following the publication of these 2 books, the New-York Times chose to deal with the class in the USA, express to using the word “class” because it is a dirty word in the USA. There was a problem with inequalities in the country. It really discussed the word “class” with few sentences in the front page in 2005. Even starter active American were worried. A man like Kevin Phillips who had worked for Richard Nixon, started to publish a book with economic inequalities. Since the 1970’s economic inequalities had grown up, a tiny class of very rich people starting to emerge during the same period. They starting to dwarf (écraser). The pyramid wages has become + & + unequal.
The class of rich people had benefited from them because of the increasing of new technology, trade, speculating on technology stock. The last factor which favoured the hyper-rich was the US Government’s tax policy : tax cut (with George W. Bush). Reagan started the trend: tax cut by 38% & Bush 45%. In that context of growing social growing inequalities.
The AD was never belief on equality & opportunity. The social class which you was born was not necessary in which you die. According to 2 economists, in 1973, 23% of sons whose fathers belong to the bottom quarters of the economic scale managed to work their way up to top*quarter of the scale. In 1998 only 10% accomplished the same things, it’s becoming hard to climb to the high scale. The comparison between social mobility in UK, FR, USA. The US has become an exception among rich countries in the Western world. Today if an American belong to the bottom 1 % of the population, he has almost 0 chance of becoming rich. If he belongs to the 5% of the population 1,6%. Paradox to the American principal of meritocracy. In the end, who are the people to manage the social class leader? People WITH MONEY? EDUCATION, connection, this is the basis for American Meritocracy today. No money, no education, no chance to American Meritocracy. That change poses serious challenges to American society & it is directly responsible for a political phenomenon that also appeared in the 1970’s that political phenomenon: political polarisation. They are getting away from another, they don’t work together. American seems only divided into red (REP) & blue (DEM) in the USA. Very risky situation. That call himself moderate. This division between REP & DEM : social issue (federal programs targeting the poor, should the FED Gov help the poor, should marijuana legalise, should abortion remain legal in the US). They were the main questions into 2 camps. Behind these moral issues, they are always economic issues, how much the Gov intervene in the economy, is the invisible hand of the market the issue of improving life in AME. Paul Ryan (vice Pdt of Mitt ROMNEY) had a very strong economic views: it was extremely radical. Spending cuts for the federal Gov. FED Gov should be strict for the Budget. AME should be interlined on private sector. No help for poor’s. There were a difference between :...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document