Read draft and give strong feedback
1. “Inequality and discrimination towards immigrants”
“We the people”, a popular phrase in the United States of America. It was the beginning phrase of the Preamble to the United States Constitution. It was part of the ratified constitution in 1788 saying that the American government was established to serve the people under this country. But which people is it referring to? It was said that those people are only those who voted to ratify it, which was define as free, white men, meaning no women or people of color were given a voice in forming the new government. Many people left their family and went to America in the 1800s. They ventured into the United States because of the vast opportunities available in this country. Although there were no immigrants in America that time, discrimination was widespread here in terms of color. It spread even more when people from other countries were allowed to enter and live within US. Today, nationality and culture are also the norm to experience discrimination. That include immigrants, who has a great contribution to the United States of America’s economy. In fact, according to the Department of Homeland and Security, immigrants work at high rates and make up more than a third of the workforce in some industries. They are also considered as taxpayers just like what the citizens do. They should be considered as part of the Preamble of the U.S Constitution because they are also helping and serving the country. USA as a free country is only applicable to citizens because everyone else, are subject to limitations such as benefits and rights. Government should give an equal treatment between US citizens and immigrants because both categories have the same needs and are doing the same obligation in this country.
Immigrants are one of the major reasons for having an overpopulated country. They are bringing their family from their home country to reunite and live with them here in the USA, and once they are together, they will start building a family that will add to the population of America and will also increase the number of people who will need support from the government. Not only immigrants did that, but also US citizens. Citizens brought their partner here in US through IR1 or CR1 petition which is an immigrant visa for a spouse of a US citizen. Aside from that, unlike immigrants who can only petition immediate relative like their child and spouse, US citizens has more rights and power to petition not only their partnes and their child, but they can also sponsor their siblings and parents living abroad which can may further affect population growth. Regardless, the petitioned family member from different category will basically do the same thing when they get here. They will both work, pay taxes, and be a responsible resident, which means they will not be a burden. Population is just a number, but the contribution they can do on this country is much more than a number. If the US citizens has the right to do that without receiving any judgement, so does the lawful immigrant.
Immigrants caused harm and threat to the government and the people in the United States of America. They are the cause of trouble and disagreement between the citizens and the government. Since President Joe Biden took all the responsibilities in the White House, he puts the welfare of the immigrant ahead of the welfare of the true people of America. They often hold rallies for their own sake, they do not think of the fear they cause to the people around them. But what really pushed them to do such violence? It is the lack of support they are getting from the government and the unjustifiable treatment from the citizens. Lawful immigrants went through the needle hole before they were granted a visa to enter United States of America. They waited a long time, some even took 23 years to get here. The immigration investigated their identity first before they came here. So why are they being accused of harm and threat to the country if the US citizens working in immigration themselves, gave the permission to enter. There are religious groups in the US such as Roman Catholic who fought for the rights of immigrants. Why? Because their eyes were open, they saw inequality and unjust allegations as being a member of terrorist. If you were accused of something you did not do, will you not defend yourself? And if you see that you are not given the right you deserve, will you not take any action? Their action is the result of the treatment they receive from the people and the government.
Having a huge number of immigrant is the cause of poor economy. Other funds that should be allocated towards projects to develop the country have even gone to the benefits that will be provided to the immigrant. It sounds that the immigrants are getting all the favor? No. In fact, immigrants are paying taxes with the same percentage of what the citizens had. They are working hard, paying their contributions to their health insurance, and are paying the sales tax too which went through the government funds for the country. Some immigrants are building their own business that helped the economy to rise. Their geographic quality helps native economies reply to employee shortages, smoothing out bumps that would otherwise weaken the economy. Therefore, immigrants should not cling to the accusations that they are the cause of the existence of a poor economy.
Lawful immigrants are isolating and forming their own organization and community against government. They were forming a group so they can still live normally and according to their culture. Yes, they may have their own culture and community, but that does not mean they are not open adapting any other culture. Filipino community is one of the examples, it was formed not because we are trying to be against the government nor the citizens, but it was the pride. A pride that will show wherever we are, we never degraded and discriminated anyone, and that is how our culture is, we are equal. If immigrants are isolating, then why there are a lot of Americans who wanted and already adapted other cultures too. From the way of living, traditions, and even the foods. In other words, it is not immigrants who isolate themselves, but the citizens. Citizens must stop labeling such private community as an organization built against government and Americans, because it is clearly for family and cultural purposes.
Immigrants are stealing the national identity. The presence of immigrants distorts the native population’s national identity. As a result, they worry that they will lose their sense of happiness to their own nation. Because of immigrants, the characteristic of a true American has become obsolete. But the real thing is, American will still be American. And the other nationalities who are already citizens will remain being characterized to who and where they came from. Immigrants are not stealing anything. In fact, they are adapting everything because they know where to place and categorized themselves. Immigrants might claim that they are US citizen through naturalization, but when you ask them about their identity, they will still definitely say their nationality to where they are born from. There are popular personalities who are US citizen by birth like Bruno Mars and Vanessa Hudgens. Whenever they introduced themselves as Filipino-American, is that considered stealing of national identity too? No. They just know who they are and the roots they came from. If a US citizen know his or her identity, then they have nothing to worry and be threatened about. There is a big difference between an American by blood and an American by law and paper.
2. Taxing the Rich
In stereotypical history, America has stood as a beacon of success, emitting praises of the American Dream with every ray it shone through its economic superiority. However, this American Dream is a facade. Underneath the promises of wealth and happiness once promised to expand the country, is the truth of the economic inequalities that grow day by day. According to a former U.S. Secretary of Labor, “Despite an economy that’s twice as large as it was 30 years ago, the bottom 90 percent of Americans remain stuck in the mud.” If America is so full of prosperity, why are so many of its people barely getting by? The answer is taxes — or lack thereof. Affluent corporate America has been dodging taxes for years, jumping through loophole after loophole and using their power in corrupt ways. With their financial authority, they have politicians in the palm of their hand, resulting in more and more tax cuts for the rich. As the rich gain more and more money and power, they are paying less and less in taxes, forcing the tax burden onto those who are not equipped to handle it. The American government must impose a heavier tax on the top income earners who have been avoiding tax responsibility for years, in order to lessen the burden of taxes on those lower on the financial spectrum and provide better tax-funded services to the people.
With an imbalance of income and tax rates in America, low-income families who have less of an ability to pay taxes, end up with an onerous burden. According to an article from the New Haven Register, low-income families are paying more in payroll, property, and sales tax than they did thirty years ago; whereas, the tax burden on the most affluent sitting at the top 1%, has decreased by more than 50%. The reason for this steep decline is tax cuts. With the political sway and authority many large and successful corporations hold, many politicians have been throwing tax cuts in the direction of the rich like candy for decades. Most of these tax cuts go toward top taxes, estate taxes, tax on capital gains — essentially, many tax cuts in the past few decades have been for taxes that only impact the rich, not the rest of the country (Ingrahm). The justification for these tax cuts that keep most people at the bottom, is that corporations will use that money to reinvest in the community and provide more jobs with liveable wages. However, this politically moral justification is no more than a facade. For example, after the billion dollar company General Motors received massive tax cuts, they cut 14,000 lower rank jobs and reinvested in their stocks and raised corporate positions, instead of using the tax cuts for the benefit of the community as a whole, as was supposedly intended. This concept of trickle-down economics that politicians have been using as an excuse to keep the rich above the rest of us is a ruse. It goes to show how little the government can care about the American people, sitting idly by while the rich get more rich and the poor get more poor. Now more than ever, the government needs to take action and address this, by increasing taxes for the rich.
Another argument against raising taxes on the wealthy is that the rich create economic growth for the country as a whole. Once again, this is a poor attempt at an excuse. During the 1950s and 1960s when corporate and individual taxes for the rich were much higher and taxes were not as burdensome for the bottom 90% of Americans, the economy grew much faster and the middle-class and below was much more successful and stable than they are today. Nowadays, the economic scale is completely out of sorts. Individuals who have more than enough funds to pay their fair share of taxes should be doing so; the weight of this nation’s taxes should not be drowning those who cannot afford to deal with them. In Utah as early as the late 1990s, residents earning $5,000-$7,500, living below the poverty line, paid a shocking 224% of the state’s income taxes. In comparison, families making $250,000 or more annually paid only 4.4% of the state’s income taxes that same year; which was actually a significant decrease from the past six years (Harrie). This gap is only getting wider, and like with taxes, there is also a growing gap when it comes to income. In California, for example, over the past few decades, economists have recognized a trend: the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer (Takenouchi). This trend is not home to just the golden state; it’s all across the country.
If the American government makes the right choice of taxing the rich, benefits would fly to all parts of this country. For example, Seattle City Councilmember Kshama Sawant proposed a progressive tax that would do just this. It would tax Seattle’s top three-percent of big businesses and families who make at least $250,000 annually. The proposed tax would bring in tax revenue to help benefit the local community — the whole community. Seattle is home to several big-name big-dollar corporations, Amazon coming in at first place, with Jeff Bezos, the richest man alive, at the very top as CEO. The revenue from Sawant’s proposed progressive tax would go toward providing thousands of affordable housing units to address Seattle’s housing affordability crisis. As the income and tax divide continues to expand, the issue of homelessness grows. Taxing the rich is a political, social, and economic issue. As the pandemic rages on, displacing people, making people lose their jobs, and increasing the lack of funding for public services, taxing the rich must be advocated for at once. Along with helping provide affordable housing units, a quarter of the money from the proposed tax would go toward converting gas or electrical homes in Seattle to renewable energy sources, in an attempt to battle the growing issue of climate change (Office of the Seattle Mayor). Additionally, not only would this tax proposal help house those in need of shelter and not contribute to pollution, this proposal would provide hundreds of jobs. There would be an abundance of jobs available for construction workers, for people to install renewable energy to homes, and more. Tax revenue going toward community services like these two social and environmental ones, will almost always result in the creation of thousands of jobs nationally, making the economy healthier and helping more businesses thrive, which is something corporations shouldn’t be against.
However, corporations were still against these proposals. Amazon even went as far as to threaten to leave Seattle and move their headquarters to the neighboring city of Bellevue, so their higher-ups could avoid being taxed — the richest man alive included. Defenders of the rich often argue that taxing them at a steeper rate than others is unfair and robs them of their hard-earned salary. However, one version of Councilmemeber Sawant’s proposal wouldn’t even kick in until the ten millionth dollar (Golden). Is ten million dollars alone not already enough profit for these corporations and individuals to live off of and thensome? Plus, the rate of taxation at that level would be miniscule and should have no largely detrimental impact on these already extremely wealthy and successful national corporations residing in Seattle. Taxing the rich wouldn’t put a burden on them; a burden is something negative that falters something, leaving them on a dirt road in the dark with nothing. Those who would be taxed by the City of Seattle in this proposal would remain at the top 1%. — that would not change. What taxing the rich would do, is lessen the burden on those who cannot afford to falter every tax season.
Some critics of taxing the rich argue that if the loopholes are already there to escape taxation, why shouldn’t they use them? Why doesn’t the rest of America use them? The rich and wealthy have access to high-priced accounts and tax lawyers who would be gold medal winners if there were an Olympics for corrupting the economy. These are the people who find the hidden deductions and write-offs that keep an evil grin on the faces of CEOs. 60% of corporations don’t pay income taxes due to excessive tax write-offs. Some corporations in this 60% even receive ‘negative tax’ rebates. Some end up increasing their profits, like Amazon, who doubled their profits in 2018 after not paying one cent in federal taxes. The majority of working class Americans do not have access to these sources and benefits. Additionally, despite popular belief that they are not, most Americans are in favor of raising taxes on the rich. According to polls cast on both sides of the political spectrum, a proposal from Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren (D) to impose a progressive tax on high income earners was more favorable than the opposite. Most critics of this proposition are those who would be taxed. Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz, for example, argued against raising taxes on the rich, claiming it is not what America wants (Bump). Which America is he talking about? The America that sits at the top of a skyscraper with the whole world in their palm, yet still engrossed by greed? Or the America that works three jobs and is still barely getting by? With majority support from those who are paying taxes in America, perhaps the government should listen closer to the proposals to tax the rich.
Immigration essay for davvyjones | History homework helpQuiz 6 study guide, asian americans spring 2016 open: fridayA kind of revolution? | History homework help
Posted in Homework Help
