View Full Version : End of the American Dream
Packratona!
10-22-15, 8:29pm
38 percent of all American workers made less than $20,000 last year.
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/goodbye-middle-class-51-percent-of-all-american-workers-make-less-than-30000-dollars-a-year (http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/goodbye-middle-class-51-percent-of-all-american-workers-make-less-than-30000-dollars-a-year)
Ultralight
10-22-15, 9:02pm
38 percent of all American workers made less than $20,000 last year.
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/goodbye-middle-class-51-percent-of-all-american-workers-make-less-than-30000-dollars-a-year (http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/goodbye-middle-class-51-percent-of-all-american-workers-make-less-than-30000-dollars-a-year)
Whoa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Williamsmith
10-23-15, 7:22am
The United States government spends about 1/3 of all its tax revenues on the military budget. You can figure all the rest out from there.....with a little critical thinking. :D
Ultralight
10-23-15, 7:32am
People are clearly "making up" income deficits by spending on credit cards.
I have heard any number of culprits fingered for the “demise of the middle class”. The article puts the blame on foreigners and robots. The Sandernistas see it as a matter of “the rich” not contributing their “fair share”, although they aren’t terribly specific about who the rich are and what fair might be. Trumpkins incline to the sneaky Mexican theory. Some point to bankers or the wrong flavor of politician. One suggestion posted here is that our defense establishment is too robust. Some blame declining wages on a general dumbing down of the American population, variously attributed to teachers unions, parsimonious taxpayers, electronic entertainment or organized religion. Others see us in an overall cultural decline: we have become lazy and entitled, and are now paying the price. Others still see a surfeit of lawyers as the cause.
Ultralight
10-23-15, 10:25am
I have heard any number of culprits fingered for the “demise of the middle class”. The article puts the blame on foreigners and robots. The Sandernistas see it as a matter of “the rich” not contributing their “fair share”, although they aren’t terribly specific about who the rich are and what fair might be. Trumpkins incline to the sneaky Mexican theory. Some point to bankers or the wrong flavor of politician. One suggestion posted here is that our defense establishment is too robust. Some blame declining wages on a general dumbing down of the American population, variously attributed to teachers unions, parsimonious taxpayers, electronic entertainment or organized religion. Others see us in an overall cultural decline: we have become lazy and entitled, and are now paying the price. Others still see a surfeit of lawyers as the cause.
I agree that most American folks are lazy and almost all people in the US have a toxic sense of entitlement.
My personal opinion is that a massive swath of people who think they have an "income problem" actually have a spending problem.
I'm always a little skeptical of statistics published by small groups with an agenda, but those numbers may be close as far as I could tell with a small amount of sleuthing. There seemed to be a little better picture if you excluded age groups under 25 years of age. In my mind the migration of manufacturing overseas and automation of jobs is a big factor. I worked for a manufacturing company for part of my career and in my later years of employment it was getting hard to find temporary workers to do relatively hard manual labor that paid fairly well, say $15 dollars an hour, and a chance of well paid permanent employment with health and retirement benefits. Rumor around was that people would rather work easier jobs in the service industry that paid minimum wage. So I think there is something to folks being lazy. I also think there is something to the overweighted wages of upper echelons and enormous wages of CEOs, where wage distribution is not fair to the lower incomes.
ApatheticNoMore
10-23-15, 11:52am
I agree that most American folks are lazy
compared to what, they spend more hours at work than almost any other country on earth.
My personal opinion is that a massive swath of people who think they have an "income problem" actually have a spending problem.
I think that depends on the income. 20k is not much. 30k? I think it depends on the part of the country and whether it's household with kids or just some single person's income, in an expensive part of the country it's not much either and will be a struggle even for one person, but somewhere cheaper it might be less so.
Ultralight
10-23-15, 11:53am
compared to what, they spend more hours at work than almost any other country on earth.
I think that depends on the income. 20k is not much. 30k? I think it depends on the part of the country and whether it's household with kids or just some single person's income, in an expensive part of the country it's not much either and will be a struggle even for one person, but somewhere cheaper it might be less so.
Both very good points. I stand corrected on the first issue for sure.
Gingerella72
10-23-15, 12:06pm
When my parents were young and first married (1950's), my Dad, with only a GED, made enough money to own a house and allow my Mom to stay at home. He didn't have a fancy white collar job either. That scenario does not happen today. A high school graduate working full time at a minimum wage job (or even a couple of dollars above minimum) can barely afford to pay rent on a one bedroom apartment. I'd hardly say that's a spending problem. It's a everything-has-increased-in-price-except-wages problem. Minimum wage jobs are only meant to be for high school and college students (as most conservative politicians say)? Tell that to my husband (48) who has a masters degree and has to work two part time low wage jobs to equate one full time one because its impossible to find higher paying "career" jobs here. I've worked at my job (office job) for 13 years and only this year finally hit $15.00/hr. We're fortunate that we live in a state that has one of the lowest costs of living in the country, otherwise we'd be screwed financially. And to hint that we're lazy and it's our own fault for making so little really makes me see red.
rodeosweetheart
10-23-15, 12:09pm
When my parents were young and first married (1950's), my Dad, with only a GED, made enough money to own a house and allow my Mom to stay at home. He didn't have a fancy white collar job either. That scenario does not happen today. A high school graduate working full time at a minimum wage job (or even a couple of dollars above minimum) can barely afford to pay rent on a one bedroom apartment. I'd hardly say that's a spending problem. It's a everything-has-increased-in-price-except-wages problem. Minimum wage jobs are only meant to be for high school and college students (as most conservative politicians say)? Tell that to my husband (48) who has a masters degree and has to work two part time low wage jobs to equate one full time one because its impossible to find higher paying "career" jobs here. I've worked at my job (office job) for 13 years and only this year finally hit $15.00/hr. We're fortunate that we live in a state that has one of the lowest costs of living in the country, otherwise we'd be screwed financially. And to hint that we're lazy and it's our own fault for making so little really makes me see red.
+1
When my parents were young and first married (1950's), my Dad, with only a GED, made enough money to own a house and allow my Mom to stay at home. He didn't have a fancy white collar job either. That scenario does not happen today. A high school graduate working full time at a minimum wage job (or even a couple of dollars above minimum) can barely afford to pay rent on a one bedroom apartment. I'd hardly say that's a spending problem. It's a everything-has-increased-in-price-except-wages problem. Minimum wage jobs are only meant to be for high school and college students (as most conservative politicians say)? Tell that to my husband (48) who has a masters degree and has to work two part time low wage jobs to equate one full time one because its impossible to find higher paying "career" jobs here. I've worked at my job (office job) for 13 years and only this year finally hit $15.00/hr. We're fortunate that we live in a state that has one of the lowest costs of living in the country, otherwise we'd be screwed financially. And to hint that we're lazy and it's our own fault for making so little really makes me see red.
+1 Emphasis mine.
It's a everything-has-increased-in-price-except-wages problem.
Might want to take a gander at the data on median household income over the past N decades:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d0/US_real_median_household_income_1967_-_2011.PNG/800px-US_real_median_household_income_1967_-_2011.PNG
Note the fun fact that you can cherry-pick smaller timeframes from this dataset, and change the scaling on the axes to convey your particular marketing message...
Ultralight
10-23-15, 12:59pm
Endless economic growth on a finite planet is not possible.
Obviously wealth inequality is a major issue. But I think everyone from "successful working class" on up the class hierarchy needs to learn to be happier with much less.
iris lilies
10-23-15, 1:09pm
...Obviously wealth inequality is a major issue....
That's not obvious to me, but I salute those marketers of victim hood who have managed to implant the phrase "wealth inequality" in the brains of most Americans. That is an awesome accomplishment in just a few short years.
That's not obvious to me, but I salute those marketers of victim hood who have managed to implant the phrase "wealth inequality" in the brains of most Americans. That is an awesome accomplishment in just a few short years.
It's been over 50 years since Kurt Vonnegut published Harrison Bergeron. Luckily, we don't yet have a "Handicapper General' to enforce mandatory leveling, although Bergeron was set in the late 2000's so there's still time.
Ultralight
10-23-15, 1:56pm
It's been over 50 years since Kurt Vonnegut published Harrison Bergeron. Luckily, we don't yet have a "Handicapper General' to enforce mandatory leveling, although Bergeron was set in the late 2000's so there's still time.
K-Von was a democratic socialist and a secular humanist!
Williamsmith
10-23-15, 1:57pm
Income levels are pretty inconsequential really. What is significant is the debt of younger adults. Student loan debt being the most offensive. Doesn't 6.8 % seem a bit abusive to you? Yet many current student loans are that high. And now they get out of college and the easiest way to get rid of that debt is to join the military. How convenient to let the debtors fight and die for the lenders. Or they go to their parents and now that great retirement plan gets put on hold maybe a decade. It can't be stopped with political elections and it can't be stopped by revolution (not enough firearms in the world to take on the military).
It will only be stopped by eliminating the dependency we have chosen to be a part of. So what if the masses decide not to participate in the buy, buy, buy and more, more, more. What if we say, we are satisfied. Go sell your crap to somebody else willing to go in debt to you for it. What if we bring them down to our level. Just simply live and starve the rich bastards to death.
Ultralight
10-23-15, 1:58pm
It's been over 50 years since Kurt Vonnegut published Harrison Bergeron. Luckily, we don't yet have a "Handicapper General' to enforce mandatory leveling, although Bergeron was set in the late 2000's so there's still time.
Also, they made a movie of that story back in the early 1990s. And I think they made one recently...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2081_(film)
Ultralight
10-23-15, 1:59pm
Just simply live and starve the rich bastards to death.
Amen, brother!
ApatheticNoMore
10-23-15, 2:05pm
K-Von was a democratic socialist and a secular humanist!
Player Piano strikes me as a somewhat more realistic scenario. No jobs. Huge competition for the few good roles, runaway credentialism, testing etc. Everyone else doing make-work. It's a lot closer to present reality than a government instituting equality, I mean one can at least see the Player Piano scenario in current trends.
Ultralight
10-23-15, 2:07pm
Player Piano strikes me as a somewhat more realistic scenario. No jobs. Huge competition for the few good roles, everyone else doing make-work. It's a lot closer to present reality than a government instituting equality, I mean one can at least see the Player Piano scenario in current trends.
K-Von was certainly a visionary. I celebrate his entire catalog of novels and stories and non-fiction.
Also, they made a movie of that story back in the early 1990s. And I think they made one recently...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2081_(film)
Dude, in my world, the 1990's were just recently.
Might want to take a gander at the data on median household income over the past N decades:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d0/US_real_median_household_income_1967_-_2011.PNG/800px-US_real_median_household_income_1967_-_2011.PNG
I would suspect that the size of the household unit has declined somewhat over the last half century, which could mean that income is available to support fewer people.
Gardenarian
10-23-15, 2:30pm
I would suspect that the size of the household unit has declined somewhat over the last half century, which could mean that income is available to support fewer people.
Good point, and now most families have 2 wage earners.
ApatheticNoMore
10-23-15, 2:31pm
There was probably a lot of poverty in 1965. Wasn't it about that time Bobby Kennedy was doing his "other America" tours in areas of real and serious poverty, genuine hunger etc..
Still it is hard to get beyond the record homelessness problem visible everyday on the streets, no matter how many statistics get thrown around.
There was probably a lot of poverty in 1965. Wasn't it about that time Bobby Kennedy was doing his "other America" tours in areas of real and serious poverty, genuine hunger etc..
Still it is hard to get beyond the record homelessness problem visible everyday on the streets, no matter how many statistics get thrown around.
It's only statistics and not solid anecdote, but according to this homelessness has been declining.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/08/the-astonishing-decline-of-homelessness-in-america/279050/
Ultralight
10-23-15, 2:48pm
I think that it might be worth it to reexamine what it really means to be homeless.
A person can be without a house or an apartment or a condo but still have food, healthcare, friends, clean water, and a place to shower too.
People live in vans and are happy: http://www.cheaprvliving.com/
People live in cars and are happy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PCwnCC5Sw0
People live in tents and are happy: http://www.businessinsider.com/ultraromance-bike-camping-free-spirit-does-not-like-work-2015-7
ApatheticNoMore
10-23-15, 2:52pm
It's only statistics and not solid anecdote
it's not anecdote, statistics show that locally homeless has increased a lot lately. It's the evidence of my eyes backed by data which by the way is not called anecdote. National stats are really an entirely separate issue as one doesn't live nationally. There is something about seeing so much abject poverty on a daily basis ...
Williamsmith
10-23-15, 4:48pm
I think that it might be worth it to reexamine what it really means to be homeless.
A person can be without a house or an apartment or a condo but still have food, healthcare, friends, clean water, and a place to shower too.
People live in vans and are happy: http://www.cheaprvliving.com/
People live in cars and are happy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PCwnCC5Sw0
People live in tents and are happy: http://www.businessinsider.com/ultraromance-bike-camping-free-spirit-does-not-like-work-2015-7
This sounds like a great commercial for communism....
"People live in work camps and are happy."
iris lilies
10-23-15, 5:13pm
Income levels are pretty inconsequential really. What is significant is the debt of younger adults. Student loan debt being the most offensive. Doesn't 6.8 % seem a bit abusive to you? ....
Not really. My mortgage was nearly at a rate of 12%. That taught me not to get into debt like that again, and I haven't.
Should I prefer that Nanny G take more from the rich to give to me, the poor person who [was stupid enough, like everyone else at the time] signed up for that mortgage? Do I really need someone to protect me from myself?
Ultralight
10-23-15, 5:32pm
This sounds like a great commercial for communism....
"People live in work camps and are happy."
Obviously you did not check those websites or watch those videos. haha
Ultralight
10-23-15, 5:34pm
Not really. My mortgage was nearly at a rate of 12%. That taught me not to get into debt like that again, and I haven't.
Should I prefer that Nanny G take more from the rich to give to me, the poor person who [was stupid enough, like everyone else at the time] signed up for that mortgage? Do I really need someone to protect me from myself?
How far do you take this though?
Not really. My mortgage was nearly at a rate of 12%. That taught me not to get into debt like that again, and I haven't.
Should I prefer that Nanny G take more from the rich to give to me, the poor person who [was stupid enough, like everyone else at the time] signed up for that mortgage? Do I really need someone to protect me from myself?
But housing prices tend to fall when mortgage rates go up because ultimately it's the monthly pyment that matters. With student loans proliferating the opposite has occured with tuition.
Whatever happened to usury laws? I say we bring them back.
iris lilies
10-23-15, 6:30pm
Whatever happened to usury laws? I say we bring them back.why do you think they don't exist? That's regulated on a state level. To me it's a flip of a coin why one rate is ok but another is not.
Why do you (the generic you) know what loan rate is best for me? What if I really NEED some money and my ability to payback is high risk, yet someone is willing to lend it to me at a higher-than-you-think-acceptable rate? Why do YOU get to decide my terms of business?
It is a middle class value, to borrow money at an acceptable rate. That "acceptable rate" varies and is regulated by politicians voted in and maintained by middle class culture. In street culture rates are higher. So, who are you to look down on users in the street for using unregulated lenders?
think about how the aristocracy looks down on us little people with credit card debt and car loans. We are smug in our comfort zone of "reasonable" rates, no usury excess for us! We are intelligent consumers. Yet the uber rich think we are idiots to pay ANY interest AT ALL, or at minimum you borrow from the family trust at a nominal rate.
It's all relative, valuing the cost of money. It's about values, usually class driven, sometimes intellectually analyzed, but likely emotional.
i intend this to address UL's question as well.
Whatever happened to usury laws? I say we bring them back.
The bankruptcy bill a few years ago did away with them. Or at least did away with the ones that interfered with banks profit. Like the ability to use bankruptcy on student loans. Perhaps if Trump becomes president he'll teach the students how to work bankruptcy the way he has. Or better yet, if only the little guy could do like the mega banks and not just declare bankruptcy, but get bailed out when things go wrong...
JaneV2.0
10-24-15, 11:19am
So we're all OK that the current system has, over time, evolved so that every advantage goes to the very rich, with more and more stumbling blocks (FICO scores, student loans, insurance- dominated health care) to keep the rest of us in our place. I'm convinced that greed is the dominant value in what passes for culture here. Other countries seem to regard a well-educated population (for example) as an investment in their future; we think of our students as a herd of cash cows.
Ultralight
10-24-15, 11:24am
I'm convinced that greed is the dominant value in what passes for culture here..
I could not agree more! Sad state of affairs.
bekkilyn
10-24-15, 11:25am
So we're all OK that the current system has, over time, evolved so that every advantage goes to the very rich, with more and more stumbling blocks (FICO scores, student loans, insurance- dominated health care) to keep the rest of us in our place. I'm convinced that greed is the dominant value in what passes for culture here. Other countries seem to regard a well-educated population (for example) as an investment in their future; we think of our students as a herd of cash cows.
We've been trained well in our cultural brainwashing....
I'm with you on this one, Jane. It's absolutely not okay. Sometimes I have to really look deep to find anything of any real value remaining in our culture...or what passes for it as you suggested.
rodeosweetheart
10-24-15, 11:31am
I think greed works both ways. A student with massive student loan debt might be thought to be greedy, to borrow money for something with no clear way to pay it back. Same is true for someone who takes on a big mortgage, when financial condition is shaky.
My husband's step mother borrowed heavily on their house in Southern California when the market was ballooning. They lost the house, and were angry at being foreclosed on--but they borrowed a lot of money on that house and spent it on things other than housing, including a lot of travel.
Maybe there is greed on both sides. . .
Greed is certainly modeled for us at every level. Remember "Greed is good."
... and now most families have 2 wage earners.
Needs to be emphasized. Two parents, both working outside the home, is what has increased the *household* income. Wages have been relatively stagnant. So on top of paying for child care that was previously done by the stay at home spouse, households are expected to fully fund their own retirement, their every-increasing health insurance and healthcare costs, plus buy a home in a good school district or else pay for private school.
None of that was the norm when I grew up in the 50's and 60's with a stay at home mom and a dad who supported all 8 of us. We had a tiny working class home and used cars but were financially getting by okay. He never made more than $11,000/year and retired to AZ with a pension and health care for himself and my mom.
My tuition and materials at a state college cost $500 a year (that I could pay for myself, working part time), good insurance was provided gratis by my employer (and considered a fair part of a compensation package), money saved earned actual interest, and my first house was perfectly affordable. Things have changed financially, and not in a good way.
iris lilies
10-24-15, 1:54pm
My tuition and materials at a state college cost $500 a year (that I could pay for myself, working part time), good insurance was provided gratis by my employer (and considered a fair part of a compensation package), money saved earned actual interest, and my first house was perfectly affordable. Things have changed financially, and not in a good way.
I figured out how much it would cost me to get the same graduate degree I have today, at today's prices, and living the way I lived. It would cost $18,000 today. I don't know how much my degree cost in 1980's dollars, but I consider $18,000 for a graduate degree that propels me into the workforce to be eminently reasonable.
Why people have to borrow $35,000 - $50,000 for this type of degree, and they do, is utterly beyond me. But greed is one reason. They need to live in a 2BR apartment, drive a newish car, and have cell phones, gym memberships, restaurant meals out 3x weekly is all part of the new graduate student lifestyle and baby that cost $$$.
I lived in a dorm. I had no car. I sold plasma for beer and cigarette money. It was a simple life, and I enjoyed it.
Also, I find the excess campus amenities out there now, the huge sports complexes and gym complexes, to be ridiculous examples of excess. That is one reason why education costs have gone up. Certainly easy access to borrowed money is another.
rodeosweetheart
10-24-15, 2:18pm
I figured out how much it would cost me to get the same graduate degree I have today, at today's prices, and living the way I lived. It would cost $18,000 today. I don't know how much my degree cost in 1980's dollars, but I consider $18,000 for a graduate degree that propels me into the workforce to be eminently reasonable.
Why people have to borrow $35,000 - $50,000 for this type of degree, and they do, is utterly beyond me. But greed is one reason. They need to live in a 2BR apartment, drive a newish car, and have cell phones, gym memberships, restaurant meals out 3x weekly is all part of the new graduate student lifestyle and baby that cost $$$.
I lived in a dorm. I had no car. I sold plasma for beer and cigarette money. It was a simple life, and I enjoyed it.
Also, I find the excess campus amenities out there now, the huge sports complexes and gym complexes, to be ridiculous examples of excess. That is one reason why education costs have gone up. Certainly easy access to borrowed money is another.
Right, the colleges are certainly not spending it on faculty salaries. As an adjunct 34 years ago, I made 500 dollars more in actual dollars than I get now teaching same class as an adjunct. Not adjusted dollars, actual dollars. With over 60% of the classes taught by adjuncts who receive no benefits and make about 6-10 dollars an hour for their work, I think whole generations of students are being cheated, as is the workforce.
House prices are the same racket--they have gone up because of easy access to borrowed money. We lived very close to the bone when we bought a foreclosure several years ago--no central heat for 2 years until we paid off all debt and had more money coming in. Now, the younger generation seems to want "move in condition" and be willing to take on a lot of mortgage debt, with the misconception that it is "cheap money."
I think because we lived so lean, and did not do the fun things that we saw others doing with HELOC loans, we particularly resent the idea that "the rich bastards deserve to have their money taken away from them."
Lots of hard work and deprivation went into saving that money.
I read somewhere that my alma mater is charging $10K a year. Maybe that's out of state tuition. But it's far more than an adjustment for inflation would be.
Needs to be emphasized. Two parents, both working outside the home, is what has increased the *household* income. Wages have been relatively stagnan.
And when you look at Abe's chart of household income it's only gone from 45k in 1970 to 45k today. I assume that 1970 had way less 2 income families. I'd be curious to see a chart of individual income during that time frame. I suspect it's gone down quite a bit during that time and the only dpreason households haven't completely imploded is because of more families with both adults working.
I'd be curious to see a chart of individual income during that time frame. I suspect it's gone down quite a bit during that time
Wages, in constant dollars, have been pretty flat from 1965 through today.
Key there is "in constant dollars".
This infographic sums it up nicely:
http://41.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m66tj9Ot1Q1r4k4dho1_r5_1280.png
Ultralight
10-24-15, 7:18pm
Two parents, both working outside the home, is what has increased the *household* income.
Who is raising their kids?
Who is raising their kids?
Depends on how much money they have to pay for childcare. As someone who was a kid during the big change from mom raising the kids to random strangers raising the kids I can remember my parents lamenting whether it was a good thing for families to have two incomes. Personally I'm glad my parents were financially able to have mom stay home.
This infographic sums it up nicely:
http://41.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m66tj9Ot1Q1r4k4dho1_r5_1280.png
Yes it does. Investing in the next generation shouldrank as one of the most important things society spends money on. Over the last several decades we've obviously decided that it's not.
I figured out how much it would cost me to get the same graduate degree I have today, at today's prices, and living the way I lived. It would cost $18,000 today. I don't know how much my degree cost in 1980's dollars, but I consider $18,000 for a graduate degree that propels me into the workforce to be eminently reasonable.
Why people have to borrow $35,000 - $50,000 for this type of degree, and they do, is utterly beyond me. But greed is one reason. They need to live in a 2BR apartment, drive a newish car, and have cell phones, gym memberships, restaurant meals out 3x weekly is all part of the new graduate student lifestyle and baby that cost $$$.
I lived in a dorm. I had no car. I sold plasma for beer and cigarette money. It was a simple life, and I enjoyed it.
Also, I find the excess campus amenities out there now, the huge sports complexes and gym complexes, to be ridiculous examples of excess. That is one reason why education costs have gone up. Certainly easy access to borrowed money is another.
Yea, that easy access to borrowed money is a real problem. And its far worse more blatant now that the banks know the debt won't go away in BK court. Our primary goal in latter stage child rearing was to get all three through college (undergrad) with no debt. We were lucky to have been in a position to do that. After his graduation we found out DS took out student loans for at least the last 3 of his 7 year university career, obviously without any need for us to cosign. In his defense he moved to CA and spent a few years going part time to community college and establishing residency before he dove in to a full university schedule. Anyway, he borrowed money to live the life in La Jolla, CA where his school was located, not because he needed the funds for school or basic living expenses. His gf, and soon to be wife, has a trust fund that wasn't huge, but was plenty to allow her to live very comfortably and do a lot of fun things without working her way through school. Needless to say DS didn't have that so he borrowed to keep up with Miss Jones. Now he bitches about the debt and I get to remind him how foolish it was to live large on borrowed money. Also needless to say that he's on his own to pay those loans back. Hopefully it bought him with $50K of common sense going forward, but its still mind boggling that a bank would lend that kind of money to a kid in school with no assets and a part time job. Makes it pretty obvious that they know they have the rest of his life to get it back.
Yes it does. Investing in the next generation shouldrank as one of the most important things society spends money on. Over the last several decades we've obviously decided that it's not.
+1
Zoe Girl
10-26-15, 11:03am
Who is raising their kids?
Me! and the school. I know we have this wonderful idea about it only being parents with kids but there are some great programs and people out there to create that village that raises a child. Now there is the problem that families on a limited income have a hard time getting high quality and child care workers are often very low paid. So that gap creates a lot of issues, but high quality care is a wonderful thing that can support families. I stayed home for years due to my kids being sick a lot. I think it would have helped me in various ways to be able to work outside and use other parts of my being!
When my parents were young and first married (1950's), my Dad, with only a GED, made enough money to own a house and allow my Mom to stay at home. He didn't have a fancy white collar job either. That scenario does not happen today. A high school graduate working full time at a minimum wage job (or even a couple of dollars above minimum) can barely afford to pay rent on a one bedroom apartment. I'd hardly say that's a spending problem. It's a everything-has-increased-in-price-except-wages problem. Minimum wage jobs are only meant to be for high school and college students (as most conservative politicians say)? Tell that to my husband (48) who has a masters degree and has to work two part time low wage jobs to equate one full time one because its impossible to find higher paying "career" jobs here. I've worked at my job (office job) for 13 years and only this year finally hit $15.00/hr. We're fortunate that we live in a state that has one of the lowest costs of living in the country, otherwise we'd be screwed financially. And to hint that we're lazy and it's our own fault for making so little really makes me see red.
another +1.........this is what I also see.
Williamsmith
10-27-15, 10:08pm
The American Dream is still alive and well.....as long as you realize it is built on the principle of ever increasing debt. The title should read....End of America. Our standard of living is being reduced daily. We have a right to be worried about the fiscal irresponsibility that is causing our indebtedness to increase.
Congress has just agreed in principle to raise the debt limits on our credit card so that we can continue our spendthrift ways. We are debt addicts. The Baby Boomers, of which I am counted, will force us to that realization that we have not saved up for a rainy day. In fact, we have laughed in the face of an oncoming category 5 hurricane.
Healthcare needs a dramatic change, not just the screwed up facelift Obamacare provided. Our taxes need to get realistic.....it's going to take some pitching in from everybody and the more you have benefited from previous tax loopholes the more you should be chipping in. The military needs to be brought back to a level where we can mount a vigorous defense but not one that punishes other countries for being in our way of manifest destiny. And the stupid Citizens United must be reversed so that corporate money does not influence the rules of the game. Glass Steagle needs reinstated so that banks and Wall Street investment entities don't get too big. And the five largest banks need to be busted up.
Or maybe just a hunter and gatherer subsistence life in Alaska with a few good books might do the trick.
Ultralight
10-28-15, 7:32am
The American Dream is still alive and well.....as long as you realize it is built on the principle of ever increasing debt. The title should read....End of America. Our standard of living is being reduced daily. We have a right to be worried about the fiscal irresponsibility that is causing our indebtedness to increase.
Congress has just agreed in principle to raise the debt limits on our credit card so that we can continue our spendthrift ways. We are debt addicts. The Baby Boomers, of which I am counted, will force us to that realization that we have not saved up for a rainy day. In fact, we have laughed in the face of an oncoming category 5 hurricane.
Healthcare needs a dramatic change, not just the screwed up facelift Obamacare provided. Our taxes need to get realistic.....it's going to take some pitching in from everybody and the more you have benefited from previous tax loopholes the more you should be chipping in. The military needs to be brought back to a level where we can mount a vigorous defense but not one that punishes other countries for being in our way of manifest destiny. And the stupid Citizens United must be reversed so that corporate money does not influence the rules of the game. Glass Steagle needs reinstated so that banks and Wall Street investment entities don't get too big. And the five largest banks need to be busted up.
You sound like some kind of liberal! ;)
I agree with you a lot.
I used to be a total spendthrift and went into various forms of debt -- some tiny and some absolutely mountainous.
I wonder what can change people's minds about debt? When I talk to people about debt they just think of it as a fact of life. Or they note that it is not ideal, but say it is only temporary "until ________."
After "_______" they will be out of debt and ahead of the game. But our economic system -- and probably more largely -- they themselves keep moving the finish line farther away.
Thoughts?
Well they have to increase the debt ceiling or risk defaulting on our loans for money we have already spent. That's the thing. The debt and the deficit and how we got here are really worth knowing. The deficit is how much we spend each year over what we take in. The debt is an accumulation of these yearly deficits. When Clinton left a deficit surplus to Bush, that means we were spending less than we were taking in. This is good cause then we can start paying down the debt.
Unfortunately, Bush slashed what we were taking in with massive tax cuts (mostly to the top percent) then started two wars using hinky bookkeeping. He refused to put this major (an understatement) expense in the yearly budget. So, on paper it looked like he was sort of OK (tax breaks and all) but in reality he was increasing the deficit by a huge margin.
Well, all that overage went to the debt. This is why we have a huge debt. See, government doesn't start and stop with each new President. When Obama took office, the country was in a free fall, burst housing bubbles and major industries on the brink of failure (auto). President was paddling as fast as he could to rescue the country and keep us from collapsing. Of course we still had to pay for these wars we were engaged in. War did not stop Jan. 20th after all, and all the money spent on the 19th had to be spent on the 21st. Plus there were still those tax breaks that reduced what we took in anyway without the added costs of wars and such.
Yes, he did need to save the auto industry. And all those who said let them die either didn't live through the collapse of the steel industry or had very short memories. Or were unable to see past their noses. Or just wanted another major industry to die simply because they didn't like Obama. (this last group I don't like to think about but they are the same crowd who threaten the country with default, essentially holding a gun to our heads, every time there is a debt ceiling increase)
I actually agree with your opinion Williamsmith on most of what you say. We need to move beyond 'God, Guns and Gays' and get back to just American business.
Universal healthcare, Citizens United overturned, Climate Change acknowledged and plans of action discussed, real tax reform as in Stuff costs so how do we pay for it (hint-it isn't more tax cuts to the wealthy, or anyone else for that matter)
I still believe in the American dream. It may not look like the 50's version of the Dream, but I don't look much like I did in the 50's and neither does the country. We just need to agree to stop squabbling about really really stupid stuff, and really work together. OK, well, maybe it isn't the American Dream that's gone away but the American ideal. When Republicans run on vilifying anyone who dares to cross the isle to work with the other party (oh the horrors!), this will never happen.
Ultralight
10-29-15, 4:26pm
New American Dream: "Work in retail, get an apartment with a roommate, pay for your Obamacare."
iris lilies
10-29-15, 4:32pm
Damn, I miss PDQ XYX around here. He would remind us GW Bush is not the
Prez any more. Get over it, Peggy.
Seriously PDQ if you read here find a way to shoot me an email messag to let me know how you are doing.
Wages, in constant dollars, have been pretty flat from 1965 through today.
Key there is "in constant dollars".
That is a good point. I don't suppose there is a good metric for rising expectations outstripping real wages or productivity.
Damn, I miss PDQ XYX around here. He would remind us GW Bush is not the
Prez any more. Get over it, Peggy.
Seriously PDQ if you read here find a way to shoot me an email messag to let me know how you are doing.PDQ registered here three years ago. I sent him a welcome back greeting and told him I was looking forward to him jumping into the discussions. He replied that he thought he'd just be a lurker this time around and, to date, hasn't made a single post. I'm with you in hoping he's still checking in and would love to see him participate again.
Damn, I miss PDQ XYX around here. He would remind us GW Bush is not the
Prez any more. Get over it, Peggy.
While you are correct regarding the thankful fact that GWB is no longer prez, the reality is that we're still suffering the ramifications of that dreadful supreme court decision appointing him president.
Damn, I miss PDQ XYX around here. He would remind us GW Bush is not the
Prez any more. Get over it, Peggy.
Seriously PDQ if you read here find a way to shoot me an email messag to let me know how you are doing.
Yeah, well, the problem is, we are still paying for his mistakes. Again, the world doesn't start and stop with each election. What he did is still affecting us. We are still embroiled in the mid-east, and probably will be for the foreseeable future. We turned that place into rubble. We can't just say "Never mind" and walk away.
We are still constrained by his tax cuts to the wealthy. We are still healing relations from his deplorable international diplomacy.
And those who lost family due to his lies about Iraq? They will never heal. They will never 'get over it". It's pretty callous to suggest they 'get over it' simply because there was an election and some would rather just 'forget' the damage this man and his handlers did.
The country is just now, finally, climbing out of the hole he drove us into. The economy is looking up, job numbers are good, consumer confidence is good, gas prices are down and optimism is up. It took many years, but the minute we forget, or 'get over it', is the minute we repeat the mistakes.
It's only been 7 years. Are we really that shallow (or forgetful) that we should 'get over it'?
Williamsmith
10-30-15, 6:31am
Yeah, well, the problem is, we are still paying for his mistakes. Again, the world doesn't start and stop with each election. What he did is still affecting us. We are still embroiled in the mid-east, and probably will be for the foreseeable future. We turned that place into rubble. We can't just say "Never mind" and walk away.
We are still constrained by his tax cuts to the wealthy. We are still healing relations from his deplorable international diplomacy.
And those who lost family due to his lies about Iraq? They will never heal. They will never 'get over it". It's pretty callous to suggest they 'get over it' simply because there was an election and some would rather just 'forget' the damage this man and his handlers did.
The country is just now, finally, climbing out of the hole he drove us into. The economy is looking up, job numbers are good, consumer confidence is good, gas prices are down and optimism is up. It took many years, but the minute we forget, or 'get over it', is the minute we repeat the mistakes.
It's only been 7 years. Are we really that shallow (or forgetful) that we should 'get over it'?
The fact that you and I can look at the same set of circumstances and see two different things both amuses me and troubles me.
Bush 43 was handed a money surplus and spent all of it and more on military actions while at the same time conveniently failing to explain to the American people how much the war was costing ( but how much his friends in the affiliated war machine were making) by collecting taxes to pay for it. So more debt for the people actually fighting the war when they got home. Bringing them home we finally got to see what a mess was made of both sides lives and futures. But now hes gone, painting self portraits of his toes in a bathtub. No wonder he doesn't show his face in public anymore.
However, our current version of leadership has been divide and conquer. No fiscal responsibility here either. All the opportunities in the world to make a difference regarding our nations biggest threat....our debt. Not climate change......not urban thuggery.......not white men seething mental illness gun toting.......not the keystone pipeline.....not shovel readiness.......not Cuban relations.......not poking sticks at Russia.......not immigration.......all problems but the debt will takes us down hard and will take us down for good. What has been done to mitigate our debt. The land of the free is a joke.
We are not a country prepared for a threat like the calling in of our debts by our debtors. We are soft altogether, fight our wars by proxy with cruise missiles and drones, invoke financial ruin on other countries to get our way, our system of food distribution is just a few days from catastrophe, our transportation relies on cheap oil, our economy on easy credit.
The country is not just climbing out of the hole Bush 43 dug us.......Obama has handed everyone a shovel and told us to dig deeper. The economic numbers are imaginative accounting meant to shed favorable light on Obamas legacy. Consumer confidence is laughable........it is built on buy now let the kids pay later. 0% interest is the only way you can nudge a consumer into buying anything. Gas prices have been engineered downward by our friends the Saudis to piss off Putin. The same friends our buddies in the CIA enlisted as "freedom fighters" taught how to be terrorists and then allowed them to turn on our own people. Optimism is up?.......OMG, can I have a little of that dope you are smoking, it must be some good shit.
Neither party has cornered the market on stupidity here. The only question is.....are they really that dumb or ......
Ultralight
10-30-15, 6:56am
Maybe a paradigm shift is needed. One that moves away from a more traditional American dream and toward something very different.
Thoughts?
catherine
10-30-15, 7:23am
Maybe a paradigm shift is needed. One that moves away from a more traditional American dream and toward something very different.
Thoughts?
Maybe you would enjoy this website: The Center for the New American Dream. They have interesting thoughts and resources:
Here's the link on their site to "Redefining the Dream"
https://www.newdream.org/programs/redefining-the-dream
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=lcYqsbpbRTU
Ultralight
10-30-15, 7:25am
Maybe you would enjoy this website: The Center for the New American Dream. They have interesting thoughts and resources:
Here's the link on their site to "Redefining the Dream"
https://www.newdream.org/programs/redefining-the-dream
I have heard of that, though (surprisingly?) I have not checked it out.
Thanks for link. I am looking it over now.
People keep referring to "The American Dream" as if it were some sort of standard benchmark, usually in terms of how it isn't being realized. I wonder if it isn't a lot more subjective than that; maybe to the point where we're not really talking about the same thing. Is it living on a farm or freestanding house you own yourself? Is it a lifestyle arbitrated by government and guaranteed at some level by taxpayers? Is it a level playing field where you can succeed or fail on your own merits? Is it about dignity rather than economics? Is it more about equality than it is about freedom (I've heard it said that freedom is the primary cause of inequality)?
Is the American Dream just a straw man we put out there to argue for our individual aspirations against what we see to be the obstacles?
Ultralight
10-30-15, 12:16pm
People keep referring to "The American Dream" as if it were some sort of standard benchmark, usually in terms of how it isn't being realized. I wonder if it isn't a lot more subjective than that; maybe to the point where we're not really talking about the same thing. Is it living on a farm or freestanding house you own yourself? Is it a lifestyle arbitrated by government and guaranteed at some level by taxpayers? Is it a level playing field where you can succeed or fail on your own merits? Is it about dignity rather than economics? Is it more about equality than it is about freedom (I've heard it said that freedom is the primary cause of inequality)?
Is the American Dream just a straw man we put out there to argue for our individual aspirations against what we see to be the obstacles?
The house, the garage, the 3 kids, and the cars have never had much appeal to me and they continue to look more like a pit full of vipers than a dream, in my eyes anyway.
I mostly just want more free time. That is my dream, as an "American."
The house, the garage, the 3 kids, and the cars have never had much appeal to me and they continue to look more like a pit full of vipers than a dream, in my eyes anyway.
I mostly just want more free time. That is my dream, as an "American."
It could be that. It could be life as a perpetual grad student, artist or subsistence farmer. It could be a life of service or a life of self-indulgence. It could be a house, car and kids in a decent private school. It could be a corner office or your name on a building. It could be an Alpha Romeo Spider Veloce or Harley Davidson Flathead.
I think sometimes the various aspirations come into conflict when we feel we don't have the means to make them happen or resent being called on to subsidize other people's aspirations.
People keep referring to "The American Dream" as if it were some sort of standard benchmark, usually in terms of how it isn't being realized. I wonder if it isn't a lot more subjective than that; maybe to the point where we're not really talking about the same thing.
I'm convinced you're right. In my mind, The American Dream is only measurable or definable on an individual basis, as it has no physical manifestation. I think The American Dream is actually a potential, open to all in a land of opportunity, yet guaranteed to none.
catherine
10-30-15, 12:54pm
Is the American Dream just a straw man we put out there to argue for our individual aspirations against what we see to be the obstacles?
Really interesting question! When I think American Dream I think of Ellis Island and the multitudes of people who came to THIS country as opposed to any other to have their hopes fulfilled. Not sure if you could easily codify those hopes, but I think American Dream has been synonymous with "land of opportunity" and "freedom"--that freedom can be interpreted to be as much about building the next big store chain or being able to wander the country like Jack Kerouac.
I think people think of American Dream via any number of platitudes about "work hard and you'll succeed." I think it also represents the Melting Pot. No one is an outsider, because we all are outsiders. So, I think it means a lot of things to a lot of different people. Of course it hasn't always delivered on the promise, and it's often a symbol more than a reality, but it's still drawing lots of people here.
I'm convinced you're right. In my mind, The American Dream is only measurable or definable on an individual basis, as it has no physical manifestation. I think The American Dream is actually a potential, open to all in a land of opportunity, yet guaranteed to none.
I think you put it better than I did. My vision of the good life I wanted to achieve for myself thirty years ago is a great deal different from what I aspire to today, but the sense that it is possible to achieve my goals remains constant.
Really interesting question! When I think American Dream I think of Ellis Island and the multitudes of people who came to THIS country as opposed to any other to have their hopes fulfilled. Not sure if you could easily codify those hopes, but I think American Dream has been synonymous with "land of opportunity" and "freedom"--that freedom can be interpreted to be as much about building the next big store chain or being able to wander the country like Jack Kerouac.
I think people think of American Dream via any number of platitudes about "work hard and you'll succeed." I think it also represents the Melting Pot. No one is an outsider, because we all are outsiders. So, I think it means a lot of things to a lot of different people. Of course it hasn't always delivered on the promise, and it's often a symbol more than a reality, but it's still drawing lots of people here.
And that seity may be where the "dream" gets it's power over the imagination. Whether it's referred to hopefully, proudly, wistfully or contemptuously it seems to mean something different based on who's talking. But we still keep using it; and as you point out it has the power to get people to endure extraordinary risks and hardships to come here. I never hear people talk about the German Dream or the Bolivian Dream. It may because America puts a greater emphasis on the individual (rightly or wrongly) than the collective.
The Center for a New American Dream conducted a survey in 2014. It has the results for questions like, is the dream harder to realize, what are the barriers to achieving the dream, and what qualities constitute the American Dream. The 1800 survey contacts appear to be random, although the questions might be a little leading towards a less consumer based lifestyle. https://newdream.s3.amazonaws.com/19/d9/7/3866/NewDreamPollFinalAnalysis.pdf
The Center for a New American Dream conducted a survey in 2014. It has the results for questions like, is the dream harder to realize, what are the barriers to achieving the dream, and what qualities constitute the American Dream. The 1800 survey contacts appear to be random, although the questions might be a little leading towards a less consumer based lifestyle. https://newdream.s3.amazonaws.com/19/d9/7/3866/NewDreamPollFinalAnalysis.pdf
How can you measure progress toward something as chimerical as the "American Dream"? How do you measure the gap between dream and reality when all the respondents have a different dream? How do you go about "redefining the American Dream" when there are as many definitions as dreamers? This organization seems interested in moving us toward becoming a nation of Brooklyn Hipsters. I'm sure we could probably do a great deal worse, but is there any chance whatever that we would ever reach that level of consensus?
In my mind the problem with Utopian thinking is that it requires planing down the crooked timber of humanity for the required building material, and that will sooner or later involve coercion.
Ldalh, is it possible that you didn't read the survey? The measures for the American Dream according to the survey were, having personal freedom, having basic needs met, achieving one's potential, having enough free time, being in harmony with nature, and achieving affluence (in that order). Those seem pretty universal to me, although some are slightly intangible.
Ldalh, is it possible that you didn't read the survey? The measures for the American Dream according to the survey were, having personal freedom, having basic needs met, achieving one's potential, having enough free time, being in harmony with nature, and achieving affluence (in that order). Those seem pretty universal to me, although some are slightly intangible.
It was a composite of 1800 different dreams, with considerable variation. I'm curious about the 22% who didn't value personal freedom.
The country is not just climbing out of the hole Bush 43 dug us.......Obama has handed everyone a shovel and told us to dig deeper...
Neither party has cornered the market on stupidity here. The only question is.....are they really that dumb or ......
As we saw in the just passed budget bill it's a shovel that requires both parties to be able use it. They won't agree on anything else - but they will agree to use the shovel.
As we saw in the just passed budget bill it's a shovel that requires both parties to be able use it. They won't agree on anything else - but they will agree to use the shovel.
And it's a shovel that requires responsibility from both parties. it's easy to say "just cut the budget and stop spending" but not so easy, or responsible to do. What would you cut? Some trot out SS and Medicare and Food stamps, and other not all that expensive comparability programs to either really cut (not gonna happen) or scare us into stopping the cut talk.
I can think of a few areas to start that would really help without punishing the majority of Americans. How about stop supporting Israel. This should be a no brainier for the republicans since Israel has universal health care and the most lax abortion policies in the world. Guess who's paying for that? Us.
Let's stop farm subsidies. Sure your food bill will jump, but if you want to stop government spending, you gotta know it will come back in some other way.
Let's stop oil subsidies cause, well, why are we doing this in the first place?
Let's cut military spending. Here is an area where waste is really a problem as in do we really need yet another trillion dollar ship when we have plenty already? (now here is one of those areas where the politicians will try to scare us away from talks of cutting by saying sure, let's cut troop pay or medical care or some other military personnel spending area)
And many other areas where we can cut spending without damaging We the People.
On the other side, let's reinstate the taxes Bush cut. Let's tax churches (and allow each individually to apply for non-profit status) Let's close loopholes that allow businesses who benefit from American markets hide profits overseas to avoid taxes. And many more I can't think of right now.
More ideas?
It was a composite of 1800 different dreams, with considerable variation. I'm curious about the 22% who didn't value personal freedom.
I just thought it was an interesting snapshot of what Americans might be thinking. We've had a chance to voice our personal vision of what the American dream might be in the discussion, and whether it is harder to achieve, which is the basic topic of the discussion. The survey addresses a wider audience, and for that reason I found it interesting. I glanced through the survey protocol. The design probably would not stand up to the scrutiny of Gallop Poll scientist, but didn't appear to be too much out of line. So it is possibly just 1800 individual people as you say, or a representation of a much larger population, which is the intention of a small polling sample.
ApatheticNoMore
10-31-15, 3:53pm
The measures for the American Dream according to the survey were, having personal freedom, having basic needs met
hard to have much personal freedom without having basic needs, and I mean just that not smart phones etc. met, possibly they mean political freedom ...
achieving one's potential, having enough free time
hard to have any real sense of personal or political for that matter freedom with no free time either.
Really as for the American dream being harder to achieve, I'm more likely to learn toward things never were all that good in this country for many, there's always been a lot of poverty etc..
People do of course risk their lives to go many countries and of course very much including present day Germany, it's where all the Syrian refugees would like to end up probably, a very popular final destination, not that that is necessarily realistic for them all to live there of course.
People keep referring to "The American Dream" as if it were some sort of standard benchmark, usually in terms of how it isn't being realized. I wonder if it isn't a lot more subjective than that; maybe to the point where we're not really talking about the same thing. Is it living on a farm or freestanding house you own yourself? Is it a lifestyle arbitrated by government and guaranteed at some level by taxpayers? Is it a level playing field where you can succeed or fail on your own merits? Is it about dignity rather than economics? Is it more about equality than it is about freedom (I've heard it said that freedom is the primary cause of inequality)?
Is the American Dream just a straw man we put out there to argue for our individual aspirations against what we see to be the obstacles?
This is true. I think the American dream is something that we need to start at a base parameter then go from there. I think for the American dream the base is not just living hand to mouth. Making enough so you can pay your basic bills with a few discretionary bucks for whatever. (savings, summer vacations, hobbies, whatever says living to you) I'm not talking making a killing, but more than just subsistence living. With subsistence living, not only are you not able to save/enjoy some aspect of American Dream, but something as trivial as a car repair or necessary dental work can put you in debt that is almost impossible to dig yourself out of (considering your already subsistence living). Now add that to all the other little things that come up in day to day life and soon you are drowning. The deeper the water, the less chance you have of making it to shore. And when your entire family is floundering, for generations, the deeper the water becomes and the farther away the shore becomes.
I don't want to pretend i have the answers, cause i don't. i really don't. wish i did. but i can have empathy, and if that's all i can offer now, then that's it. And i can see policy that helps the situation, or hurts it. I try to vote for the policy that helps.
Williamsmith
10-31-15, 9:51pm
Seeing as how it is politicians who so fervently preach the gospel of the American Dream.....it is damned easy for any living breathing American to see the hypocrisy in their conjuring up spirits of the past poor who rose through the tattered ranks, sailed past the satisfied middle class, Cruised past the common rich and landed atop the heap of the 1%.
Like our dear friend and co-dreamer Donald Trump who had just the slimmest of chances to succeed with only a million dollar boost from his wealthy father. Now here is a man I can follow up the ladder of success through hard work and determination. Nose to the grindstone.....I get a bloody nose.
All one has to do is apply the simple formula for dreamers. Let's see.
1. Get a job. Preferably one that hasn't been outsourced yet, one that hasn't been eliminated by a robot, one that doesn't require going into ten years of debt to get a degree. But not a minimum wage one. And stay away from evil unions. Overtime, holiday pay, sick leave, defined benefit pensions and the like are for pussies.
2. Don't rely on any government subsidy. Government is the problem. Pull yourself up by the bootstraps and March onward and upward. However, big government is a good thing when it comes to the military. Or bailing out really disgusting bankers. You have to know when big government is good for you and when it is not. Usually, if it helps you acquire your dream....it's BAD. Your dream must be acquired through hard work.
3. Take responsibility for your own future. Save your own money. Give your hard earned cash to the Wall Street guys and they will make more of it for you. Enough that maybe you can retire at oh say....82. Of course, it's better for you to take the risk. It is your dream after all.
4. Never mind the benefits those ahead of you are getting. We can't afford to keep that going. Besides if you are truly working hard and wisely investing you won't need help paying your medical bills when you get older and you will have plenty to get by with without Social Security.
5. Your ascension through the social classes is dependent on government keeping the rules beneficial for the rich. THe more they make, the better your life will be. I know, it sounds funny that fewer and fewer should be getting richer and richer and somehow that all makes things for you better.and better..but hey, Milton Friedman said so ....so it must be true.
and so, just leave it to the rich....they will make sure you get rich too. Y'OK !
Seeing as how it is politicians who so fervently preach the gospel of the American Dream.....it is damned easy for any living breathing American to see the hypocrisy in their conjuring up spirits of the past poor who rose through the tattered ranks, sailed past the satisfied middle class, Cruised past the common rich and landed atop the heap of the 1%.
All one has to do is apply the simple formula for dreamers. Let's see.
[Snip]
and so, just leave it to the rich....they will make sure you get rich too. Y'OK !
+500
You know, up till now, I hadn't realized that I was a victim, that I and my progeny haven't actually achieved more than our parents and grandparents. I thought I was living the American Dream. I feel so silly!
You know, up till now, I hadn't realized that I was a victim, that I and my progeny haven't actually achieved more than our parents and grandparents. I thought I was living the American Dream. I feel so silly!
I don't think anyone is saying that you're not living the dream. I think the difference in perspective is that you seem to believe that it's entirely up to the individual whether they achieve it but others of us acknowledge that there are a lot of external realities that prevent many from realizing it. And also a lot of specifics of some people's lives that make it easier for them to achieve it. Just the fact that your parents and grandparents (and mine) achieved a level of the dream puts you (and me) miles ahead of many people.
Just as Peggy pointed out that each president doesn't start from zero, neither does each individual who is striving for the American Dream. Some start from plus 10 or plus 5000. Some also start from -10 or -5000. Government policy can do a lot towards leveling out those starting points so that as many people as possible can achieve the dream.
Williamsmith
11-1-15, 8:35am
The rules matter. We play board games. They all have rules because they matter. The rules give everybody as much of a fair chance to win as possible. And as we play the game, we follow the rules. The rules are there so that nobody gets to cheat, take short cuts, join in conspiracies, or otherwise make a mockery of the game. Some people love to change the rules in their favor to give them a better chance to win.
Marco Rubio just got endorsed by one of the biggest rule changers in the game. Paul Singer. Check him out. Hedge fund manager who got a 2 million dollar boost toward the American Dream when he started. Victimized whole countries with debt purchase and seizures of property and blackmail. The game just changed in favor of Rubio but how much of his soul will he have to sell to achieve the American Dream.......
The rules matter. We play board games.
I've often thought it's very interesting how close the game Monopoly is to real life, and not always in a good way. In other words, you start out the same, equal to other players (which of course, as jp1 points out, is NOT exactly real life). Then it's a combination of pure luck, plus a little strategy that puts you in a position of power/advantage vs. the other players. You build your hotels, which exacts a price on the other players. Someone starts amassing the money, while others lose. At the end, there's only one winner.
Monopoly is a zero sum game--while I don't believe life is that way necessarily, I do believe that, as Billie Holiday sang, "The rich get more, while the weak ones fade. Empty pockets don't ever make the grade." As LDAHL suggests in the comment about the individual vs. the community, how much of the American Dream is one of "winning" at the expense of other people? My personal opinion is that "unfettered capitalism"fosters a zero sum game like Monopoly, especially when laws like Citizen's United gives corporations Boardwalk and Park Place..
rodeosweetheart
11-1-15, 10:11am
I can certainly see the analogy, Catherine, but I don't see it that way, that we are limited that way in a zero-sum game. Monopoly boards are static; life is ever-changing, and humans are constantly developing and learning. So I guess I see much more opportunity than what would be had an endless round of Monopoly.
I can certainly see the analogy, Catherine, but I don't see it that way, that we are limited that way in a zero-sum game. Monopoly boards are static; life is ever-changing, and humans are constantly developing and learning. So I guess I see much more opportunity than what would be had an endless round of Monopoly.
True. If life was as simple and static as Monopoly someone surely would've gotten frustrated enough to throw the board in the air and we'd be playing a different game now.
I do think, though, that there is less opportunity today for a lot of people. My grandfather, born in 1903, was orphaned at a very young age. He was bounced around to various relatives who didn't particularly want him, so at about age 10 he found a job, quit elementary school and set out on his own. Despite having only a fourth or fifth grade education, and no familial support, he managed to create a middle class lifestyle, eventually marrying and having three kids, supporting them and his wife's parents all on his wages. Today his prospects for success would probably be a lot lower.
Williamsmith
11-2-15, 7:16am
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.
Sometimes it's harder and sometimes its easier. Its especially tough now for the unskilled or low-skilled. Is there a grand conspiracy out there "rigging the game"? I doubt that's any more true now than it ever was. I don't see the path to Utopia involving a muzzled and gelded form of capitalism. Will most, or even many achieve this inchoate "dream'? Possibly not, but that is the nature of dreams. Otherwise we'd have to call it the "Irrevocable American Guarantee".
Dispense with the bloviation of the social justice warriors and the pandering of political enthusiasts, and the key factors to achieving whatever your version of the grand cliche we call the "American Dream" seems to be:
1) Grow up in a stable and intact family.
2) Limit your sense of entitlement to what you can earn.
3) Ignore the people who want to hang the "victim" label on you. They aren't your friends.
4) Work hard in any situation you find yourself in. You aren't being paid to realize the power of your dreams.
5) Never stop learning.
6) Be lucky.
7) Some decent math and language skills certainly won't hurt.
8) Save part of what you earn, and invest cold-bloodedly for the very long term.
9) Don't let anyone else define success for you.
Personally, I think Your Money or Your Life is a reasonably reliable guide, once you scrape off the New Age candy coating. It's funny how seldom it seems to be mentioned here these days.
Sometimes it's harder and sometimes its easier. Its especially tough now for the unskilled or low-skilled. Is there a grand conspiracy out there "rigging the game"? I doubt that's any more true now than it ever was. I don't see the path to Utopia involving a muzzled and gelded form of capitalism. Will most, or even many achieve this inchoate "dream'? Possibly not, but that is the nature of dreams. Otherwise we'd have to call it the "Irrevocable American Guarantee".
I agree that its not necessarily more true now than its ever been. The "game" is structured to be rigged, its just a matter of which group is favored at any given time. Sometimes its the fastest, sometimes the strongest, occasionally its the smallest. Now it just happens to be the wealthiest. Once the rest of the group loses interest and/or realizes that type of asset hording isn't the path to nirvana favor will shift away from an extremely small group who's only real advantage is the ability to bribe someone else to do their bidding. If 7.125 billion people decide they have no need for what the few thousand folks currently on top have to offer and decide to work a little more locally (in general terms) the leverage of the wealthy could dissipate pretty quickly. Abstruse? Sure, but its a dream afterall! Does it actually need to make sense? I just hope we have a livable planet left when it comes true. That's Gregg's Non-State-Specific dream.
Williamsmith
11-2-15, 2:40pm
Sometimes it's harder and sometimes its easier. Its especially tough now for the unskilled or low-skilled. Is there a grand conspiracy out there "rigging the game"? I doubt that's any more true now than it ever was. I don't see the path to Utopia involving a muzzled and gelded form of capitalism. Will most, or even many achieve this inchoate "dream'? Possibly not, but that is the nature of dreams. Otherwise we'd have to call it the "Irrevocable American Guarantee".
Dispense with the bloviation of the social justice warriors and the pandering of political enthusiasts, and the key factors to achieving whatever your version of the grand cliche we call the "American Dream" seems to be:
1) Grow up in a stable and intact family.
2) Limit your sense of entitlement to what you can earn.
3) Ignore the people who want to hang the "victim" label on you. They aren't your friends.
4) Work hard in any situation you find yourself in. You aren't being paid to realize the power of your dreams.
5) Never stop learning.
6) Be lucky.
7) Some decent math and language skills certainly won't hurt.
8) Save part of what you earn, and invest cold-bloodedly for the very long term.
9) Don't let anyone else define success for you.
Personally, I think Your Money or Your Life is a reasonably reliable guide, once you scrape off the New Age candy coating. It's funny how seldom it seems to be mentioned here these days.
I want to challenge you on a few terms you slipped into your analysis ....."Utopia"......."muzzled and gelded form of Capitalism.
First Utopia. Perfect happiness and fulfillment, total unity or world peace. I myself and as far as I know no one else has suggested that a regulated form of capitalism could produce Utopia. Perhaps, it might hold cronyism and materialism, consumerism, idolism, greed, misappropriation, theft, bribery, usury, fraud, abuse, gluttony, and a host of other "limitations" that are inherent in capitalism....to a low roar. But not Utopia.
I would not suggest and neither do others who think like me that we cut the balls off of capitalism and tie its mouth shut so that it is rendered wholly ineffective. Perhaps the analogy of placing a bit in its mouth might be more appropriate so that at least we can steer, start and stop the tool we call capitalism. Otherwise, free marketers would have us hop up bareback and hold onto the mane for dear life. While it makes for an interesting ride, it usually does not end well.
I would not suggest and neither do others who think like me that we cut the balls off of capitalism and tie its mouth shut so that it is rendered wholly ineffective. Perhaps the analogy of placing a bit in its mouth might be more appropriate so that at least we can steer, start and stop the tool we call capitalism. Otherwise, free marketers would have us hop up bareback and hold onto the mane for dear life. While it makes for an interesting ride, it usually does not end well.
But take out the greed, competition and unequal outcomes, and it's not capitalism anymore. Why would anyone bother? Thinking people would put out the same level of effort without the same rewards and punishments certainly seems Utopian to me. We'd be reduced (to paraphrase Churchill) from complaining about the unequal sharing of blessings to complaining about the equal sharing of misery. I'll take the occasional obnoxious billionaire (the effrontery of that Singer guy, actually demanding Argentina honor it's bonds!) over the pinched self-righteousness of Elizabeth Warren anytime.
Williamsmith
11-2-15, 5:12pm
But take out the greed, competition and unequal outcomes, and it's not capitalism anymore. Why would anyone bother? We'd be reduced (to paraphrase Churchill) from complaining about the unequal sharing of blessings to complaining about the equal sharing of misery. I'll take the occasional obnoxious billionaire (the effrontery of that Singer guy, actually demanding Argentina honor it's bonds!) over the pinched self-righteousness of Elizabeth Warren anytime.
But take out the greed, competition and unequal outcomes, and it's not capitalism anymore. Why would anyone bother? We'd be reduced (to paraphrase Churchill) from complaining about the unequal sharing of blessings to complaining about the equal sharing of misery. I'll take the occasional obnoxious billionaire (the effrontery of that Singer guy, actually demanding Argentina honor it's bonds!) over the pinched self-righteousness of Elizabeth Warren anytime.
I won't protest your apparent abilities to to withstand obnoxious billionaires but have no time for self righteous politicians ( aren't all politicians self righteous)....
but I will ask that you consider the obnoxious billionaire we refer to as Singer as being even a little too obnoxious. So let's say you bought a car for $6300 and you took a loan out. Let's say that loan came due one day and you couldn't pay it. So in good faith, because unlike corporations you as an individual can not declare bankruptcy for this loan, you negotiate.
But you find out Mr. Singer has bought the bad debt off your prior lender. You do not realize he bought it for $480 but he did. Anyway, upon negotiating, you are advised that Mr. Singer now values your debt at $25,000. After all, there is interest that has accrued. You offer to pay Mr. Singer $2000 hoping he will be understanding that here is no way you will ever pay back four times the original value of the loan.
Instead of being understanding, Mr Singer sends representatives to your property and kidnaps your dog. He says he will give it back if you pay. You protest to the local district justice and get the dog back legally. Mr. Singer is not happy. So he sues you for the money you have in a life insurance plan. $1200.
Now, you were willing to pay him four times his investment on your debt but he wasn't satisfied because he is an obnoxious billionaire, and he didn't get to be that rich by being ethical. So after all his pissing around what does he get?
Knight to kings bishop three
I won't protest your apparent abilities to to withstand obnoxious billionaires but have no time for self righteous politicians ( aren't all politicians self righteous)....
but I will ask that you consider the obnoxious billionaire we refer to as Singer as being even a little too obnoxious. So let's say you bought a car for $6300 and you took a loan out. Let's say that loan came due one day and you couldn't pay it. So in good faith, because unlike corporations you as an individual can not declare bankruptcy for this loan, you negotiate.
But you find out Mr. Singer has bought the bad debt off your prior lender. You do not realize he bought it for $480 but he did. Anyway, upon negotiating, you are advised that Mr. Singer now values your debt at $25,000. After all, there is interest that has accrued. You offer to pay Mr. Singer $2000 hoping he will be understanding that here is no way you will ever pay back four times the original value of the loan.
Instead of being understanding, Mr Singer sends representatives to your property and kidnaps your dog. He says he will give it back if you pay. You protest to the local district justice and get the dog back legally. Mr. Singer is not happy. So he sues you for the money you have in a life insurance plan. $1200.
Now, you were willing to pay him four times his investment on your debt but he wasn't satisfied because he is an obnoxious billionaire, and he didn't get to be that rich by being ethical. So after all his pissing around what does he get?
Knight to kings bishop three
I don't see how refusing to take a massive haircut from the original bond terms demanded by a debtor is the same thing as simply multiplying the value of a loan just because they were purchased on the secondary market. And I have to say I admire the guy's chutzpah in trying to seize an Argentinian warship (which is quite a bit different from kidnapping a puppy).
And I have to say I admire the guy's chutzpah in trying to seize an Argentinian warship (which is quite a bit different from kidnapping a puppy).
Not as different as you might think, according to my friend Anthony who took the ARA Guerrico out of commission with handheld weapons during the initial invasion of South Georgia Island.
Not as different as you might think, according to my friend Anthony who took the ARA Guerrico out of commission with handheld weapons during the initial invasion of South Georgia Island.
But Singer did it with lawyers. A less reliable weapon.
Williamsmith
11-2-15, 7:00pm
Maybe we should talk about Singer and The country of Peru. Quite a juicy story that involves purchasing debt merely for the purpose of sueing the debtor, confiscation of aircraft, blackmail and ransom payments with profits of over 400%. All of which he paid not one cent of tax on. Chutzpah !! You ought to be gushing with admiration over that one.
do you think little Marco Rubio, who has had little Marco Rubio financial troubles himself, has given Singer his cell phone and email address? Or does Singer have to go through His campaign staff? Singer sure does like screwing with people. Countries full of people.
millerpet23
11-4-15, 5:35am
I still have mortgages on hold, not one but two. The interesting thing is that I still haven’t been into debt, and I used to manage them with the help of a mortgage solutions provider in Ontario called ********* Mortgage. My mortgage had fallen to even 13% once, and still I managed it somehow from going into debt.
Packratona!
11-8-15, 6:13pm
I think that it might be worth it to reexamine what it really means to be homeless.
A person can be without a house or an apartment or a condo but still have food, healthcare, friends, clean water, and a place to shower too.
People live in vans and are happy: http://www.cheaprvliving.com/
(http://www.cheaprvliving.com/)
People live in cars and are happy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PCwnCC5Sw0
People live in tents and are happy: http://www.businessinsider.com/ultraromance-bike-camping-free-spirit-does-not-like-work-2015-7
Nice links all; there are other options also...
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.