Common sense seem to dictate that there is undeniable division between the upper class compared to middle and lower class. Once upon a time, it was difficult to make a clear distinction between these different classes of people in the society. The article, “Income Inequality: Too big to Ignore” by Robert H. Frank write about how the country continuously uneven income levels have affected Americans. According to Frank “three decades after world war 2, income in the United State rose rapidly at about the same rate for people at all income levels” (1). The point Frank was trying to get at is that, the gap between the higher and lower classes were more even before compare to now. “Income growth is concentrated at the top with about 8.9% in 1976 to 23.5% by 2007 during same period” (Frank 1). The essence of Frank’s argument is that the revenue is going to those who already have more. This is true, because it increase inequality. …show more content…
This approach illustrates that rising income inequality has resulted to greater losses and fewer benefits. Insinuate the effects of income inequality are so great to be ignored. According to Frank, the dilapidating nature of “crumbling roads, weak bridges, an unreliable rail system, poorly maintained dams, and cargo containers that enter the ports without scrutiny” (2). Basically, Frank is warning that the losses affects the rich and the poor are similar and with issue of revenue sidedness will only make the problem worse. Naturally, this is true because everyone faces the effect, since the rich or the middle class are not willing to support basic public services that they also make use of compared to the decades after World War 2. Were basic public services (roads and bridges) were well maintained and new infrastructures been constructed. The rich and middle class during this decades were very generous and the issue of revenue sidedness was not