NameInstitution

Course

Professor

Date of Submission

America a Modern Caste Society

The fact of America being a modern caste society is inquisitive. One can argue it is transitive to the nation’s nonegalitarian, while on the other side American culture can be regarded as one that has social equality. The argumentative claim in this paper is that America is not an egalitarian society due to it being a modern-day caste society. The American dream is one of the principal focus that considerably takes part in giving the defensive as well as supportive points with regards to the mentioned above claim. In consideration of the public policies, the country had a dream of stabilizing the economy when it comes to the social-economic and political matters. In the real sense, the politicians in a way or the other try to put extra efforts in fortifying class inequality and condemning the complainers (Lempert, 43).

Getting a precise understanding of egalitarian, issues regarding equality and social justice arise. Equality can be in the context of economic measures which involve the citizens’ income and financial status. It can also be in the social perspective where the civilians demand equal social rights regardless of the ethnicity and race (Dalmia, page 65). In the modern days, people are living in different social classes depending on the financial capability and welfare. It develops a caste society where many depend on the inherited wealth for their day to day life satisfaction. However, this is not the case to all the people in the country a there still exist the investors and many famous people who have introduced new inventions and worked hard to raise their living standards from low and middle class to the higher one ((Krugman, page 65). Therefore, the claim that America is not an egalitarian society can be looked into a diverse perspective putting into consideration some factors that affect the typical citizens in the country.

The articles “The Death of Horatio Alger” by Krugman, “Long Live the American Dream” by Dalmia and “By Our Own Bootstrap” by Alm and Cox are relevant when it comes to supporting and opposing the subject claim. Therefore, they will be profoundly used as the major source of information in this discussion. All these authors have deep roots in the American society as well as the experience gained through the interaction with people at different levels of the society. According to Krugman, America can be referred to as a sphere of class warfare, where people be concerned obout their own business when it comes to social and income matters (Krugman, page 64). Alm and Cox argue that the United States of America is a land full of opportunities. Hence individual efforts bring about different social class and inequality in the community. “Opportunity and not equality of income is what made the economy of U.S. grow and prosper” (Cox et al. page 65). On the other hand, Dalmia an Indian immigrant believes that America is the strongest in economic power regardless of the stiff competition seen among the strong rivals India and China.

The economic potentiality is one of the most common aspects that will be put into consideration when looking at the citizens living standards in a particular nation. With eligibility, it means that there is no divergence with the civilians’ incomes as well as the social classes. Social equity can be seen as an impossibility in the American society, but Dalmia in her article “Long Live the American Dream” has proved it wrong. She postulates that it all depends on the social mobility, where income inequality tends to rise with a decrease in social mobility. The juxtaposition of the claim that America is not an equal opportunities society due to it being a modern-day caste society is given into an in-depth extent with regards to the people’s income as well as social mobility among other factors that build differences among the public (Soltow, page 44). It is believed that the United States is a perfectly egalitarian society where the employment rate is high, and a high percentage of people succeed, but this is not the fact as there is only social mobility and opportunity to those who are industrious.

To start with the opposing point of view, America is an egalitarian society regardless of it a modern hereditary way of living. Dalmia in her work “Long Live the American Dream” profoundly support this fact putting into consideration the country’s talent appreciation, infrastructure, and civil society sufficiency, poverty eradication, education superiority as well as unavailability of hype culture. When it comes to supporting talents, America emerges to be the best compared to China and India as well as many other parts of the world. With this, people in the nation can utilize the scarce resources to maximum whether tangible or intangible enhancing the proper satisfaction of its citizen’s living standards. “Personal attributes-talent, looks, smarts-matter only on the margin” (Dalmia, page 66). People are talented in different ways and when all supported there is equality in the society where everyone will have a reliable source of income. In the American culture, there is an extension of not only the intangible capital but also the substantial resources which are essential in human day to day activities. The infrastructures such as water and roads in India are primitive, and the case is the same in China when it comes to civil society deficit (Gittleman, page 9).

The gross domestic product level is the excellent measuring tool of the poverty level of a country and this to a great extent dictates social equality in a community. Regardless of China being the at the top line of the world’s large economy and India hopefully following the same steps, their purchasing power capabilities are wretched. “America’s is about $47000, China’s $7500 and India’s $3290.” (Cox, et al. page 64). It postulates that there are equal opportunities in the American society making it maintain its economic level highest compared to China and India. Generally, there exist superiority in the American education where the products secure good posts in the society, and high percentage depend on it for their income generation. The quality of education is high suggests that all people in the American community have equal access to learning facilities regardless of the financial background. Additionally, Americans do not have a culture of hype making them believe in their efforts and not depending on the shortcut ways of earning income. People believe in working to secure extra capital and fixing what is not right as a method of solving any new problem (Burkhauser, page 16).

On the other hand, it is correct to juxtapose the American society is an egalitarian society when people greatly depend on the inherited wealth. In the current community, the young people’s income level is significantly determined by their parents and elders financial status where the poor remains downgraded and go under tough struggle to get at the high-class level (Downey, page 12). There before, income was distributed among the middle class, but the case is different today where some belong to the high level and many overlaps at the middle and lower class. The integration mobility in the community makes things happen that in many instances the children have more income than their fathers. The case of a caste society prompts the nation to be divided into those civilians that have and the ones that do not have. “…a class of renters in the U.S., whereby a small group of wealthy but untalented children controls vast segment of U.S economy…” (Krugman, page 64).

According to Cox and Alm, America is a land of opportunities and different people have different interests, making it not possible to have an egalitarian society. The authors argue that it is a fundamental principle of nature that someone achievements are paid to depend on the efforts and mobility. “Opportunity defines our heritage” (Cox & Alm page 64). The American dream is based on the opportunity but not making people equal in the society. In reality, people have to appreciate the variation in income generation. For instance, in the business case, there must be the entrepreneur, manager and the employees. The income level increases from the employee to the entrepreneur making it not possible for all the people to be equal. Therefore, in the ideal society, the variation in income generation vary mostly for reasons little to do with equality and fairness (Cox & Alm page 66). It is the way forward for social-economic development as the income distribution does not depict the opportunities available as well as the economy’s performance.

One can argue that social inequality does not matter as even the poor take part in the economic development through the little amount of capital earned. The taxation case is an excellent example that portrays inequality in the society. The government has put in place different taxation brackets where the citizens are taxed according to the income earned per month. The higher the income, the more senior the taxed income. Therefore, it is a fact that civilian’s income level cannot be equal but all putting efforts towards community development can lead to economic improvement (Soltow, page 31). The social class will exist in every part of the country as well as the world where one might be but may be brought out in different perspectives. It is true that all children in the United States of America have the right to access learning facilities and get an education, but there still exists a difference between those who study in public and private institutions. Both might contain high-quality education, but the ones in the private schools will automatically be treated better when it comes to the living standards at school (Lempert, page 11).

The fact that there is no an egalitarian in American society due to the caste society today as discussed above tends to outfit the opposing side. As people have different capabilities in doing things, there will be no way that all will have equal income amount (Karageorge, page 21). There must be leaders at the top, and they are expected to have added advantage than the followers. In other words, it is evident that the innovators and investors will leap high capital from their investments than the employed workers. Some parameters such as taxation if equalized can at the end lead to economic degradation.

Financial inequality is not a threat to the community when considered at the positive dimension as it will instead emerge to be a motivational factor to the young people. It is not right to put the wrong perception in the present and future generation that all people must have equal income level. Nevertheless, the appropriate measures should be put in place to boost education, talents, developing social amenities as well as eradicating poverty in the marginalized parts of the nation.

Work cited

Burkhauser, Richard V., and John G. Poupore. “A Cross-National Comparison of Permanent Inequality in the United States and Germany.” The Review of Economics and Statistics, vol. 79, no. 1, 1997, pp. 10–17. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/2951428.

Charles, Aurélie. “The Great Recession and Ethnic Inequality in the U.S. Labour Force.” History of Economic Ideas, vol. 19, no. 2, 2011, pp. 163–176. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/23723544.

Cox, Michael and Alm, Richard. “By Our Own Bootstraps.”Reading for Writers, Edited by Jo Ray Mccuen-Metherell and Anthony C. Wrinkler, 15 th edition, Boston, MA, Cengage Learning, 2016, 64-66.

Dalmia, Shikha. “Long Live the American Dream.”Reading for Writers, Edited by Jo Ray Mccuen-Metherell and Anthony C. Wrinkler, 15 th edition, Boston, MA, Cengage Learning, 2016, 66-69.

Doyle, Rodger. “BY THE NUMBERS: Income Inequality in the U.S.” Scientific American, vol. 280, no. 6, 1999, pp. 25–26. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/26058280.

Downey, Liam, and Brian Hawkins. “Race, Income, and Environmental Inequality in the United States.” Sociological Perspectives, vol. 51, no. 4, 2008, pp. 759–781. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/sop.2008.51.4.759.

Gittleman, Maury B. “Has Performance Pay Contributed to the Rise of Inequality in the United States?” Monthly Labor Review, 2015. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/monthlylaborrev.2015.03.002.

Karageorge, Eleni. “The Growth of Income Inequality in the United States.” Monthly Labor Review, 2015. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/monthlylaborrev.2015.04.006.

Krugman, Paul. “The Death of Horatio Alger.”Reading for Writers, Edited by Jo Ray Mccuen-Metherell and Anthony C. Wrinkler, 15 th edition, Boston, MA, Cengage Learning, 2016, 62-64.

Lempert, Richard. “A Personal Odyssey Toward a Theme: Race and Equality in the United States: 1948-2009.” Law & Society Review, vol. 44, no. 3/4, 2010, pp. 431–462. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/40926304.

Soltow, Lee. “Wealth Inequality in the United States in 1798 and 1860.” The Review of Economics and Statistics, vol. 66, no. 3, 1984, pp. 444–451. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/1925000.