Jacob: Welcome to Crash Course Economics,
I’m Jacob Clifford… Adriene: …and I’m Adriene Hill. The world
is full of inequality. There’s racial inequality, gender inequality, health, education, political
inequality, and of course, economic inequality. Some people are rich, and some people are
poor, and it can seem pretty impossible to fix. Jacob: Well, maybe not. [Theme Music] Jacob: So there are two main types of economic
inequality: wealth inequality and income inequality. Wealth is accumulated assets, minus liabilities
so it’s the value of stuff like savings, pensions, real estate, and stocks. When we talk about
wealth inequality, we’re basically talking about how assets are distributed. Income is
the new earnings that are constantly being added to that pile of wealth. So when we talk
about income inequality, we’re talking about how that new stuff is getting distributed. Point is,
they’re not the same. Let’s go to the Thought Bubble. Adriene: Let’s look at both types of inequality
at the global level. Global wealth today is estimated at about 260 trillion dollars, and
is not distributed equally. One study shows that North America and Europe, while they
have less than 20% of the world’s population, have 67% of the world’s wealth. China, which
has more people than North America and Europe combined, has only about 8% of the wealth.
India and Africa together make up almost 30% of the population, but only share about 2%
of the world’s wealth. We’re teaching economics, so we can focus on income inequality. These
ten people represent everyone on the planet, and they’re lined up according to income.
Poorest over here and richest over here. This group represents the poorest 20%, this is
the second poorest 20%, the middle 20%, and so on. If we distributed a hundred dollars
based on current income trends, this group would get about 83 of those dollars, the next
richest would get 10 dollars, the middle gets four, the second poorest group would get two dollars
and the poorest 20% of humans would get one dollar. Branko Milanovic, an economist that specializes
in inequality, explained all this by describing an “economic big bang” – “At first, countries’
incomes were all bunched together, but with the Industrial Revolution the differences
exploded. It pushed some countries forward onto the path to higher incomes while others
stayed where they had been for millennia.” According to Milanovic, in 1820, the richest
countries in the world – Great Britain and the Netherlands – were only three times richer
than the poorest, like India and China. Today, the gap between the richest and poorest nations is like
100:1. The gaps are getting bigger and bigger. Thanks, Thought Bubble. The Industrial Revolution
created a lot of inequality between countries but today globalization and international trade are accelerating it.
Most economists agree that globalization has helped the world’s poorest people, but it’s
also helped the rich a lot more. Harvard economist Richard Freeman noted, “The triumph of globalization
and market capitalism has improved living standards for billions while concentrating
billions among the few.” So, it’s kind of a mixed bag. The very poor are doing a little better, but
the very rich are now a lot richer than everybody else. There are other reasons inequality is growing.
Economists point to something called “skill-biased technological change.” The jobs created in
modernized economies are more technology-based, generally requiring new skills. Workers that
have the education and skills to do those jobs thrive, while others are left behind.
So, in a way, technology’s become a complement for skilled workers but a replacement for
many unskilled workers. The end result is an ever widening gap between not just the
poor and the rich, but also the poor and the working class. As economies develop and as
manufacturing jobs move overseas, low skill low pay and high skill high pay work are the
only jobs left. People with few skills fall behind in terms of income. In the last thirty
years in the US, the number of college-educated people living in poverty has doubled from
3% to 6%, which is bad! And then consider that during the same period of time, the number
of people living in poverty with a high school degree has risen from 6% to a whopping 22%.
Over the last fifty years, the salary of college graduates has continued to grow while, after
adjusting for inflation, high school graduates’ incomes have actually dropped. It’s a good
reason to stay in school! There are other reasons the income gap is
widening. The reduced influence of unions, tax policies that favor the wealthy, and the
fact that somehow it’s okay for CEOs to make salaries many, many times greater than those
of their employees. Also, race and gender and other forms of inequality can exacerbate
income equality. Jacob: Let’s dive into the data for the United
States. We’ll start by mentioning Max Lorenz, who created a graph to show income inequality.
Along the bottom we have the percent of households from 0-100% and along the side we have the
percent share of income. By the way, we’re using households rather than just looking
at individuals because many households have two income earners. So this straight line
right here represents perfect income equality. So every household earns the same income.
And while perfect income equality might look nice on the surface, it’s not really the goal.
When different jobs have different incomes, people have incentive to become a doctor or
an entrepreneur or a YouTube star – you know, the jobs society really values. So this graph, called
the Lorenz curve, helps visualize the depth of inequality. Now, for 2010, the US Census Bureau found
that the poorest 20% of Americans made 3.3% of the income. And the richest 20% made over
50% of the income. So that’s pretty unequal but has it always been like this? Well, in
1970, the bottom group earned 4.1% of the income and the top earned 43.3%. By 1990,
things were even less equal so the 2010 numbers are just a continuation of the trend. And
it isn’t just the poorest group that’s losing ground. Over those 40 years, each of the bottom
groups or 80% households earned smaller and smaller shares of the total income. Now, from the Lorenz curve we can calculate
the most commonly used measure of income equality – the GINI Index. Now without jumping into
too much of the math, it’s basically the size of the gap between the equal distribution
of income and the actual distribution. Now, 0 represents complete equality and 100 represents
complete inequality. Now, you might be surprised to learn the US doesn’t have the highest income
inequality, but it does have the highest among Western industrialized nations. The UK has
the highest in the EU. Adriene: The debate over income equality isn’t
about whether it exists. It obviously does. The fight is over whether it’s a problem and
what should be done about it. Let’s start with those who don’t think it’s a big deal.
They tell you that the data suggests that the rich are getting richer and the poor are
getting poorer, but that might not be the case. Instead, it could be that all the groups
are making more money but the rich’s share is just growing faster. Like, let’s say you
own an apple tree and we pick 10 apples. You keep 6 and give me 4. A week later we pick
20 apples, you take 15 and give me 5. So my share of the total went down from 40% to 25%
but each of us still got more apples. So it’s true that people in the lowest income bracket have
earned a little more money in the last 40 years, but in the last 20 years, that average income has been falling.
Meanwhile, the rich have continually gotten richer. So, what’s the richest guy on earth have to
say about it? Bill Gates said, “Yes, some level of inequality is built in to capitalism.
It’s inherent to the system. The question is, what level of inequality is acceptable?
And when does inequality start doing more harm than good?” There’s a growing group of
economists who believe income inequality in the US today is doing more harm. They argue
that greater income inequality is associated with a lot of problems. They point to studies
that show countries with more inequality have more violence, drug abuse and incarcerations.
Income inequality also dilutes political equality, since the rich have a disproportionate say
in what policies move forward, and the rich have an incentive to promote policies that
benefit the rich. So, how do we address this inequality? There’s
not a lot of agreement on this. Some argue that education is the key to reducing the
gap. Basically, workers with more and better education tend to have the skills that earn
higher income. Some economists push for an increased minimum wage, which we’re going
to talk about in another episode. There’s even an argument that access to affordable,
high quality childcare would go a long way. And some think governments should do more
to provide a social safety net, focus on getting more people to work and adjust the tax code
to redistribute income. Jacob: Some economists call for the government
to increase income taxes and capital gains taxes on the rich. Income taxes in the US
are already somewhat progressive, which means that there are tax brackets that require the
rich to pay a higher percent of income. Right now, it peaks at around 40% but some economists
call for increases up to 50 or 60%. One idea is to fix loopholes that the rich use to avoid
paying taxes. Other economists argue that taxing the rich won’t be as effective as reducing regulation
and bureaucratic red tape. It’s unclear which path we’re going to take but extreme income inequality
at the national and global level needs to be addressed. Motivation to improve income inequality may come
from a genuine desire to help people and level the playing field, or the fear of Hunger Games-style social
upheaval. But either way, the issue can’t be ignored. Adriene: Even Adam Smith, the most classical
of classical economists, said, “No society can surely be flourishing and happy of which
the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable.” Thanks for watching, we’ll
see you next week. Jacob: Thanks for watching Crash Course Economics.
It was made with the help of all of these nice people. You can help keep Crash Course
free for everyone forever by supporting the show at Patreon. Patreon is a voluntary subscription
service where you can support the show with monthly contributions. We’d like to thank
our High Chancellor of Learning, Dr. Brett Henderson and our Headmaster of Learning,
Linnea Boyev, and Crash Course Vice Principal Cathy and Kim Philip. Thanks for watching,
DFTBA.

Tagged : # # # # # # # # # #

100 thoughts on “Income and Wealth Inequality: Crash Course Economics #17”

  1. Instead of saying… Somehow it's okay for a CEO to make more money oh, why don't you just say that he makes more money because he is the most educated the most dedicated and the most productive? Don't teach political bias. Just teach!

  2. You should also consider individual productivity when you're talking about gender inequality. I think just social issues need to stay out of the economics. Are you just going to continue to get comments like this.

  3. Income inequality is what meritocracies are all about. Who does not want to earn more to work harder? The issue is too much of a good thing (wealth) in the hands of too few people and firms, who become corrupted by their greed to hoard more wealth and buy their way out of accountability for moral transgressions. When inequality gets too severe, productivity gets undermined and too many people are unable to afford the goods and services offered by ultra-wealthy corporations. The corporations then layoff thousands of people and the system corrects itself, with either elections or revolutions. Fortunately we just had a rather significant election that will hopefully decrease income inequality so we can have a peaceful transition.

  4. Thanks for an objective view.
    Any bias was unnoticed at least by me.

    I do agree that income inequality is a good thing but my explination in long so I won't bother.

  5. We should not be talking about inequality we should be talking about how to get poor people rich not just taking wealth away from the rich

  6. Income and Wealth inequality are inevitable and beneficial, extrinsic motivation has value, capital accumulation helps economic growth, people invariably make personal choices which influence their income and wealth, etc.

  7. Adam Smith also advocated for progressive taxation(there was no word for it back then in 1760s) system some 150 years before the policy started appearing in some countries(early twentieth century).
    ("The wealth of nations" page1065)
    Adam Smith wasn't as conservative as many economists say he was.

  8. We have enough resources now that no person should live pay check to pay check and struggling it's not fair and greed is the root of all problems.

  9. Over the past 150 years, global poverty rates have dropped from 80% to 10%. So how can the US have poverty rates greater than 10%. By defining poverty to be relative. That means there will always be poverty. And always people that say it is a problem.
    Do you really think you are poor? Would you trade places with the richest person in the world 200 years ago?
    Have you ever asked, what is a dollar worth? Is it really about how we choose to distribute income, or is it about the choice we make in our lives? Yes, there are people that truly need help. Most, though, just need to act responsibly.

  10. I agree with what is said here but one thing should be added. Poverty is not what it used to be. Today’s poor all use smart phones, have cable TV, drive SUVs, and have a roof over their head. People in this country are homeless by choice because we have housing benefits, food stamps, welfare, Medicaid, and the list goes on. The people to be concerned for are the middle class who barely make it and can’t save.

  11. I do not really understand the graph with European countries and China and India, those last two countries have also experienced a great growth and it is clearly not visible there

  12. "…countries' incomes were all bunched together…" Never in human history, even the Greek city states had differences (sometimes smaller,sometimes bigger)… Are we on the same planet?!? I'm sorry to say that but although the info is useful seems like the crashcourse is a bit on the leftist side…

  13. Education isn't the answer or college. If everyone got free college and earned a degree what value would it have. Take gold for instance there isn't alot that's what makes it valuable

  14. I am an MBA student and Globalization is also the cause of an uneven wealth distribution. In the real sense, globalization has not been able to reduce poverty at all. It is said that the rich are getting richer while the poor are getting poorer. Sadly, that's the reality. Globalization resulted in a free-flow of product. The developed country are moving in undeveloped country to invest, because the labor cost is cheaper. Opening the doors of international trade has given birth to intense competition. This has affected the local markets dramatically. The local players suffers huge losses as they lack the potential to export their product in a huge scale. Therefore the domestic market shrinks.

  15. If you want to stop this, don't allow loser idiots with no job or Macdonalds jobs to reproduce. Same reason we spay and neuter animals

  16. These guys are pushing socialist propaganda. They left out the reason why more students are graduating college but their income falling. Because the schools are lying to the kids telling them that with a degree in history with an emphasis in gender equality studies they're going to get a high paying job right after they graduate. Colleges then charge $50k a year to these numskulls that don't know any better all the while pushing them more and more into debt. I could go on and on and with their fallacies.

  17. Income inequality doesn’t matter as long as the wealthy continue to design and create products/services, compete against each other, be incapable of hiring lobbyists, be philanthropists, and lower the prices of products/services to attract customers.

  18. Wealth , Income , Skill biased technological change , Lorenz Curve , Gini Index , Inequality , Income Inequality , Progressive Tax .

  19. Iol. I love how these two closeted Socialists keep trying to sneak their ideology in… too funny. But it's obvious to us in the real world that these two are hiding in Academia. Hey guys nothing stopping you from writing a bigger check to the poor. Go for it.

  20. Hi there!
    Great video about Income Inequality.
    We are WowApp, a solution for Income Inequality – @t
    We share 75% of our revenue margin with our members.

  21. To decide the problem of
    income inequality we need to fix the prices so that they remain relatively
    stable and change the method of income distribution.
    Read my article"Workers income correlation with economic results"on White pages banking resource

  22. Everyone one of you commenting on here are in the 1%.. go start giving your money away and stop demanding money from people who work hard and create that wealth you love to tax.. Using Communist China as an example of world poverty is quite rich as well.. There's income equality in China.. They are all poor!

  23. "Let's say YOU own an apple tree, and WE pick ten apples. YOU keep 6 and I keep 4" First of all you got 4 free apples! Where were you when I was planting the seeds and water the plant. Where were you for those first 5 years of work? Oh yeah. You just showed up and started picking MY apples. This whole video ignores the wealth creators, like wealth is this magic thing that has to be spread around..

  24. PEOPLE gradually become an instrument in the hands of unscrupulous people who exploit them for the sake of their own ignoble aims, usually by the political class along with lobbying corporations and big business they have been so often thrown out of employment through no fault of their own and they are now more or less indifferent whether a right wing or left wing government is in place, Though the idea of going to the polls to vote for better life chances for yourself and future generations is what most of us want. so the further people are impoverished due to lack of employment or working poor due to the cost of living, having to use food banks etc. the more people are turned to the extreme right of politics, that's what happened in the 1930s Germany there was such a class divide between rich and poor fascism was the only way out for them. remember torys are to the right of politics and they are of two camps the right and the extreme right. on the other hand, the labour is of the left and some even the extreme left of politics. The fundamental differences between left-wing and right-wing ideologies centre around the rights of individuals vs. the power of the government. Left-wing beliefs are liberal in that they believe society is best served with an expanded role for the government. People on the right believe that the best outcome for society is achieved when individual rights and civil liberties are paramount and the role — and especially the power — of the government is minimized. this leaving more room for exploitation of a cheap labour force. in Hitlers Germany corporations and small companies used the jews as forced slave labour. due to these policies. BMW, Gruppe, Volkswagon.Abeking & Rassmussen Schiffs- und Yachtwerft (GmbH & Co.), Deutsche Industrie Anlagen GmbH, California Kleindienst Holding GmbH. there were actually hundreds of firms capitalising on the free slave labour that's why fascism was so popular in Germany with the capitalists and profiteers. contrary to popular belief the average German CITIZEN did not care who was in government as long as there lives and that of there families improved from the huge injustice of poverty at that time due to low wages etc.? KEEP THE POOR POOR AT ANY COST TO KEEP THE RICH RICH AND GET EVEN RICHER

  25. But where is the rebuttal of poor people getting richer? If that is the case, I don't mind having the free market continue doing its thing and even free it up more.

  26. CEO income is a negligible amount and when it’s brought up it pigeonholes you as a person with a certain frame of mind. This is fairly common on this channel although I still enjoy it. It would do you wow to pick up some books by Thomas Sowel.

  27. Me: Is this communist propaganda?
    Video: "redistribute wealth" "Race and Inequality"
    Me: Ah I was wrong, it's NPC programming….

  28. Rich CEO's get old, ugly, impotent, sick, and die. They have to leave everything behind. They cry inside like little girls. They have too much money and not enough peace of mind and time on earth before they go 6 feet under and rot. Rich people suffer more than poor people on their deathbed because they are internally weak. We the poor and enslaved on the other hand have no problem with getting old, ugly, sick, and dying. Ha ha on the rich. And because we are so deprived we don't need viagra.

  29. People don't realize that there is more wealth in the world nowadays than there was in 1820, so yes the gap is bigger, but the poorest counties are MUCH richer than the poorest countries were 100s of years ago

  30. Ignorance is bliss. I imagine that’s why most of you are in denial rather than facing the cold hard facts.

  31. This video has a lot more views than mine. This is inequality and evil. I want to get a compensation for this! How dare you be more watched thou my videos are longer!!!

  32. Crash Course: The number of graduates also increased during that period may be doubled. Also you have to dive deep into which college degrees stopped paying. Appreciate your thought process / edited data point on this. Also the goal should be get the quality air , water, food, shelter, education , health, transportation. Did we improve on that ?

  33. this needs a update a 2019 update india owns a lot of gold and a lot of gold is being moved from the us an Europe banks an back to its owners

  34. So why do the poor people keep giving the rich people more money? The first ones to complain about not having enough income, are the same ones who spend their income on Amazon 😉

  35. Inequality is impossible to fix because we are born that way.
    Assets and income are not distributed they are earned. Couldn't get 1 minute into this stupid video.

  36. Socialism won't work, capitalism won't work alone. The scenario in this country from 1950 thru 1989 worked best. A free market with social programs. What killed growth is simple…outsourcing millions of jobs. We now have the rich making profits never seen before in this world's history. Yet they pay 0 in taxes and don't want to tie wages to profits. The poor are a drag on the system because they have not a clue on money management or investing. They make more and more babies and expect free resources to cover their shortages. The middle class as usual carry this country on its shoulders.

  37. I'm surprised you didn't mention the negative correlation between income/wealth inequality and socioeconomic mobility (The Great Gatsby Curve).

    I hear many people that say it's not a huge issue say they care more about the ability to move up in society, while they ignore that higher inequality means lower ability to move up in society.

  38. Hey Crashcourse! Absolutely love your videos! They're amazing! I was looking for a video on Universal Basic Income (UBI) and couldn't find any in your resources. Any chance we'll get one?

  39. Education what a joke when you are capable to get good education from good university but you are born in por family with one perant who's salery are about 450-500 Euros and university enterence almost 10k per year Education 😀 what a joke

  40. Income taxes should be lower except for the really high income brackets, the really rich persons tend to get money from investments and assets, so those should be taxed much more aggressively, as this would only affect the super rich.

  41. We need to come to grips with the cause of all the wealth problems. Taxes. High taxes takes more money from the poor who need the money the most while the rich, who still get taxed a bunch, can take the hit. An ideal scenario is a small government, that can operate with minimal taxes, a deregulated economy that promotes free enterprise to bring jobs back into the country. More jobs means more money for people, less taxes means you keep your money. Dont think it will be fast, though. Our problems have been built to it's current state for decades and it will take years for it all to be removed. But in the end, the wealth of the common man will improve and allow for them to help their children build better lives for themselves.

  42. I just wish the wealthiest people used their money to solve problems. Imagine how much more they would get by funding hospitals and schools in needed areas. They would be our heroes. That's what we need and we would thank them and welcome that. More philanthropy in short.

  43. @CrashCourse Your points, which are largely fact based, would probably land better if you didn't express them so polemically. Sure, some trolls are going to throw their rattles out of the crib one way or the other, but for anyone who's on the fence and not a troll, if they identify at all with a procapitalist argument, this aggressively didactic format of lecturing will set them on their back foot and may alienate potentially reasonable people. If the goal is to convert people to your point of view, I don't think you're succeeding here so much as preaching to the choir.

    Bias often distracts from a solid argument. Let's say someone's from the south – many/most southerners have this culturally innate suspicion that "liberals are tryin' to brainwash you" – even the fair, logical ones. If you get inculcated in that worldview from a young age, it's very hard to change, even with a fairly open mind. So the natural response to anyone forcibly & obviously trying to persuade you is defensive – devil's advocacy. For this reason, even if you feel it's critically important in this day and age to take a stand for something, it's generally better to do it from an apparently somewhat neutral, or at least nonpartisan, standpoint. The very facts you present should make the argument for you. The images (graphs, etc.) are compelling. Why double down on it with personal insistence?

    This comment is aimed specifically at the Economics peeps. John Green is much better about maintaining fairness and not making emotionally-incendiary arguments feel personal, even when his opinion comes across subtly in the subtext. Just my two cents.

  44. Hola, just saw your #17 Income and Wealth Inequality – blog/video and since my son introduced me to your blog, I must say that you have helped to clarify quite a few details. Also, can you put together a blog/video about 'ageism,' and putting people, such as petit women or bosomy women in a box??

  45. I think loopholes are the biggest issue. Companies like amazon should pay taxes for doing business in the USA but they don't. I don't think the tax on them should be ridiculously high, but the current system clearly doesn't work.

  46. It is very simple. The rich don't work for money while the poor and the middle class does, and continue to do so, even after making enough money, at least in USA to get out of the rat race.

    Everyone say study(get in debt) , and make more money(increase your salary), and they will be on the same situation because they don't have the financial education that someone needs in order to become rich and the poor and the middle class continue to acquire skills to work for money, and at the end they move to a bigger tax bracket and get more debt because they making more money.

    The rich avoid the redistribution of wealth because they keep at pace with inflation and they understand taxes better than everyone else. They invest in assets that generate income. They use good debt to become richer and if they want an expensive toy they invest on something thats is going to produce enough money to pay for it,but the poor and the middle class just get in bad long term debt(liabilities) and then they keep working so hard to pay for it.
    What happen next?
    Well, they go back to school, get another skill, more debt and same thing over and over again.
    The only way we can stop the gap between the rich and the poor is providing financial education so the poor and the middle class can make better desitions once they get their paycheck.

  47. Another source if inequality: Each year one trillion dollars flow illegally out of developing countries into the bank accounts of multinational corporations.

  48. So take from the workers and give to the takers. 3rd would countries breed like rabbits and this is the surest way to be poor.

  49. Nature goes on forever for everyone and everything to return as everyone and everything an infinite number of times. 😢 😢 😢

  50. The rich suffer from too much that eventually leads to mental disorders. Stay away from them else they will infect you too.

  51. He who possesses becomes possessed. Suffering makes strong. The poor are blessed. He who possesses less is that much the less possessed.

  52. We could endlessly debate about which economic policy is better to pursue which we will never agree on – or we can talk and agree about Mr. Clifford's rad ACDC belt buckle 🤪

  53. College graduates are also making less because they're learning less life skills and focusing on meaningless subjects. Like everything else in economics its alot of factors

  54. I was made fun of by teachers. Did you know Chris Degrazia punched me in the shoulder? Tony Becerra did nudge him in senior hall.

  55. All my comments are legal. There was no excuse for John Vlad to not give you credit for that 30 60 90 triangle. You were right. Topher did cheat off you. He has made alot of money. Has a pension.

  56. The problem is that inflation exists. Does it really matter how much more the poor make if price and taxes come to compensate with it? There is an issue here. I believe the smartest person goes the farthest, and those who don’t see a game plan don’t see a future

  57. The problem is you cannot to hang inequality to capitalism, because socialism and power of government create much more inequality and poor.

  58. I think you forgot to mention that the progressive tax used to be 50% and that raising taxes isn’t raising them at all. It’s putting them back to 1950s levels and the rich did just fine back then.

  59. Is China really poor like that? I mean I know China has a large population but in the Thought Bubble the gap between China and UK… that's not realistic at all come on

  60. Are the two figures in the video the lady from Crash Course Physics and the guy from Crash Course Chemistry?

  61. Actually, in the seventeenth century, when India wasn't colonized, it held 24.4% of the world's GDP. Meaning it was the richest xD
    also, no hate. I love you guys!

  62. So if unskilled workers are paid less…. How can they gain more skill? Do they have the same opportunities? Surely some don't, there are a ton of people who do need help. But what about all the other people that are just unmotivated and want to sit around and get high or drunk or just watch TV all day? Do these people seriously need extra money? Unskilled workers getting paid less sounds about right does it not?

  63. The solutions that you mention to income in a quality require legislation and legislation is largely controlled by who has the money. The solution to which everyone has access is to organized labor. Unions are the answer 2 income inequality.

  64. Industrial revolution did not increase inequality amongst nations, colonialism did.

    China has a major trade surplus to Great Britain, until Opium and the battleships came;

    India was the biggest textile exporter globally until Great Britain banned textile production in India and cut off craftsmen’s thumbs and index fingers when found weaving.

    There will not be meaningful knowledge if historical factors are intentionally swept under the carpet.

  65. Best lessons a child can learn about money is a arcade let them play then collect a prize and then show them the actual cost online of that item compared to how much they spent playing for tickets. See showing kids early on that SOCIETY IS RIGGED FOR YOU TO LOOSE AND THEM TO WIN is what all children need to understand… Society is rigged example we need a car but I can't buy it whole sale directly from manufacturers at a reasonable price so I am forced to pay a inflated price from a dealer. That dealer MAFIA created denial of first party sales state by state because it would be completely illegal at the federal level going against the competition laws. Another thing when we have no alternative to go to alternate energy source we are forced to pay for gas making local oil man rich NOT BECAUSE HE OR SHE IS SMART BUT BECAUSE THE CONSUMER HAS ZERO OTHER CHOICES. Utility companies work off same principle and so does your water bill. Now insurance lives off the ideology of the boogey man is going to infect you with diseases, crash your car, burn your house down but are like the auto dealers just MIDDLE MEN GETTING A FREE PAY DAY. ALSO THESE EMPIRES ARE ENTANGLED TOGETHER TO INCREASE PROFITS!!!

  66. Patterns of the rich are simplistic, sinister with a strong direct agenda that if not aided by corrupt government would be entirely illegal. Wealth at the mega level had never been about intelligence but rigging society to give you money for doing ABSOLUTELY nothing. With knowledge of the most powerful lie in global history "Safety" they have accomplished this in so many areas. Defense spending lie " It's to protect our way of life", Lotteries lie that the money will go to children via improving schools yet nothing goes to schools, Automobile Dealers lie "We are needed to protect consumers from the mean old manufacturers" but are middle men getting a free pay day, Law enforcement lie about all forms of safety "Gun control, Traffic Control, Drinking control, what we smoke or inject control etc" but are all about making there arms longer to push communistic control that's based around profits first Judicial law, Harvard, Stanford, Yale and other CIA Universities lie that Americans are stupid and need 61 billion a year to feed off to educate third world immigrants yet if people from other countries were smart it would be SELF EVIDENT and no need from another country education would be needed, and so so many others. The real patterns that need to be studied are right after someone says you need something you never needed before and it's to protect you from fictional monsters!!!

  67. THERE ARE NO TALENTED, RICH, FAMOUS, OR INTELLIGENT PEOPLE ONLY MADE UP FICTIONAL CHARACTERS OF THE CIA GOVERNMENT!!!!

  68. I am sure no one wants to be poor and see homeless people, but I think inequality is just part of human nature. Some people consciously made bad decisions and knew about how it would affect their lives financially but still decided to act on those bad decisions. Others, unfortunately, had no control over their situation.
    For the most part, I believe it is people's decision, lifestyle, and perception of certain situations that allow inequality.

  69. Islam promotes welfare distribution
    Quran (Koran) Surah Al-Hashr, Verse 7:
    ِ كَيْ لَا يَكُونَ دُولَةً بَيْنَ الْأَغْنِيَاءِ مِنكُمْ
    , so that it may not be a thing taken by turns among the rich of you,

  70. fyi
    india is said to be a developing country, despite it the 6-7th richest country in the world on comparison with GDP

  71. I personally see the issue as this. Yes the world was worse for everyone in the past but there was only so much I be could do. Like it used to be just no one knew anything about disease or how to cure it. It wasn't a social issue as much as just unfortunate. Today however, there is a cure or vaccine for almost every disease that kills many young people in the poor countries of the world and the only issue is that they are too poor to get it, and there is something much more distressing about this

  72. How can we NOT have wealth inequality in America? We import millions of poor, uneducated, unskilled, poverty stricken immigrants into this country every year. If we didn't have wealth inequality, something would be very wrong!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *