Confronting inequality paul krugman analysis

I’m stuck on a English question and need an explanation.

"Confronting Inequality" (610)

1) Paul Krugman writes, "Ever since America's founding, our idea of ourselves has been that of a nation without sharp class distinctions—not a leveled society of perfect equality, but one in which the gap between the economic elite and the typical citizen isn't an unbridgeable chasm. . . .High inequality, which has turned us into a nation with a much-weakened middle class, has a corrosive effect on social relations and politics" (562). What does Krugman mean by "an unbridgeable chasm"? How might high inequality be bad for social relations and politics

"The Upside of Income Inequality" (581)

5) What is your overall opinion about what Gary Becker and Kevin Murphy, the authors of this text, "The Upside of Inequality?" Do you agree with their views/arguments.

6) Why, according to Becker and Murphy, has income inequality in the US increased significantly since 1980? In what ways do they believe that this change is "beneficial and desirable?"

7) According to the authors, Becker and Murphy, in paragraph 9: "Growth in the education level of the population has been a significant source of rising wages, productivity, and living standards over the past century?" Which groups have benefited from these developments, and which ones have not? What do Becker and Murphy say about what can be done to improve the situation of the less advantaged? Do you agree?

8) Last week you read "Confronting Inequality" by Paul Krugman, and he offered a different perspective on economic inequality (pgs. 561-580). How might he respond to Becker and Murphy's argument in "The Upside of Inequality" that earnings should be considered "a favorable rather than an unfavorable development?"