Essay On Income Disparities
A study from the Pew Research center shows that 65% of people have noticed the gap between the rich and the poor getting bigger. For the past, few years income disparities have been growing larger. 65% of people have actually noticed income disparities grow now. Current income disparities certainly threaten democratic ideals for two important reasons. First I am going to show how much inequality there really is and how its growing. The first reason is that Inequality causes Corruption, and Corruption threatens Representation and the second reason is that Inequality dampens political participation, which is a cherished ideal.
The income gap between the richest and poorest Americans grew last year to its widest amount on record as young adults …show more content…
This is the flip side of the first argument. Enormous resources connote unusually strong political influence. In turn, a lack of economic means reduces the degree of political participation. (The) potential for vast differences of economic resources leads to uneven opportunities in influencing the political process. Those who own capital, land, and machines are in a much better position to influence political affairs, and therefore ultimately have more individual freedoms, than those who have only their labour to sell under increasingly competitive market conditions.
This also has potentially dangerous spillover effects. The NDRI conference reached this powerful conclusion:
High levels of poverty and inequality not only lower the quality of democracy, but may pave the way for the emergence of authoritarian (strict) populists and democratic backsliding. Therefore, addressing the social question, which warrants attention in its own right, is critical to the sustainability and quality of democracy.
Rohrschneider also introduces a third, less frequently-cited democratic model to describe the harmful effects of a lack of participation. In the Athenian plebiscitarian (A direct vote in which the entire electorate is invited to accept or refuse a proposal) democratic model; Proponents believe…that self-government and political liberty REQUIRE citizens to be extensively involved in deciding their
The income gap between the richest and poorest Americans grew last year to its widest amount on record as young adults …show more content…
This is the flip side of the first argument. Enormous resources connote unusually strong political influence. In turn, a lack of economic means reduces the degree of political participation. (The) potential for vast differences of economic resources leads to uneven opportunities in influencing the political process. Those who own capital, land, and machines are in a much better position to influence political affairs, and therefore ultimately have more individual freedoms, than those who have only their labour to sell under increasingly competitive market conditions.
This also has potentially dangerous spillover effects. The NDRI conference reached this powerful conclusion:
High levels of poverty and inequality not only lower the quality of democracy, but may pave the way for the emergence of authoritarian (strict) populists and democratic backsliding. Therefore, addressing the social question, which warrants attention in its own right, is critical to the sustainability and quality of democracy.
Rohrschneider also introduces a third, less frequently-cited democratic model to describe the harmful effects of a lack of participation. In the Athenian plebiscitarian (A direct vote in which the entire electorate is invited to accept or refuse a proposal) democratic model; Proponents believe…that self-government and political liberty REQUIRE citizens to be extensively involved in deciding their