Part 1:Statement I agree with:
The rich do not spend as much as they make; they save it. They do not drive the economy.
When looking at the income and spending of three different groups, we see that the spending for most basic needs are ruffle the same. This makes scene considering that a poor human and a rich human still need the same basic things, like food, water, shelter, and clothing, A study shows the income of three categories and the spending: income below the poverty line ($15,000-$19,999), income ranging from $50,000-$69,999, and income at $150,000 and above.
In this, most incomes are able to provide a similar amount of their budget to each topic. But what is shocking is that a budget in the poor income, spends more on food than the two richer incomes. This is also seen in housing and health care and health insurance. The opposite is seen in education and specifically in saving for retirement. The richer income is spending more of their income on these topics than the poor income. In most topics all incomes spend a similar percentage of their income on the same topics for all incomes,
http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/08/01/157664524/how-the-poor-the-middle-class-and-the-rich-spend-their-money
Part 2: Statements I disagree with:
Children in poverty will stay in poverty.
Although there were few things I disagreed with from this documentary, I would say this statement was a little shocking. I do agree with it is some ways, that children raised in poverty will likely remain in poverty, but I do think there are ways for them to get out of poverty. I am not disproving this statement. In many ways I support it, but I do think there are ways to get out of poverty.
Many rich nations use government relief services to help families in their states, keeping children out of poverty. In the U.S. the children poverty rate dropped from 25% to 23%, while the UK cut their rate by almost 2/3 and France by a half. Studies show that high family income reduces drug abuse, neglect, teen pregnancy, and witnessing violence, along with greater parental emotional well-being, high school attendance, test scores, graduation rates and health. But the U.S. spends less than other rich countries on poverty reduction.
In 2011, one in five children were living in poverty, meaning 16 million children in the U.S. Most children in poverty live with single mothers.
http://www.raisingofamerica.org/raising-children-out-poverty
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/by-the-numbers-childhood-poverty-in-the-u-s/
Part 3: Need to research more:
The middle class and the executive class have an increasingly gap between them.
Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam writes, :Poor kids, through no fault of their own, are less prepared by their families, their schools, and their communities to develop their God-given talents as fully as rich kids,” in his book, Our Kids. In a study, where patents were matched up with tax returns of people receiving patents and the returns of the parents, it was found that kids from rich families are more likely to get patents in their life than poor kids. The researchers also got the public-school test scores of New York City residents and added them to their study. Although children from poor families were receiving high test scores, they still were less likely to get patents. It was also found that 23% of patents come from students of high-quality colleges, 10 in number and only 2.7 of U.S. college enrollment. This study can be flawed in some ways. Some inventions go un-patented, due to the limited access to and money fro patent lawyers and no knowing how to get patents. The study also only identifies parents of children born after 1980, which shows people under 32, also test scores are an imperfect measure.
There is a way to fix the poverty gap, basic income, something proposed many times in the precedence. In a basic explanation, this would mean giving people money so no one is poor.
Along with the growing gap between incomes, there is also a gap in health. In 1970, a rich 60 year-old was likely to live 1.2 years longer than a poor 60 year-old. In 2001, a rich 60 year-old was likely to live 5.8 years longer than a poor 60 year-old.
The gap between the rich and poor is every growing. It should not be a struggle to live a life in the U.S. yet it is because of the inequality of rich and poor.
http://www.vox.com/2015/3/16/8225165/patents-innovation-social-mobility
http://www.vox.com/2014/11/14/7220291/basic-income-poverty-plan
http://www.vox.com/2016/2/16/11014778/lifespan-rich-poor
gracieabrams
gamechangershow
2087
turnnoffyourmind
kianamaiart
yousharknotpass
areudirty