How Laziness and Dependence on The Government Contribute to a Wage Gap

Proposition one states that the wage gap has grown due to an increase in dependency among the American working class. The argument states that the nations “lazy” have the opportunity but not the motivation to earn a livable income. In Autor’s article the author concludes that “Even in a society with perfect equality of opportunity, one would expect children of successful parents to have above average success as adults, simply because many attributes that contribute to success (appearance, intellect, athleticism) are partly heritable.”(Autor) This supports proposition ones statement that the country’s “lazy” stay poor, assuming that the success of the children is a reflection on the success of the parents.

Proposition one argues that individuals have opportunity to advance and choose to be lazy and dependent on government systems. In turn, when these individuals have children they will be raised in an environment that emphasizes the attributes that have caused the family not to gain upward mobility. This is a vicious cycle that causes such a large distance between the county’s wealthy and poor.

Proposition two states that the wage gap can be blamed on the governments affiliations with the country’s highest earning individuals and businesses. Proposition two promotes the creation of fair tax distribution that will redistribute funds to help lower income individuals and families gain upward mobility. Autor discusses the process of creating equal opportunities for individuals of all socioeconomic status. The author mentions that the results of programs may take time to appear and even span across several generations.

Autor states that there are “numerous nearer-term levers that moderate inequality directly without imposing substantial economic costs: applying progressive tax and transfer policies that fund public investments and foster opportunities for children of all socioeconomic backgrounds”(Autor). This statement reflects proposition twos view on tax redistribution, in this section of the article the author discusses that these type of programs can be beneficial for reducing the income gap, however those results take time.

Before reading Autor’s article I found the 2nd proposition to seem more accurate. After reading the article I stand by that choice. Proposition two is relevant in my life and I see the results from it. I wouldn’t be able to attend a University without the assistance of government programs. Proposition one has some points that seem accurate superficially, but doesn’t take into consideration that the cost of living in the United States is more than minimum wage. Individuals with a limited skill set and no opportunity to advance that skillset are stuck in a difficult place, when living on a wage that is less than ones expenses it is impossible not to turn to the government (the creator of that wage) for help.