In essence, the purpose of N. Gregory Mankiw’s Defending the One Percent (2013) is to open a dialogue between readers who may come from different sides of the political spectrum. To open this dialogue, Mankiw takes readers through selected points of interest comparing political philosophies, economic theory, and analysis of past studies all around one topic: income inequality. Mankiw himself uses little to no original data or empirical evidence, but cites past work by celebrated economists and political philosophers alike. Mankiw divides his paper into several important subtopics: Is Inequality Inefficient?, Equality of Opportunity as a Desideratum, The Big Trade-off, The Uneasy Case for Utilitarianism, Listening to the Left, and lastly, The Need for an Alternative Philosophical Framework. Mankiw, in these subsections, discusses individual aspects of inequality, including the source of inequality, the inequality of opportunity, the trade-off between equality and inefficiency, Utilitarianism (utility-maximizing), and observing the arguments of the opposition.
In Is Inequality Inefficient?, Mankiw discusses potential…show more content… Mankiw shows that Utilitarianism has inherent flaws in its optimal allocation. Workers with higher productivity will consume as much as any other citizens, but will be expected to work more. In the second section, Mankiw discusses whether inequality comes from rent-seeking behavior, or technological advancement. In summary, Mankiw in this section says that society needs to take note of the trade-off in supplying top talent to sectors whose responsibilities are highest, but ensuring that that top talent doesn’t show that rent-seeking
