Yay! Another political quiz!

[Jon Miller]

Here are some articles from that bastion of socialist thought, the Economist:

http://www.economist.com/node/15908469

http://www.economist.com/node/7059155

Another blog:

http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2009/10/is-the-american-dream-a-myth.html

JM

[Nikolai]

Half of these questions are strictly US centered. Hard for me to answer properly. And how can I know whether I am an independent, whatever that is, a democrat or a republican? I ended up as a post-modernist. That is not even a political ideology.

[Hauldren Collider]

The Economist is crap. It might as well be called "articles that were too douchey and irrelevant for Newsweek." It's like Forbes of European social metrics. Where does your country rank? Oh no! Spain is #34 on press freedom!

[Hauldren Collider]

It is better to be a poor person in the US than a poor person in India.

It doesn't mean that they imagine that they can become a wealthy person in the US. Nor does it mean that it is possible for them to become a wealthy person in the US (or for their children to).

JM

Jon, a poor person in the US is a wealthy person (almost) everywhere else. Who gives a **** if they can't rise to the very top tier of American wealth in a single generation? They are still vastly wealthier, so long as they work hard.

As for the bottom 75% stagnating, that's blatantly false. Was the bottom 75% better off 20 years ago? Don't just look at wages. Think about it in real terms--can you count all the things the bottom 75% of America have today that they didn't 20 years ago? Do people in Guatemala have those now as well?

[Jon Miller]

Jon, a poor person in the US is a wealthy person (almost) everywhere else. Who gives a **** if they can't rise to the very top tier of American wealth in a single generation? They are still vastly wealthier, so long as they work hard.

As for the bottom 75% stagnating, that's blatantly false. Was the bottom 75% better off 20 years ago? Don't just look at wages. Think about it in real terms--can you count all the things the bottom 75% of America have today that they didn't 20 years ago? Do people in Guatemala have those now as well?

What the **** does that have to do with the american dream?

Come on, attempt a minimal amount of honesty here.

JM

[Hauldren Collider]

What doesn't it have to do with the American dream? Here you can make it if you try, whereas in most countries there's little hope of moving up. You might come here with nothing, not speaking the language, but you can get yourself a job, a place to live, food, some minimal level of medical care, public education for your kids, television, internet, electricity, public transit...

That's a lot of stuff to be able to get even when you're at the bottom rung. And then your kids, who speak English and have a high school diploma can get health insurance, maybe even a college education, own a house, buy a car...

Seriously, if that doesn't seem like class mobility to you, what the hell does?

[Jon Miller]

What doesn't it have to do with the American dream? Here you can make it if you try, whereas in most countries there's little hope of moving up. You might come here with nothing, not speaking the language, but you can get yourself a job, a place to live, food, some minimal level of medical care, public education for your kids, television, internet, electricity, public transit...

That's a lot of stuff to be able to get even when you're at the bottom rung. And then your kids, who speak English and have a high school diploma can get health insurance, maybe even a college education, own a house, buy a car...

Seriously, if that doesn't seem like class mobility to you, what the hell does?

Class mobility is going from being a poor american to a rich american. That is the american dream.

It isn't the american dream to go from a poor indian to a poor american.

Additionally, if you read my links you will see that american has a lot less class mobility than most 1st world countries.

So your statement is crap and you were trying to obscure the fact that your argument doesn't hold.

JM

[giblets]

The Economist is crap. It might as well be called "articles that were too douchey and irrelevant for Newsweek." It's like Forbes of European social metrics. Where does your country rank? Oh no! Spain is #34 on press freedom!

Hauldren Collider hating on The Economist is a surprise.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Why shouldn't it when the income of the bottom 75% has stayed the same or decreased, their costs have skyrocketed, and only the income of the very wealthy has increased significantly in the last 30 years?



JM

What does that prove? Doesn't mean that mobility between class has slowed.

[Hauldren Collider]

Class mobility is going from being a poor american to a rich american. That is the american dream.

It isn't the american dream to go from a poor indian to a poor american.

Yes it is! Only an idiot would suggest that it is possible for anyone to become a "rich American", the American dream in that sense is basically that it isn't inherently impossible for anyone with the skill and determination. Obviously not everyone is going to come to America and found Microsoft, and you are never going to get very far up the economic ladder in this country unless you are talented and hardworking, but that's the whole point.

Additionally, if you read my links you will see that american has a lot less class mobility than most 1st world countries.

So your statement is crap and you were trying to obscure the fact that your argument doesn't hold.

JM

No, that stuff from the Economist is crap. Their whole schtick about "inequality" is working under the assumption that having a gap between rich and poor is actually a problem, as if poverty has nothing to do with wealth in real terms. Under that ridiculous fetish for egalitarianism, we would prefer to all live in caves so long as everyone gets the same size cave, rather than in marble palaces if some people's palaces had bigger living rooms than others.

People like to talk about "gaps" as if they are problematic somehow, like "achievement gap" and such, and if you're one of them, Kurt Vonnegut has news for you.

[Jon Miller]

If you happened to read, you would know that the economist is quite OK with the inequality. In fact, they celebrate it and praise it. They don't consider the gap between rich and poor as a problem.

But of course, since you didn't actually read those articles, you are just talking ****.

If you are done being a ****, you can read those article and see that the concern is with the ability to be socially mobile. Which is an issue of using social capital properly.

If you were a capitalist, and not just worried about your ability to get into Carnegie Mellon if you had more competition, you would realize that a socially mobile society which allows those who have ability to use that ability and profit from that is most advantageous for business. Then they can hire someone from a poor family who displays critical reading/thinking skills rather than someone who does not.

JM

[Hauldren Collider]

I think I made him angry!

[Jon Miller]

Not particularly.

But it is summer in Sweden and I haven't seen my girlfriend in a long time.

I am not KH, so I should have used different words perhaps. You really should read those articles (and others like them), and think about it for a bit.

JM

[DaShi]

I think the key observation to make here is for all the supposed flaws in the American Dream people keep moving here in droves. They seem to believe in it.

People move to where the money is.

[MrFun]

To a country where 90 percent of the wealth is owned by 10 percent of the people.