Income inequality is a problem, when poor people don't have an equal chance at succeeding in life. They don't have to have equal outcomes, but as long as they are given an equal chance, it is ok.
It is a problem that the people in finance who destroyed our economy make so much money
An economy in which most citizens are doing worse year after year is not likely to do well over the long haul.
Whenever equality of opportunity is diminished it is a sign that we are not using some of our people in the most productive way possible.
As long as fewer people are trully poor, income inequality is not a problem.
When poor people can still afford cable TV, cell phones, and Gold Teeth, income inequality is not a problem.
Income inequality isn't a problem as long as most of the very wealthy really did work harder, smarter, or are more deserving. Income inequality isn't a problem when the extremely poor do not try to graduate from high school, keep their pants on, or support their offspring.
Income inequality (the outcome) is not a always a problem, but equality of income opportunity is a problem.
Score: +4 (reasons to agree), -4 (reasons to disagree) = +0
I want to use Romney's candidacy to advance his causes and arguments. This means debate. Thomas Jefferson said we should list pros and cons. Here is my list of reasons to agree and disagree. Please help me advance the arguments:
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.