People’s source of income is highly related to their level of education. Those who are an exception to this are those with extremely bright minds like Steve Jobs. If you’re not a gifted individual, chances are, you are going to have some kind of post-secondary education to attain a livable income. Those who do not receive a post-secondary education or just happen to have a hiccup in their lives, may rely on some kind of public welfare assistance or acquire a minimum wage job. Although those who have a secure, minimum wage job have a flow of income, they still have to have a secondary job or receive some sort of benefits. One has to receive assistance even with a secure job because minimum wage is low in many states. There have been initiatives to raise the minimum wage. In Arkansas, they voted to raise the minimum wage in increments, eventually going up to $8.50. When people stumble, they have welfare to support them. But why let the people stumble? Can we prevent them from stumbling in life? An increased quality in education and an easier path to post-secondary education may be that answer.

Past studies have shown there is a lagging effect, and improvements on educations would only show with time. Those who receive the higher quality education can have a more balanced income once they have graduated and enter the workforce. This results in a lag within education and changed in income inequality. Why does society not like this lag structure? Society wants to see immediate results; politicians want immediate results in order to be re-elected. A Keynesian style of thinking is being used on education. Keynesian economics is used to immediately boost and help the economy without focusing on the long-term effects. That is the problem with Keynesian economics: It only looks at how to fix the current situation and have immediate results and does not focus on future consequences. Society seeks immediate results and progress. This lag structure within education may result in a misperception as to what education can do to help income inequality.

The decision not to attend college are mainly based on the individual’s family income. Some families can't afford education, or some need to work to obtain their own education. Needing to work while attending school, leads many to attend a two-year institution. Because of this, a cycle is created. Those who are able to attend a four-year institution are more likely to have a higher income than their counterparts. Those who do not attend a college are less likely to earn as much as those who attend any kind of post-secondary institution. The children of those who do not attend college are more likely to choose going to college or a two-year college because of their financial situation. The children of those who attend a four-year college are a little ahead of the rest of their peers because their parents are more likely to be able to afford college. One may argue impoverished students receive federal aid, but due to the increasing cost of college, financial aid has not been able to match that increase. Colleges are steadily increasing tuition every year, making it that much harder for the impoverished to receive a good, quality education.

I have seen what a good education can do to a individuals and their family. Not only can families be proud of something, but those individuals can ensure that their children do not have to grow up in the same manner. These people who have been helped through educational institutions are now part of our economy, making it stronger in order to truly make American great. We need to start talking about the inequality that surrounds us every day.