Social Norms of Income Distribution

            During the period between 1929 and 1953, the United States occupational pay ratios and earning inequality is declined, mainly across World War II (Ober 1948, Phelps Brown 1977, Williamson and Lindert 1980, Goldin and Margo 1922b). The evidence showed that the condition of income inequality was occurrence in that period. Moreover, the problem of income inequality is declined. But, the problem of income inequality is existed. The government cannot spread the income distibution evenly. Many reasons obstructed the income distribution evenly. In my discussion, I concentrate to explain five reasons to influence the income distribution in the United States in the 20th century. .

             Changing in social norms is related to the income distributions. Many people think that women represented a cheaper alternative for employers. Their jobs were viewed as temporary to be abandoned in favor of marriage and a home. High turnover combined with a large pool of replacements in any occupation will tend to depress wages, but it also means there is no incentive to provide career opportunities or invest much effort to train persons for more responsibility. Consequently, women tended to fill the more specialized and lower-paying work, while men moved into the new office manager roles. The fact is that clerical, service, and sales work does not yield significant financial returns to people with more formal education or longer work experience (Bibb & Form, 1977). In large part, this is because most of these are low ceiling careers, lacking in meaningful promotion opportunities for higher paying positions. The jobs have been filled advantageous position by one sex or the other. The point is strongly influencing the income distributions.

             The point of the unionization is related to the income distributions. Unions have improved wages and benefits, increased job security, and protected workers from discriminatory managerial decisions.

Related Essays: