Persistence of the American Dream

[marko]

My two cents:
Yes, we were all lucky with being born in the Western Hemisphere where opportunity is a given.

But I think it ends there.

I certainly know people who were born to 'Wikipedia' level families, born insanely wealthy, Ivy League educated who--through their own poor choices-- are now scanning a register at Whole Foods.
I also know people who were born into poor, dysfunctional, alcoholic families, attended community college and through blood, sweat and tears are now vice presidents of the local banks or insurance agency.

It might just be me, but what I hear when I read the word 'lucky' is the "you didn't build this"/income distribution crowd telling me that somehow I owe a portion of my hard earned resources to those "unlucky" who've done little to better their lives.

Harumph!

[6miths]

Quote:

Originally Posted by yakers I think it is true but would like to see the numbers. Read several articles in The Economist and FT that a number of countries now have better opportunities for moving up financially than the US. Still, a person has to chart their own course.

Studies point to the fact that almost all OECD countries have greater economic mobility than the US.

[HtownRose]

From the original post: Specifically, she asks how people continue to believe in the "work hard/make smart choices" American Dream in the face of objective measures that show that may not be sufficient for them.

To me this is not that far removed from asking how people continue to believe in gravity in the face of having suffered grievous injuries due to a fall. Yes, gravity can cause great harm, even death, but it's reality. Ignore it at your peril.

Yeah, working hard & making smart choices may not be sufficient to keep you from ever suffering from poverty, it's unfortunate but true. So do we want to scrap a system that rewards hard work & smart choices and replace it with a system that rewards laziness & dumb choices? Some would say some of our programs already do this, with predictable results.

[redduck]

Quote:

Originally Posted by marko I certainly know people who were born to 'Wikipedia' level families, born insanely wealthy, Ivy League educated who--through their own poor choices-- are now punching a register at Whole Foods. Harumph!

Shows what an Ivy League education is worth. Apparently, these morons don't know that they are supposed to scan items. Sure don't want to get in their line--gotta' take forever.

[marko]

Quote:

Originally Posted by redduck Shows what an Ivy League education is worth. Apparently, these morons don't know that they are supposed to scan items. Sure don't want to get in their line--gotta' take forever.

Fixed it to 'scanning'.

[GrayHare]

I hire out a variety of tasks. So many people could earn themselves additional money by simply showing up, but the majority do not even return a call or email when I'm offering a job.

[razztazz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrayHare I hire out a variety of tasks. So many people could earn themselves additional money by simply showing up, but the majority do not even return a call or email when I'm offering a job.

Pay more. That's how it works, unless you think Marx was right after all

[razztazz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HtownRose Yeah, working hard & making smart choices may not be sufficient to keep you from ever suffering from poverty, it's unfortunate but true. .

Well there you have it. The rest is reduced to if's, and's, and buts. It always end up coming back around to the beginning

[MrsHaloFIRE]

I started at page 249 and am still sifting through at a rate I call 50 WTF's a minute. "The overspending myth?" A guy said he spent more than he made so he felt he was living beyond his means. And the author basically said he was ignorant of the economic oppression "keeping him down" or some such. So she pressed him on it and he still said "look, I spent more than I make so that's clearly beyond my means." This guy gets it. The author clearly has some political agenda. She asked a lady she felt sure would agree with her if the lady thought the govt should pay for her to stay home and watch her own children and the lady was like "no, people will take advantage of that and the economy wont prosper." and the author thinks this lady is wrong.

[Running_Man]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HtownRose Please tell me "longtime" was a typo on your part & not how she spelled it in her dissertation. And thanks for confirming my suspicions.

It went long as last word on one line and time as first word on next line when I copied and past it got combined

[GrayHare]

Quote:

Originally Posted by razztazz Pay more. That's how it works, unless you think Marx was right after all

Price is generally not an issue since usually out of 10 candidates only one person shows up, and gets whatever price he wants.

[samclem]

I'm plowing through it, but will likely not read every word (C'mon--she spent 4 1/2 pages on "Acknowledgements," !)


So far, there are strong echoes of the themes Thomas Frank brings up in "What's the Matter with Kansas?" In both cases the authors struggle to believe that people can support policies that don't directly benefit them, instead of supporting policies that would take resources from others and transfer them to those being interviewed. In my opinion, this says a lot more about the authors than it says about the subjects of the study.
Weiderspan's take on "family capital" is an interesting one, and reflects the very recent understanding that the "immediate" household (parents and children in one dwelling, no extended family) should be the defacto family unit, that support from extended family is properly viewed as unusual, and (I'm guessing she'd say) a more proper role for the state. This view would be quite alien to people living in many other parts of the world, or to the view held by most Americans before WWII.
Weiderspan uses the term "localized blame" to describe the situation when poor people see their economic situation as being the result of their own decisions. The use of the term "blame" rather than "responsibility" is telling. From her later recommendations, I believe she would say these people should more properly "blame" the economic system in general--as this would be more rational, would improve their self esteem, and would be the most effective means to prompt political changes that will benefit them. I'm hoping Weiderspan leverages the fulsome research on Locus of Control to explain the ramifications of her findings. People with "internal" locus of control (as Weiderpan's "localized blamers" apparently do) have less anxiety than those with an external locus of control.


Anyway, as time permits I'll hack through some more.

[Winemaker]

Last time I looked, people were trying to get themselves or their kids into the US at all costs, and we are trying to limit them so we can vet them better.

I also noticed, that there were not many people moving out of the US, even take a boat to Cuba.

[razztazz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winemaker Last time I looked, people were trying to get themselves or their kids into the US at all costs, and we are trying to limit them so we can vet them better. I also noticed, that there were not many people moving out of the US, even take a boat to Cuba.

A) It's not the worst place by a long shot. But anyplace looks like heaven next to a 3rd world pit of despair. You are damning with faint praise. I used to wonder why old people would always say that when I was young.

B) Can't afford it. Takes money to travel and set up shop. Other countries have standards and historically have not been so into waves of cheap labor at the expense of their own people.

[griffithee]

a couple of days ago, Bob (@imoldernu) posted a link to a blog written by Charles Hugh Smith (oftwominds.com). I read the article that he linked to and then got sucked down the rabbit. Smith has a considerable number of articles (like lots and lots) that discuss the 1%, crony capitalism, the wealth gap, the next credit bubble (which evidently we are in), and a whole bunch of other things that are kind of depressing, if true. Moreover, a lot of his posts sort of address the fact that the American dream does not exist and it is all the Feds fault for it all. So there is that perspective.

[HtownRose]

Agreed on the similarities to What's The Matter With Kansas? - person who knows what's best for others can't understand why those others don't think the same & vote accordingly.

[HtownRose]

Quote:

Originally Posted by razztazz Well there you have it. The rest is reduced to if's, and's, and buts. It always end up coming back around to the beginning

Perhaps I should have clarified that while hard work & smart choices do not guarantee you will never suffer poverty, it's the path many have taken with good results & the path that is available to many more than the path of receiving wealth from benefactors, & certainly more likely to succeed than laziness & dumb choices.

[armor99]

I do not comment on these forums much these days. But this topic is close to my heart so I thought I might respond.
I am a bit of a poker player. I have a regular game at my place. I view life in much the same light as a poker hand. It is not so much the hand you are dealt, as what you choose to do with that hand. Is there luck involved? Of course there is, but as any poker player will tell you, there are reasons good poker players tend to win more often over time.
There are no barriers in the US to your actions and choices. No govt agency will stop you from starting your own business, learning new skills, or sitting on your butt playing xbox all day. The choices you make determine the life you will have. Each one of us has barriers to overcome in life, and no two lives are the same. We all have luck both good and bad, but not always in equal measure. I know (as everyone knows) that fate is comming to kick my ass! The best I can do is prepare when times are good, so that when the blow comes, I will be as padded as possible.
As proof I offer the following. I am an engineer by trade. I like numbers. So I was curious about how much someone might need to save a month over say a 35 year working lifetime to retire a millionaire at 65. It is way too long to list it all out here (feel free to check it yourself). So I looked at the best and worst 35 year stretch on the stock market. I believe the worst was 6%, and the best was 12% (these are approximates, you get the idea). So I picked 10%, I like to be an optimist. I think when you calculate it all out it was in the $300 range a month saved, got you to that 1 million mark. I think the vast majority of people can really do that, if it is a priority for them. Just my thoughts.... thanks....

[skipro33]

Hard work and smart decisions. Now there's a pair just about nobody is going to agree on a definition. What is 'hard work' anyways? A migrant laborer knows more hard work than I'd be able to do in several lifetimes. My definition of hard work is defined my tenacity; a drive to never give up and never settle for 'good enough'. It's excellence by mastering a skill set and devoting myself to constant improvement.

Smart decisions depends on how smart the decision maker is. Can someone with a low IQ be capable of making consistent smart decisions? Is researching enough to reach a smart decision, or does it also include a willingness to take risk? My observation is that the financially successful are constantly taking risks. Not blindly, but after hard study and a comprehension of the process to reach such a goal. Smart decisions are not parroting another's path toward success. Life is just too variable for that.

[Denverite]

Quote:

Originally Posted by marko My two cents: Yes, we were all lucky with being born in the Western Hemisphere where opportunity is a given. But I think it ends there. I certainly know people who were born to 'Wikipedia' level families, born insanely wealthy, Ivy League educated who--through their own poor choices-- are now scanning a register at Whole Foods. I also know people who were born into poor, dysfunctional, alcoholic families, attended community college and through blood, sweat and tears are now vice presidents of the local banks or insurance agency. It might just be me, but what I hear when I read the word 'lucky' is the "you didn't build this"/income distribution crowd telling me that somehow I owe a portion of my hard earned resources to those "unlucky" who've done little to better their lives. Harumph!

Agreed. The "lucky" is just a repackaged version of "you were born into privilege and therefore you owe me because I wasn't." That argument has been around for decades but goes through periodic creative rephrasing. It persists because it generates votes for politicians - sometimes.

Also, it is conveniently ignored that some of the largest American-built fortunes have periodically been squandered, including the Vanderbilts. Then the "lucky" become members of the "unlucky."

I read that was once the largest private family fortune in the U.S. No longer, and I love the opening quote from Cornelius Vanderbilt in this article:

https://www.earlytorise.com/how-the-...ly-went-broke/

As the Chinese say, "wealth never survives three generations." Point being: even the "lucky" face risk, just as we do. They are just less cognizant of it due to being coddled in their younger years and not realizing how difficult the original fortune was to build. A perfect recipe for bad financial decisions. Then it is welcome to the "unlucky."