We Are the 99.9%

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/25/opinion/we-are-the-99-9.html?scp=17&sq=inequality&st=cse

Paul Krugman writes about how the differences between the poor and middle class are the first to be pointed out, but the real issue lies between the middle and elite upper class. Why are tax cuts helping the already-rich 0.1% when the middle class faces bankruptcy and the recession without the help of tax breaks? Executive pay has skyrocketed, and even poorly performing C.E.O.'s are still paid lavishly. Many of those in the middle class argue what that 0.1% is really contributing to the economy. Apparently the elite "create jobs" for the lower classes. In actuality, the elite upper class don't do much to contribute to the economy other than invest in stocks. Krugman argues that the 0.1 percent shouldn't be hated, but they should ignore the business about being "job creators" and take a stand against tax breaks.

Krugman's use of rhetorical devices makes his argument that the elite upper class is given too much credit for the economy more powerful. His purpose is to inform the American public -mostly middle class- that they shouldn't hate the top 0.1%, they just shouldn't be given so much credit for the state of the economy. Krugman separates the opposing groups and uses logos by using statistics in order to hold the reader's attention. Those who are within the middle class looking up at the elite see that they have more tax breaks, but question whether they deserve them. Krugman serves his opinion that "bad economics" is the enemy. He separates his readers by mentioning Republicans and Democrats, and how each part would react to the issue at hand. The ideal market should give back to people however much they put into the market. However the elites are given special treatment because their contributions to the economy is greater than the average 9-to-5 worker.