Essay Example on Geographic Inequality in the U.S.: Examining Causes & Determinants

Introduction

Geographical differences refer to the impact of the location on the assets of that area and is a major cause of inequality among the states. Based on empirical studies in geography, urban studies, sociology as well as urban economics, there is a clear indication of the geographic intersection of inequality in the U.S. The geographic determinants of inequality, especially wage and income inequalities, have been probed in research using variables like the human capital, skills, race, poverty, together with the unionization tax unionization. There are considerable variations in these variables as per geographical differences (Florida & Mellander, 2016).

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Based on an empirical study on wage and income inequality across U.S. Metros, geographical location plays a crucial role in inequality (Florida & Mellander, 2016). The states with the highest scores in wage inequality are mainly those with high-technology knowledge economies like San Jose, Durham, and New York. Correlation analysis of the same study revealed that the geographic differences inequality was as a result of job polarization and skills, where human capital had a correlation of 0.606, knowledge 0.666, high-tech 0.625, and social skills with a correlation of 0.520. (Florida & Mellander, 2016). The continuing legacy of geographic differences in race, poverty, and variance geographic extrication in post-war social impact replicated in de-unionization plays substantial roles in inequality.

Where one lives or grows matters a lot when it comes to equality in accessing public services, education, labor prospects, economic resources, and opportunities correlated to the geographic location of a state, a geographical location determines the residential choices, as dictated by the ability to pay or the capacity of affording specific neighborhoods. According to the American Community Survey data, 12% of poor individuals are in distressed states, suffering from contextual poverty due to their geographical locations (Florida & Mellander, 2016). Additionally, geographical differences have resulted in educational inequalities. Owen's study reveals that disparity in economic segregation among the states results in better schooling facilities in areas with high-income earners compared to low-income locations (Owens, 2016). Thus, children in such areas benefit more from education than in low earners.

Economic resources thus become a major factor of inequality due to geographical differences. Income inequality, suburbanization designs, age together with the quality of housing stock, conservatory and civic boundaries, zoning and regulations in the usage of the land, as well as historical housing policies results in inequality among the state regions (Florida & Mellander, 2016).

Studies also reveal that geographical differences result in inequalities in allocations of health resources among the states (Florida & Mellander, 2016). Operations in the modern free market allow allocation of health resources rendering to the disposition as well as the ability to pay and not following the health needs of the people in a given location. Thus, the allocation of health services must be mainly focused on rich regions (Florida & Mellander, 2016). The geographical areas where there are poor people, with the greatest health needs, lacks proper services, becoming a major form of inequality due to geographical differences.

How Globalization is Creating More Inequality

Globalization refers to the process in which various parts of the globe get connected and inter-dependent through the intensification of trade as well as goods and services. Although globalization is aimed at expanding transnational, cultural, economic, and political activities, it creates more inequality in the process.

Nobel Laureate Eric Maskin theorizes that although the existing wave of globalization has raised the average income due to the increased trade and global production, inequality among the countries has also been augmenting as a result (Berger, 2014). Firstly, globalization is creating more inequality as a result of snowballing specialization and trade. Although the phenomenon brings about a comparative advantage and potentially is capable of stimulating economic growth as well as lift per capita incomes, it is increasing poverty in some countries. For example, a country is now capable of importing cheaper steel across the globe. As a result, it is probable that the domestic supply contraction will occur, which leads to the fall of employment and factual incomes within the industry. These have brought increased rates in structural unemployment, and the living standards get lowered. Besides, there is a resultant downward pressure on wages bringing inequality.

For instance, studies show that in the U.K., there have been de-industrialization due to globalization, which has increased unemployment rates, and there is a worsened economic as well as social scarcity. Another example is in the United States, where national income was in the top 1% of the population, which grew from 11% in 1980 to about 20% in 2014, in comparison to only 13% in the population's bottom half (Riley, 2016).

According to Bergh and Nilsson (2011), there is increased inequality as a result of globalization. The study examined the connection between globalization and country income inequality. Various control variables for the possible endogeneity were considered. The results indicated that reforms regarding economic freedom were increasing inequality, mostly in the North (Bergh & Nilsson, 2011).

Globalization is also creating more inequality since it brings about higher profits for multinational corporations like Apple and Facebook (Riley, 2016). Wages for a segment of the workforce in such corporations to increase, although it is not in the case for other segments, thus contributing to inequality due to the wage gap. In transnational matters - they engender 10% of the total GDP per year and more than 50% in the world's trade value (Riley, 2016). Transitional companies have also raised critical political as well as economic issues due to the globalization. These companies have been shadowing prices together with other forms of authorized tax evasion to lower their liability of paying taxes and thus increasing returns to individuals with an equity stake, which creates more inequality. Furthermore, in China, the Globalization Index (KOF) rose by 74% between 1990 and 2010, together with a 31% rise in Income Inequality Index (Gini) within the same period (Atif et al., 2012).

Additionally, tax avoidance as a result of globalization makes the national governments unable to generate the required revenues needed in offering public services. Also, the government's welfare systems get disabled, which brings a progressive upshot towards the income distribution. For instance, in 2017, multinational businesses avoided paying approximately £6 billion of tax revenues in the U.K. (Riley, 2016). More studies have revealed that tax avoidance, as a result of globalization, has been costing developing countries over $170 billion annually (Riley, 2016). The estimates indicate that $100 billion can provide education for about 124 million needy children and also offer healthcare services that could greatly reduce annual mortality rates by over six million deaths of children (Riley, 2016). Also, according to theorist Maskin, the skills match among the workforces, is decided by the crux of realizing how globalized production creates more inequality within corporations (Berger, 2014).

How Populism is Winning the Battle Against Cosmopolitanism

I agree with the statement that populism is winning the battle against cosmopolitism for a number of reasons. Evidently, in the entire world, populism is becoming a bulbous feature within the political scene. There are populist leaders like Donald Trump, Norbert Hoffer, and Geert Wilders who have become so prominent in the present world in different countries. With the rising of prominent populist leaders, there is shifting conventional patterns of party competition in present-day Western societies. The populist parties have already attained votes together with seats across the world. For instance, there has been the creation of government coalitions within eleven Western egalitarianism, with the inclusion of Austria, Italy, and Switzerland (Inglehart & Norris, 2016).

The pattern across Europe, as demonstrated in different studies, is now characterized by an average vote segment within the national as well as European parliamentary elections that have doubled from the 1960s, from approximately 5% up to 13%, replacing cosmopolitanism within the center parties. At the same time, populist seats have triplicated, from around 4% up to 12% (Inglehart & Norris, 2016). The nations with few elected populist legislatures have also been experiencing incredible 'blackmail' pressure on conventional parties from the few populist parties.

Nowadays, cosmopolitanism has been getting a lot of depraved press. The "cosmopolitan" has been connected to "elites," for example the cosmopolitan elites, known to be sipping a cappuccino at one time and pinot noir in other moments, as well as jetting everywhere, for instance to Davos, enjoying immense advantages of digital insurgency (Tabellini, 2019). There was a time when anti-cosmopolitanism was regarded as anti-Semitism code. Today, with the rising wave of populists, cosmopolitans are just "citizens of nowhere" (Tabellini, 2019).

The scopes of political conflicts are continuously changing. The previous economic, as well as the redistributive conflicts among left and right, is diminishing. A new conflict is between the nationalists and social conservatives against cosmopolitan and socially progressive positions. As a result, populism has been embraced since the shifting extents of political conflicts are ostensible from voting upshots and political parties' standing. (Tabellini, 2019).

There are different theoretical arguments for the rise of populism against cosmopolitanism. A major and mostly used view of the massive populism support is linked to the perspective of economic inequality (Inglehart & Norris, 2016). Theoretically, this view accentuates electoral behavior outcomes ascending from reflective changes transmuting the labor force and society in post-industrial parsimonies. There is irresistible evidence of prevailing tendencies in the direction of superior income as well as affluence inequality in the West in the regime of cosmopolitans. Thus, populism is taking its roots as a result of augmented knowledge in economy, industrial automation, and worldwide streams of labor (Inglehart & Norris, 2016). The intensification of economic insecurity, together with the social deficiency amongst the left-behinds, has powered popular antipathy towards the political elites.

Additionally, the winning of populism over cosmopolitanism can be based on a progressive cultural change argument (Inglehart & Norris, 2016). This view is based on value change' silent revolution' theory, which elucidates that unprecedentedly higher echelons of existential safety in people within the developed Western societies in the postwar era resulted in an intergenerational swing on post-materialist ideals like cosmopolitanism and multiculturalism (Inglehart & Norris, 2016). Thus, the traditional parties are unable to re-position themselves for the emerging political extents since they fear to leave their support base, as the insiders may not embrace such political drifts. Therefore, these phenomena have created a political vacuum that has to be occupied by new political parties that are led by new political leaders.