Income inequality occurs when income is not distributed evenly in a country. This inequality has reached staggering levels around the world. Even in what we consider developed countries this disparity is only increasing. The causes of income equality can range from immigration to a country's policies and politics. However, some critics of income inequality argue that it will always be present and is necessary to stimulate growth. However, the problem is not just that the gap between poor and rich is widening, but that income inequality is causing devastating market and government failures. Let us look in particular at the case of the United States. The United States is the world's leading power and hegemon, which also has the highest GDP and GDP per capita in the world. However, the gap between rich and poor has grown rapidly in recent years. This prevalence of income inequality in a free-market society like that of the United States indicates that inequality is the direct result of market or government failure. In a free market, individuals are believed to have equal opportunities to succeed, but due to the misallocation of resources in a market economy this is not possible. The resources I am referring to here are those needed for a person to escape poverty and earn a higher income. This includes merit and public goods that individuals with higher incomes can afford and devote themselves to, while people with lower incomes or who suffer from poverty depend on some state provision, such as health care, education and access to job opportunities and professional networks. It is important for society to take care of these market failures not only to help reduce income inequality... middle of paper... vitality. Additionally, the bill has the potential to further widen the income inequality gap. For example, students who cannot afford the cost of higher education but whose parents earn too much to qualify for federal aid will still be forced to take out private loans to finance their education. “These loans can amount to anywhere from $50,000 to $60,000 by the time a student graduates, despite attending a public university” (The Student Loan, 2012). This, in turn, will lead students to make choices based on the cost of higher education rather than their own, meaning lower-skilled jobs and individuals financing U.S. markets and greater income inequality. Finally, while the bill reduced the cost of higher education, it does nothing to completely eliminate the cost and unfortunately isn't really feasible as it was rejected by the Education and Workforce Committee..