Here's the link to the article: http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/atlarge/2012/04/23/120423crat_atlarge_lemann?currentPage=all
Review/Summary:
The article that we read was “Evening the Odds”. It simply discussed how unequal the U.S. is as a whole, especially when it comes to income and wealth. It explains how a “good” society needs more than just equal opportunities for all its citizens. “Opportunity is increasingly tied to education, and education performance is tied to income and wealth”, in so many words the rich get richer and the poor stay poor. This article argues how 99% of Americans are being left behind economically and financially and although they’re coming up with ways to improve the current no one can agree on which ones to approve. Instead, he argues, “almost everybody blames the elite”. It mentions how the elite has simply “handicapped” the lower class (blacks) by creating government assistance programs and welfare; which as he states is the reason for community deterioration, crime and lack of work ethics; Charles Murray blames the government. Also, in his book “Losing Ground” he only examined black underclass people which further lead me to believe that he already had some biases because blacks are not the only ones living in poverty and/or on welfare; nonetheless, they weren’t criticized. The argument being made here is that neither the government nor the “elite” should be held accountable for the lack of resources or short comings of the underclass.
Analysis:
This article analyzes the effectiveness and importance of politics and government. It also brings into question whether or not our country plays too much on the emotions of wealth and equality.
Ninety-nine per cent of Americans are being left behind economically. According to the article, this is an issue that many politicians try and take on when they have no hand in it. They always talk about it, even the ones who aren’t running for president. So why do they do it? It gives them something to talk about, a person to represent for them, and a trustee to confide in. In no way do politics and government go hand in hand. This seems to be one common misconception.
The tone of this article is so sympathetic about the ninety percent of Americans who are being left behind. The wealthy people get to their level of success by one of two ways; inheritance or education. If the people left behind have nothing to do with these two, that is only a problem for that person. The elite are doing these people a huge favor, even though they’re encouraging them to live off of the government.
People work hard for their money. They shouldn’t be punished for that and their rewards or reaped benefits shouldn’t go to people who aren’t doing the same. Their success isn’t the cause of the less poor’s failure. In Murray’s book, he says that the poor don’t need more money, but more values? America shouldn’t have to teach grown people how to have values simply because they’re lazy and in need of money.
Ninety-nine per cent of Americans are being left behind economically. “The ninety-nine per cent is too big a category to be an effective political force,” therefore the financial stability of the underclass should be a personal responsibility and not a government burden. Financial inequality is inevitable. It can never and will never happen.
