Persistence of the American Dream

I'd almost certainly be dead by now, having lived a life that was "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short".

But I got lucky. I was born in the U.S., in one of the wealthiest counties in the country (although as the son of an electrician and a secretary we were ourselves not wealthy) but that gave me access to one of the better public school systems in the country. I also had housing, regular meals, medical care, and all the other bennies that came with 1950's and '60's suburbia.

I think there is little question that luck plays a role. The bigger issue of course is what one does with that luck.

That's not a bigger issue. How would anyone know it's that luck? Wouldn't that be luck too? Yes. It would be.

Many good decisions and good plans have bad outcomes with the victim of fate being castigated as lazy and unproductive. And many a foolish leap and unwellthoughtout (Is that one word?) plan has The Fool smelling like arose and being regarded as hard working and a great achiever. And , I suspect, these two human endeavors work out about 50% on average.
 
Last edited:
.... Many good decisions and good plans have bad outcomes with the victim of fate being castigates as lazy and unproductive. And many a foolish leap and unwellthoughtout (Is that one word?) plan has The Fool smelling like arose and being regarded as hard working and a great achiever. And , I suspect, these two human endeavors work out about 50% on average.

or in short, life isn't fair.
 
That's not a bigger issue. How would anyone know it's that luck? Wouldn't that be luck too? Yes. It would be.

There is that. It didn't occur to me that I was lucky until much later in life, when at work I started seeing up close how badly some people lived.

Many good decisions and good plans have bad outcomes with the victim of fate being castigates as lazy and unproductive. And many a foolish leap and unwellthoughtout (Is that one word?) plan has The Fool smelling like arose and being regarded as hard working and a great achiever. And , I suspect, these two human endeavors work out about 50% on average.

Reminds me of this story:

A guy in high school was voted "least likely to succeed" (back when they did such things) because he was so bad at academics and just barely graduated.

At the 20-year reunion, it was discovered that he was the owner of a local chain of restaurants and was doing very well for himself. Asked how this had happened, he said "It's easy. I buy a steak for $10 and sell it for $20. That way I always make fifty percent".
 
.... some who still believe in the traditional American Dream ideology are buffered from the reality of current day economic trends due to either access to credit or financial support from parents and other relatives. That is, their lives were better than they otherwise would be, given the true economics of their lives, which allows them to continue their belief.

.... The sheer number of adults whose lives depend on the economic resources of parents and other older relatives was somewhat shocking.

I live now in a place that is probably unlike where this study was made, but these two findings are anecdotally true here. The money keeps flowing down and the children who bragged in grade achool that they themselves were rich (because their parents were) are now adults and their parents continue to support them; I just saw yesterday that one of DS’s friends now runs a brewery that his father bought. I could write a book about these kids 😂. Not explaining it well, but it does skew one’s beliefs about how easy or hard attaining financial success is as a general rule, whether having it bestowed or achieving it without one’s family’s help.

I looked up the author of the UofMich paper in the OP and see that her 11 years included getting a masters in social work as well as post doc work, if that matters. I also thought about this short thread posted yesterday http://www.early-retirement.org/forums/f27/child-protective-services-failures-94049.html which made me think about what a difficult profession social work is.
 
I'll try not to bore you, but...
When I went to college on a full scholarship to Bowdoin in 1954, My dad and mom both worked 40 hour weeks. He as a loomfixer and she as a weaver. He was making a little more than the average hourly rate at obut $1.75/hr. and she at the average wage of $1.60... about $135/wk or about $7500/year.

The college cost w/o scholarship was about $1300/yr. Married right after college, and with a son born 9 moths after marriage, as a 2nd Lt. in the Army, my income was $220/month or about $2600/yr.

Today: https://www.niche.com/colleges/bowdoin-college/#rankings

My first job after Fort Benning, was as a store manager trainee @$1.90/hr... so, more than my father, and about $4200/yr.
....................................................................................................
So What:confused:

Well, first of all, graduate school was out of the question.... Any dream of becoming a psychologist was impossible. Just housing and feeding my family of 3 was a struggle. No loans possible back then, and though my grades were good enough to get a scholarship... no way enough go to Harvard... even with the scholarship.
.....................................................................................................

So about the American Dream, and pulling oneself up by the bootstraps?...
Dunno.... Our family was average... Poor by todays' standard, but average according to the statistics. My college mates were almost all in the top 5% of wealth... most had graduated from Private high schools... Hotchkiss or Phillips Exeter academies or Roxbury Latin.

By today's standards, we're not living the American Dream, but with some luck and hard work, were able to retire @ age 53... and with all that we ever wanted. Jeanie worked most of the early years, even with four sons in 8 years.

No lesson or point to be made... Just an observation that things were a little different a few generations ago, and that "the American Dream" might have had a different meaning.

Just sayin'
:flowers:
 
Last edited:
All I have to do is look at my kids to realize that the "American Dream" is a lot harder for them, than it was for me. They have to pay more for education than I did (I was able to work my way through with no debt). In their case I am paying their tuition, but they have friends whose parents can't and there is no way they can cover all the costs by working.
Starting wages are lower (especially if inflation is taken into account) and housing costs higher. I'm sure they will do OK, but I don't envy their path vs mine.
 
Changing dream?

Buy a big house. Fill it with stuff. Buy a car so you can get to work.

Spend all day at work. Car sits empty all day. House sits empty all day. Go home. Buy more stuff or watch tv. Repeat.

Work to pay for the car and house. Then work to buy a bigger house and newer car. Repeat until 65 or 67 or 70.

Some try to bust out of this cycle. Interesting journey.
 
Last edited:
Wait a sec!! It took 11 years to complete a dissertation in SOCIAL WORK? :confused:

We don't know her situation. Maybe she should be commended for sticking to it and completing her dissertation in 11 years. I imagine there were reasons outside of grad school that made grad school very difficult for her.

And, you seem to be demeaning a dissertation in social work. What's that about? I would also guess that completing a dissertation in 11 years is a lot tougher than completing it in 2-3 years.
 
Interesting comments so far, including by some who I'm pretty sure didn't actually read any of the paper. As I mentioned at the start, this study was not making a determination regarding whether our current economic system actually is fair and rewards hard work or luck, both or neither. Opinions really do vary, and I'm not certain another repetition of that argument is particularly illuminating.

I thought it was an interesting study of how people's beliefs match up with their own economic circumstances, as well as how those of us observing from the outside may have no idea of the truth of those circumstances. We also can't conclude what their attitude toward the American Dream may be simply by looking at their education, their profession or their income. There were some definite surprises discussed.

One of the lines that caught my attention is about one of the higher income group participants who appeared to have a pretty good life.

I thought about how wrong I had been about Leah’s financial situation based on her appearance and my knowledge of her “traditional” socioeconomic status (SES) measures, and asked if other people knew about the extent of her struggles. “Oh my God, that’s a great question,” she said. “Nobody would have any idea. Nobody. We look like we’ve got our **** together. We really do. We do. But we don’t.”


There are some valid arguments to be made about the author's methodology. Is the sample size large enough? From what I recall of statistical sampling, if your sample is actually random it doesn't take a very large sample size to draw conclusions within a range of certainty about the whole population. Pollsters do it all the time. Are two towns in the Rust Belt representative? Maybe, maybe not.

But how long it took her to finish her doctoral program and her particular field of expertise do not address the validity vel non of the study itself. And, frankly, I just find some of the stories interesting.
 
Last edited:
Wait, do you expect us to read a dissertation of 550 pages in retirement?
 
I question the conclusions gleaned from a survey of only 56 people from 2 Rust Belt cities. I have read only parts of the paper, but i find it interesting. I enjoy reading such articles even when I disagree with the writer’s conclusion.
 
America has "an unfair economic system" per the author. Wonder what she advocates as the alternative...I could hazard a guess.

She believes unless America moves to a strongly socialist society retired people will be dying in the street of America. Actual quote:
It has been a longtime in this country since elderly individuals in this country were dying in the
streets because of a lack of financial resources, but this is certainly possible in the future.

She ascribes 4 main reasons for people continuing to believe they can succeed in America when she feels it is impossible and are rubes due to wake up hungry in old age in the streets"
From Figure 10.1:
1) Participants have Low Economic Angst
2) Participants only have High/moderate Economic Angst but with mobility beliefs
3) Receipt of family capital which makes their lives possible
4) Conservative news media

Her "solution" to get more people to want to change the mirage of the American dream through exposure to:
1) Exposure to a different stratification ideology -- I believe this is basically understanding how well socialism would work
2) High Economic Angst with limited mobility optimism -- my take -- if you could just get people to be more pessimistic they would see how bad the United States economic system is
3) Exposure to an alternate economic reality
4) Positive intergroup contact -- if one just saw how many people truly suffer in America we would demand change to the economic model.

Her Solutions: page 469-470

Not in any particular order
1) Universal Health Care - Medicaid for all
2) Universal Basic Income
3) Every Baby born is given a baby bond at birth to buy a house or use for educational expense when they turn 18
4) Universal child care for all children under 5 pay based on income free at certain income limits
5) Universal Child allowance - government payment for the life as a child to offset the cost of raising a child
6) Significantly increase top income tax rate - she mentions 70-90% earlier in the article
7) All elections to be funded by government and private contributions to be banned
8) Eliminate voter ID declare election days a national holiday and allow automatic registration
9) Free college tuition at all public institutions
10) Eliminate social security tax gap
11) Ban companies the right to purchase their own stock
12) Create Federal Jobs guarantee to all Americans over 18 with a liveable wage and free benefits
13) Allow every American from age 22-33 the right to research a dissertation at the University of Michigan to study the ongoing benefits of the other 12 solutions - Ok I made this one up

She then concludes all social workers should consider this pursuit to be their main purpose of social work as this is most likely to improve the situation for people in need of social assistance.
Page 472 and basically throughout the paper
By helping clients (and other individuals) make sense of the structural factors that influence their economic hardships, social workers could increase the chance that they will come to support policy interventions that will improve their lives.
 
Last edited:
Please tell me "longtime" was a typo on your part & not how she spelled it in her dissertation.

And thanks for confirming my suspicions.
 
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!
 
Last edited:
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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'.
 
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.
 
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
 
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
 
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.
 
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
 
Back
Top Bottom