wp3-----informative assignment----at least 1250 words

Harkness 7

Cover Letter

Prof. Sands,

This cover letter explains the revisions I made from my first draft into what is now my final draft. My friend responded to my paper and made several corrections. My friend first noticed I made many small grammatical errors and spelling errors. This was due to the fact that after work I get tired and it shows in my schoolwork. I corrected them easily and even changed a few words by looking in the thesaurus and noticed there were better words I could use that sounded more in context. Second, my friend said I had way too much passive voice in my writing. I looked up passive voice to familiarize myself with the topic. Passive voice is defined as when the object of an action becomes the subject of the sentence. Passive voice is confusing and is not very clear, I did my best to correct all my passive voice sentences and rewrote them clearer. Some sentences I had to break into two sentences to avoid using passive voice. Other than those two things, I only had to make my paper one hundred words longer. I looked through my sources and found a couple statistics I chose to include to explain my points.

Fatima Harkness

Prof. Sands

ENGL 111

2 November 2014

Economic Inequality

In September 2011, a scene unfolded outside Wall Street that would change history. Loud protestors marched up and down Wall Street and settled into Zucotti Park, yelling slogans and bearing large signs. Although the protestors were finally forced out of Zucotti park, a couple months later, the protestors were successful at gaining the world's attention. The protestors were part of the "Occupy" movement and aimed to fight social and economical inequality worldwide. Economic experts agree economic inequality is exponentially increasing in America, yet experts disagree whether economic inequality is positive or negative or what if anything should be done to combat economic inequality.

Elise Whitaker, explained why she was protesting, said "I believe that I am not represented by the big interest groups and the big money corporations, which have increasing control of our money and our politics and I want a more equal economy" (Katel 1). Elise, like many other protestors, felt victimized by the current political and economical system that promotes rapid growth income for the rich, while making it harder for lower income Americans to be successful. Many statistics support this claim, such as from The Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development that reported the richest one percent of Americans took in twenty percent of national income (Katel 1). Twenty percent of the country is a vast amount to be owned by just one percent. Shortly before the "Occupy" movement began, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) reported that the average pretax income for the bottom ninety percent of households is almost nine hundred dollars below what it was in 1979, while the average pretax income for the top one percent is over seven hundred thousand above its 1979 level (Clemmitt 991). According to the CBPP, from 1979 to 2007, the average after tax incomes of the top one percent nearly quadrupled and increased two hundred and eighty-one percent while middle class only saw a twenty-five percent increase, and the bottom fifth only rose sixteen percent (Clemmitt 991). These statistics are astonishing and clearly show our economy is benefiting the rich the most. What is even more astonishing is the fact that the richest Americans, the one percent who comprise twenty percent of our national wealth, are taxed less of a percentage than the middle and lower class. According to the Center for American Progress, corporations are capturing a growing share of national income while corporate taxes are a declining share of total federal revenue (Stein 2). The corporations are making more money and being taxed less. In 1946, corporate income taxes comprised about thirty percent of federal revenue from taxes, but in 2012 corporate income taxes only comprised about nine percent of federal revenue (Stein 2). Corporations contend this is a fair amount because they can give more jobs out if they are given tax breaks. However, corporations receive government services funded by tax dollars, such as national transportation networks and federal laws that protect their goods.

"If you want to get at the root of what's wrong with this system, in my opinion, the way we fund and run elections has become skewed in the direction of powerful money interests,” says Kunin, a former governor (Katel 10). She is referring to how political campaign contributions or donations are not limited to a certain money amount so that the wealthy can donate as much money as they want to a campaign. According to CQ Reseacher, wealthy business interests have organized into lobbies, political action committees and think tanks, at the same time as the main organizations that once represented the working class – labor unions – have shrunk. Also, politicians' need for high dollar contributors for successful campaigns has increased those contributors' influence and as a result, "government policy has grown much more generous toward the fortunate" (Clemmitt 1004). In a democracy, the politicians rely on their constituents support for re-election. In our democracy, the constituents are the big money interest groups and the wealthiest Americans. This is because they have the power to donate much more money than many families combined, and therefore, the politicians satisfy these groups with supporting tax policies and regulations. According to Addis Fortune, "the marked differences in the extent and nature of inequality across countries demonstrate that inequality is not just determined by economic forces; it is shaped by politics and policies. The more that wealth is allowed unrestricted roles in funding elections, the more likely it is that economic inequality will get translated into political inequality (“Thinking Twice”). Addis Fortune is reiterating the point that policies have altered economic inequality. In addition, with fewer unions to support the working class, the working class cannot be heard. So as you can see, public policy choices do play a role in economic inequality. Addis Fortune suggests a change in public policy such as taxation changes and an increased amount invested in healthcare and education could decrease economic inequality tremendously (“Thinking Twice”). Dan Ariely, a professor of behavioral economics at Duke University agrees, and says, "taxation, education, and health care are the pathways to create a more equal society" (Clemmitt 995). Higher education seems to be an important theme in lowering inequality, because the workforce is in need of skilled workers with knowledge or a trade.

Although all economical experts agree income inequality is high in America, not all agree on whether it is positive or negative. Some experts not only acknowledge income inequality is present in America, but contend income inequality is vital to a thriving economy. According to George Reisman, a professor of economics at Pepperdine University, "Having an economic class with very large amounts of disposable money is valuable to society. That's because only the very richest can make the investments vital to building businesses and driving demand for labor" (Clemmitt 991). This is true because only the rich have incomes that enable them to make investments. However, if income was distributed more evenly, many more would be given a chance at success. Addis Fortune argues that income inequality is a bad thing because it leads to a failing economy. Addis Fortune and CQ Researcher state that income inequality reached high levels before the Great Depression in the 30's and before the Great Recession in 2008 (Clemmitt, 1004)(Thinking Twice).

In "The Lesson", by Toni Cade Bambara, a kid refers to economic inequality and says, "Imagine for a minute what kind of society it is in which some people can spend on a toy what it would cost to feed a family of six or seven. What do you think?" (Bambara). Another kid replies, "I think, that this is not much of a democracy if you ask me. Equal chance to pursue happiness means an equal crack at the dough, don't it?” (Bambara). This is a great question that would be answered differently depending on what economic expert answered. Whether the answer is yes or no, economic inequality is a part of life in America and is exponentially increasing.

Works Cited

Bambara, Toni Cade. “The Lesson.” Gorilla, My Love. NY: Random House, 1972. Web. 15 Sept. 2014.

Clemmitt, Marcia. "Income Inequality." CQ Researcher 3 Dec. 2010: 989-1012. Web. 18 Oct. 2014.

Katel, Peter. "‘Occupy Movement." CQ Researcher 13 Jan. 2012: 25-52. Web. 2 Nov. 2014.

Stein, Harry. "Corporate Profits and Taxes". Center For American Progress. 15 Sept. 2014. Web. 22 Oct. 2014.

"Thinking Twice About Inequality [opinion]." Addis Fortune. 3 Aug. 2014. LexisNexis Academic. Web. 1 Nov. 2014.