For many, the American Dream is associated with the ability to make gains based on hard work, largely in a rags-to-riches manner. However, the dream now associated with equal opportunity moving forward died, similarly regressing the country to the early 19th century where there was a small coterie of extremely wealthy robber barons and the majority of the people were very poor. The Progressive Era changed all that, and throughout the mid-to-late 20th century the American Dream was very much possible. Regardless, because most of the resources vital to success are now owned by the top 1%, the traditional American Dream is a concept accessible only to the wealthy in American society. This allows the rich to make investments. The counter claim, so to speak, is that the gap in income levels does not necessarily prevent the lower-middle classes from achieving the American dream and that the extremely wealthy are a necessary fixation in the United States to employ so many people. Therefore, the stability of the economy requires this inequality. In an essay written by Brandon King, who believes that the American dream is still fully attainable by all classes, he says: “...We should keep in mind the ways in which large corporations and financial institutions enable many others to achieve economic stability and security". While this view is very understandable and yes, the economy partially relies on wealthy people for business, the excess wealth of those who own the most money in the United States (not those with moderate wealth, but those who own the majority it) is useless and harmful to the rest of the country. The majority find themselves unable to acquire sufficient standing to procure the materials necessary to catch up with a world in which the list of resources essential to success continues to grow and the ability to acquire these things continues to increase.