The Great Diversion in relation to income has been a vital matter over the years. Various scholars have tried to evaluate this issue, which has seemingly been on the rise since the 1970s. This diversion has been acclaimed to rise from the increasing difference in earning of the middle and top earners. However, this has caused an increasing concern among scholars who have evaluated the various causes of the diversion. Whereas a number of scholars attributes this difference to the rising demand for skilled labor, some claim that it is due to the emphasis put on the vitality of public policy. Historically, the income levels have been noted to be constant. However, this constancy was affected after the Civil War period. Recently, the top earners report a rise in their income with the standard tax reduced. In the event of the global recession, this inequality ostensibly decreased with statistics indicating a rise of the same during the recovery period. In most instances, these diversions are mostly deliberated from the household income. According to the recent study conducted by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), there has been an increase in the household income indicated by a 62% range. Noah (2012) is mostly concerned of how this inequality has affected tuition in learning institutions. According to him, this great divergence seemingly is affecting prospective students who find themselves cut out from the colleges because of the tuition inflation. Fligstein (2010, p. 3) in his part advocates for an understanding between politics, the economy, and income circulation for individuals to comprehend the rising income inequalities.
Noah’s Evidence and Explanations for the Great Diversion
According to Noah (2012), the top earners seem to be gaining more as compared to the remaining fraction of the population. Following the global recession, the low-income earners experienced a major crisis contrary to their opponents. This trend has been noted to proceed into the recovery period, which seemingly was noted to benefit the top earners whereas discriminating the remaining fraction of the populace. He acknowledges that the social class differences do not contribute to the increase in income inequalities (Noah, 2012). Consequently, Noah attributes this diversion to the economical state of the nation. He claims that having a disparate economy fails to provide the populace with the chance to improve their earning, thus, an imbalance in the income. However, to provide these opportunities, people need to be educated, which eventually leads to improved performance in the workplace and eventually influences the income and wealth of the individual. Noah (2012) argues that the appropriate way of ensuring a reigning equality between the top and middle earners is to introduce new values to the middle earners. He acknowledges that moving the resources away from the top earners will not help in solving this inequality. This is due to their level of intelligence. Introducing new values to the middle earners will ensure the existing gap is minimized (Lemann, 2012).
Massey’s Evidence and Explanations for the Great Diversion
Massey (2012) highlights the advancements made in the trade market through the adaptation of technology, which led to the minimization of labor and increase in technological applications. These advancements led to the improvement of production, which seemingly contributed to an increase in the country’s income. However, with the rise in income, the income inequalities also increased. This is due to the difference in taxation. According to Massey (2012), the more elevations noted in the income percentage, the higher is inequality in income allotment. According to Massey (2012), three distinct aspects majorly cause the great diversion: race, class, and gender. According to the racial classification, different individuals earned varied levels of income with the whites seemingly earning more compared to their counterparts the Blacks and Latinos. This difference in race could be the major contributing factor to income inequalities because it creates an extensive gap between the people. In relation to the social classification, the top earners seemingly continued to earn more whereas the middle and low earners retained their income position. It was so due to the tax rates. Whereas the top earners were charged more, this did not affect their income because they earned more. The middle classes however were affected because of their minimal wages.
Comparison between Noah and Massey’s Evidence for the Great Diversion
Noah and Massey ostensibly illustrate major similarities and differences in their argument for the great diversion. Both seem to agree that the economy is a major contributing factor to the variations in income. This is due to the level of economic development seemingly contributes to the amount of income one will earn after paying taxes. With a decrease in production, the income earnings are affected and this consequently influences the income inequality between the various social classes. There are however a number of differences between their arguments. Whereas Noah attributes the solution to this increasing inequality to the introduction of new values to the middle earners, Massey considers the solution to be the reduction of discrimination. Seeing that the population is mostly discriminated along the line of labor, housing, credit, and capital, balancing these aspects will ensure a decrease in the levels of income inequalities (Massey, 2012).
Fligstein’s Contribution to the Explanation for Growing Inequality in American Society
According to Fligstein (2007), the advancement in trade within the society has seemingly contributed to the growth of this inequality. Conversely, different nations have joined up to form a trading union, which has enabled them to expand their market niche. This has led to the augmentation of the economy. This in turn increases the income of the populace and eventually contributes to the rise in inequalities. Flingstein further attributes the growing inequality to the merger between companies in the global market. This provided an avenue for the companies to increase their income and eventually contributed to the increase in income inequalities (Flingstein, 2007).
Overly, a number of factors seem to contribute to the increase in income inequalities with a common aspect being the economic development. According to the two scholars, Noah and Massey, the level of income ostensibly determines the growth of these inequalities. Reducing the extent of discrimination and by introducing new values to the middle earners will help in reducing this inequality. These aspects help to create a level basis for the varied social classes and enables them to be at the same equal income level.