Any English majors or writers want to proofread my paper?

[thinkfloyd14]

This is a very rough first half of a paper I have due tomorrow. Its an opinion paper, I just need someone to proofread grammar and sentence structure. I have to write an opinion based upon an article in The Economist about Inequality In America (pertaining to income). If your interested in the full article just say so and I can post that too if you want.
Thanks

The United States of America began its life as a democracy, a government in which capitalism is substantial. America does not reflect any sort of communistic values or practices, and because of this: there will always be economic inequality under its name. The article confirms the belief that America tolerates this inequality; consequently, this is the only way capitalism can be achieved. The difficulty in capitalism is trying to balance itself within the entire communal population. Capitalism may seem like an oxymoron when you cite one of the basic principles of democracy, which is that America promises equality to all people, or that all people are created equal. This is true, but American democracy cannot promise economic equality to all its citizens; it can only promise equal opportunity to attain similar economic levels between its people.
A major issue constraining America’s ability to balance its economic distribution is that the richer are effectively attaining more wealth than before. Since the working rich are achieving higher income, this translates to the idea that capitalism is working because the rich keep working or trading to become wealthier. The article defines this perception as untrue based on the study that if your parents are rich, proportionally you will become rich. This means that most generations reflect upon the next generation in the sense of pure income. In order to measure the gap between the polar classes, one can look at the wages, which is how most people earn their income. Not many people inherit fortunes or own an abundance of property to rent or lease. The author stresses that no matter how you measure income inequality, income is skewed toward the rich.
The typical American worker falls into the middle class of income. After 2000, while the richer wages had risen, the middle class income had increased less than 1%. While the economic gap between classes has widened recently, these statistics support the claim that money is being acquired by extremely high income individuals and large companies. High skilled workers are the ones that endure an increase in their pay packets after 2000. This may be because of the rise of newer technology. One way very high skilled workers can be more productive is by pertaining globally instead of locally because of communication technologies that allow a static enterprise to be more dynamic by communicating or trading on a much grander scale. Moderate skill workers are taking a major blow because their work is no longer needed due to advanced technology and outsourcing. Education is important as well because one could say that your educational background can determine you level of skill as a worker. Thus; the more educated you are contributes to the level of skill you obtain, which ultimately reflects your income.




k im gonna go start the second half if i can stay awake

[thinkfloyd14]

geez thanks.... didnt think it was that long of a read maybe not

[Dottore]

How old are you?

Please say under 14!

That is one of the sorriest excuses for an academic paper I have ever read!

[dd74]

Dottore - give him a break, for *****'s sake! Thinkfloyd's asking for help...

Thinkfloyd - if this is an opinion piece, I don't read where you're stating an opinion. It seems as if you're regurgitating a summary of the article. In opinion pieces, one uses counter-arguments to the writer's argument, and that's not happening here. Please post The Economist article in this thread, if possible, so it can be read in conjunction with what you wrote.

I'll try to give it a look over in about an hour. Hopefully, if it's not too late in the evening, others will chime in.

Your grammar and sentence structure read fine, if not a little simplistic. I found myself sort of "nodding off" as I read; maybe because most of what you wrote was so expository (re. no opinion of your own).

[BRPORSCHE]

he cant be 14 and reading the economist. Hell I am 19 and barely understand all the stuff going on in there. Wonderful mag.

[thinkfloyd14]

its not an opinion paper

[thinkfloyd14]

Your task in this essay is to identify key aspects of this complexity by responding to following questions in no more than four pages:

1. Introduction. In two to three paragraphs, what are the key issues in this article as it relates to inequality, the American dream and the big gainers in America’s new prosperity? What is used to measure income inequality? 12 POINTS

2. After year 2000, what has happened to the wages of the typical American worker? Indicate with numbers. 6 POINTS

3. What categories of workers (if any) have seen their pay packet increase over the last six years? What category has seen their pay packet decrease (if any) in the same period?

[dd74]

Originally posted by thinkfloyd14
Its an opinion paper

...then you say...

Originally posted by thinkfloyd14
its not an opinion paper

[dd74]

Originally posted by thinkfloyd14
Your task in this essay is to identify key aspects of this complexity by responding to following questions in no more than four pages:

1. Introduction. In two to three paragraphs, what are the key issues in this article as it relates to inequality, the American dream and the big gainers in America’s new prosperity? What is used to measure income inequality? 12 POINTS

2. After year 2000, what has happened to the wages of the typical American worker? Indicate with numbers. 6 POINTS

3. What categories of workers (if any) have seen their pay packet increase over the last six years? What category has seen their pay packet decrease (if any) in the same period?

Okay - here's what I think. You seem to touch on all these. Your sentence structure is fine, your grammar is fine. Double-check your punctuation and spelling, and you're good.

I don't know, though. The writing just lacks punch for me. But if all you're required to do is point, shoot and answer direct questions about the article, it seems you've done the work.

One suggestion: The article defines this perception as untrue based on the study that if your parents are rich, proportionally you will become rich.
Substitute "your" and "you" for "one's" and "they" as you did two sentences ahead. This will give your answer a less personal and subjective feel, and more of a wide-ranging and inclusive tone that suggests the perception of rich parents/rich kids is more the norm than exception.

[thinkfloyd14]

thanks thats waht i needed, im sorry about the discrepancy with the opinion matter. Im just supposed to answer questions in essay format after reading an aritcle.

and dottore, I never thought id say this to someone on here but that was a very ********* remark

[dd74]

Good luck! Make us proud!

[svandamme]

Originally posted by Noah
The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer, because of evil capitalist Republicans.

the correct liberal spelling of Republican is now "repuhblikhan"

Neocon has also been revised, and should now be replaced by "neoconfused"

[wludavid]

Geez. Even as a left-wing idiot myself, I agree with Noah.

[Laneco]

You are tasked with a concept that appears simple, but is actually more difficult than most imagine. You are to take a subject that is an opinion, basically do a synopsis of it, and yet somehow standout from your other 50 classmates who are doing exactly the same assignment.

You need to grabass in the first sentence or accept your slide down the bell curve.

This may require you to step out of your comfort zone, even be slightly inflammatory. But you gotta sink the hook, Floyd if you want to land a big fish. I haven't read the article you've read, just your summary of it, but my impression is very distinct: American Democracy promotes the accumulation of wealth for the rich at the expense of all other economic classes.

Probably not an accurate assessment of the whole article is it? Probably really pis$ people off, get a good flamer going, right? Absolutely. But it is an intriguing comment. One that snatches the reader from doldrums and fires them up enough to continue reading. At that point you can expand into the full depth where your intelligent read of that article will become very apparent.

Your understanding of the article is likely very good based on the post you've submitted. Hook them early, then explain fully with the detail you've already used. End the article with power also. Don't wimp out. Stand out.

angela

[nostatic]

nobody reads more than the first paragraph anyway. Just include a few figures with well written legends and you'll be gold.

Your first paragraph should start with a provoking sentence. Please....*PLEASE* do not use a dictionary quote. I would do something like this:

The concept of econmic equality is a fool's game generated in the 60's by fringe elements of the left and designed to plunge the country into chaotic oblivion. Then a couple of sentences of over view, then the thesis sentence restating the first sentece (ie your main point).

viola!

[wludavid]

Okay, I guess I'll help as well as make a snide comment.

High skilled workers are the ones that endure an increase in their pay packets after 2000.
Endure is a poor choice of word. How about 'reap' or 'secure'?

[wludavid]

Also, I agree with laneco and nostatic. Some of the best (and most fun) writing is taking some inflamatory and controvertial stance and doing your best to defend it.

[Eric 951]

There are a few grammar errors. Describing the US gov't as a "life", using "you" using "may be because". "or own an abundance of property to rent or lease" is also unclear as it is written. I know your intent, but the wording as written is incorrect. Also, there is an overuse of "that".

just some quick pointers--(I hold a B.A. in English Writing)

[M.D. Holloway]

$3/word and I'll write it for you.