Introduction
“Inequality for All” is a documentary film which focuses a historical lens on the growing income-earning gap in the United States and analyzes its significance for the good of the economy of America. Jacob Kornbluth directs this film, and it features Robert Reich, an economist, who teaches students at the University of California, Berkeley. He poses a heated debate that might be readily integrated into US history curriculum or social studies. The documentary boils down on our present economic challenges to the major point that the economy of the United States in consumer-driven. As a matter of fact, 70% of the economy of the United States is dependent on consumer expenditure (Inequality for All 1). The purchasing power of the middle class makes the American economy. It challenges students to examine the impact of human of 20th century economic and political policy and alleviate more exploration into associated themes such as tax policy, globalization and duty of the state in availing a middle class that is healthy.
In an attempt to stir up an argument about the difference in income, just as “An Inconvenient Truth” did for change in climate Kornbluth’s “Inequality for All” offers intense listening as Robert. Reich, the former Labor Secretary, narrates the history of America’s poor/rich gap and debates that the current state of affairs is ruining our nation. The role of this film is not to win us over with something most Americans never want to conceive, but to speak about something everyone know is taking place and specify the adverse effects it bears. Judging from a critical point of view, the role is entirely played, and the challenge will be to influence the policy makers. The film consists of graphs and charts that convey the information that can easily be interpreted by the target viewers. Complicated information is, therefore, displayed in a manner that neither condescends nor confuses (Inequality for All 1).
The Message
The message that the film puts across is that this nation has been faced with a troubling phenomenon that has persisted for over three decades; the ever extending inequality of income, consequent inequality in upward mobility, political power in the U.S., and wealth. According to Reich, a certain degree of inequality is unavoidable, but for a nation’s economy to flourish, people require incentives to innovate and work hard. Whether inequality is bad or good is not the question, rather, at which point the gap becomes so large as to be a threat to the growth of an economy. Reich believes that our nation might have arrived at this critical juncture. While those in the middle class keep on suffering, the rich people in the country, according this film, keep on getting richer and richer. There is an inequality in resources provided as opportunities are more geared towards the wealthy. Wage disparities in the wake of taxes among other necessary costs imposed on an individual illustrate that the middle-incomed population may continue in this state for a considerable period. The imbalance in the class economies is overly consequential to the country's economy as essentials like savings are not adhered to.
In the year 1978, according to this film, the income earned in the United States by the middle-class worker was $48,000, aligned for inflation. Meanwhile, the average income earned by a member of the 1% garnered $390,000, which was eight times the amount received for a middle-class worker. By 2010, the one percenter was making $1.1 million, while the middle-class person’s wage had reduced to $33,000. Reich is also of the opinion that, currently, the richest four hundred individuals in the United States possess more money than the 150 million people at the bottom combined. The accuracy of this statistic is well debatable since the United States Census Bureau also agrees with the data presented by Reich. The council of economic advisers in the white house states that percentage of middle-class people has dropped from 50% to 42% since 1970. The Congressional Research Service, on the other hand, presented a report in the year 2012 that stated that 10% of the wealthiest households rose from controlling 67% of the wealth country in 1989 to 75% in the year 2010 (Inequality For All 1). The data provided gives an assertion of the worrying levels where the rich control more resources with time. This is dangerous as the economy’s wealth may be held in the hands of a few. This data provides an analytical financial outlook on the wage differentials and income growth curves that are existent in the society. Shockingly there has a tremendous increase in the rate at which income growth of the rich has multiplied over the last thirty years to four-fold figures.
The Argument
Robert Reich argues that while spending by consumers accounts for almost 70% of the economic activity in the U.S.; if there is a lack of adequate purchasing power from consumers then businesses will require bonuses to grow and hire more workers. Because the wealthy people spend lesser percentages of their earnings compared to the poor and the middle-class, the demand for consumers is suppressed as the lion’s share of the country’s total financial gain benefits the wealthy few. If the middle class is compelled to maintain its living standards through borrowing, that suppression might come unexpectedly when the bubbles of debt burst.
In Robert Reich’s opinion, the weak recovery the nation is experiencing currently is directly related to downslope in average family wages after the year 2009, connected to the unwillingness and inability of banks to pay the debt and consumers to meet the additional debt. Reich says that the economy of this nation cannot be growing without a buoyant and expanding middle class. If the top 1% enjoys almost all economic gains, we can never boast a growing middle class. Broadening inequality also poses challenges to the country’s central ideal of equal opportunity since it hinders upward mobility. Slow upward mobility is brought about by high inequality. Has upward mobility been slowed by widening inequality? The studies leave a question mark since the rate of upward mobility is not easy to determine. Nevertheless, under the impractical presumption that there is little difference between now and thirty years ago, it is simple to comprehend how widening inequality hinders upward mobility. Owing to the gap between the top rungs and the bottom rungs of the income ladder being much larger currently, anyone going up at the same velocity as before will make little progress. (Inequality for All 1)
Kornbluth’s “Inequality for All” presents increasing inequality as also a threat to our democracy since it is understood to be connected to the undermining of democracy. Whenever there is an upward flow of money, there is the tendency of political power following. According to Reich, no member of Senate or House of Representatives in completely resistant to this phenomenon. Another menace to our democracy originates from polarization and the political decisiveness that follows the high degree of inequality. Robert Reich suggests that when most of the Americans are trying their level best to work without progressing, and observe most income going to a few people at the top, they suspect that the government and the wealthy are conspiring against the rest (Inequality for All 1).
The Cause of This Inequality for All
According to Reich, the average wage in the U.S. grew as productivity in the nation increased between the Second World War and 1970s (Inequality for All 1). However, after the late 1970s, wages began to flatten, despite the continued rise in productivity at almost the same speed as before. This was partial because of the effects of labor-replacing technologies and globalization that started to hit the workforce in America very strongly increasing with years until today. “Inequality for All,” therefore, asserts that the advancement in technology and globalization are to blame for the income-earning gap in the United States. Those who were well educated were the lucky ones in this era as they landed themselves into high-earning jobs while those who were not so well educated ended up being in the middle-class and low-class.
Conclusion
In my opinion, I chose to agree with Robert Reich, that the middle class is the backbone of the economy of the United States. Technology and globalization are good for consumers, though not appealing to the workers in the U.S. Due to the fact that the wealthy people control Washington and are too powerful, none of our presidents has managed to accomplish real change. Other first world economies experienced similar gale-force winds although they never endured such widening inequality as the United States since they gave support to their workforces to adjust to the current realities of the economy. This has left this nation as the only advanced nation with the highest inequality by a large margin.
The government should, therefore, invest in education by making it affordable to every citizen in the United States. This will present everyone with equal opportunities to venture into the job market. Education ought not to be perceived as a private investment, rather a public good that benefits both the economy and the people. This will significantly reduce the widening inequality in the United States. Education, as many people say, is the key to success. In my opinion, Education is the key to reducing the inequality gap in the United States. The policy makers should watch this film and take the premier steps towards ensuring that equality is paramount in this great nation.
Work cited
"Inequality For All 'Full Movies'☆2013☆". YouTube. N.p., 2016. Web. 10 May 2016.
