View Full Version : Is the American Dream dead?
Tonight on PBS.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/business-economy-financial-crisis/two-american-families/in-milwaukee-a-familys-struggle-for-survival/
From the website:
"In 1991, when Bill Moyers first began following the lives of Claude and Jackie Stanley, the parents of five had just been laid off from well-paying manufacturing jobs in Milwaukee.
They’ve been battling to keep from sliding into poverty ever since.
Two American Families (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/two-american-families/), a 90-minute FRONTLINE documentary premiering July 9, tells the Stanleys’ story — and that of another Milwaukee family, the Neumanns — all the way up to the present, and raises troubling questions about trends toward part-time, low-wage work in America.
In this excerpt from Two American Families, meet Claude and Jackie, now approaching retirement age, and their son, Keith, now grown.
“My heart goes out to that generation that was promised something from America, by America — that they would have a better life. And that’s not the case anymore,” Keith tells Moyers.
Bill Moyers will appear tonight (June 26) on The Colbert Report (http://www.colbertnation.com/) to discuss Two American Families. The documentary premieres July 9 on FRONTLINE (check local PBS listings (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/local-schedule/))."
iris lilies
7-9-13, 9:30pm
Tonight on PBS.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/business-economy-financial-crisis/two-american-families/in-milwaukee-a-familys-struggle-for-survival/
The last count I heard was 10 million illegal aliens staying here to get--something. Some kind of dream they've got, tied into living in this country.
Plus there are the millions of approved and legal entries from residents of other countries across the world. Something here is right. Or else they are wrong.
I think the American Dream is there for anyone willing to do what it takes to achieve it. It always has been and always will be.
The opportunity for prosperity and success for those willing to work for it can only be limited by outside forces exerting control over their lives. Most likely, a Democrat majority. ;)
The last count I heard was 10 million illegal aliens staying here to get--something. Some kind of dream they've got, tied into living in this country.
Plus there are the millions of approved and legal entries from residents of other countries across the world. Something here is right. Or else they are wrong.
It could be that something here IS right. Or maybe it's that something else in the country they came from is more wrong than here. Obviously the average US standard of living is still higher than lots of other countries. Nonetheless, the standard of living here is falling for lots of families, and in this era of globalization it will likely continue to fall until it reaches equilibrium with those countries.
iris lilies
7-9-13, 9:40pm
Obviously the average US standard of living is still higher than lots of other countries. ....
Obviously! yep.
Obviously! yep.
Not sure what your point is. Do you mean that since it is still better than a lot of other countries we shouldn't care that it's falling?
flowerseverywhere
7-9-13, 11:17pm
I think you should take the time to watch the show before commenting. It is very powerful and portrays people that really want to work and are having a tough time finding much beyond minimum wage. I thought it was very well done. Just today we heard from a friend in his fifties who has done everything right, saved in his 401K, paid off his house, stayed in a long term marriage, but as the years have gone by his job as well as his wives has stagnated and he has continued to go backwards. It is tough out there for a lot of good people. And by the way, they follow the families for years, through Bush, Clinton etc. so it is not political Alan.
I didn't see the show, but it would be interesting to take some percentages of things like affordable housing, home ownership, poverty, nutrition, and affordable health care as trend items rather than single out a small sample size. I would suspect things are not all that bad, but could be proven wrong. There have been some boom years and bust years over the last few decades and things seem to go in cycles rather than an overall decline.
I think the "American Dream" is a moving target with higher standards now than a couple or few decades ago when the average home size was much smaller and cell phones, computers, internet, and cable TV didn't exist.
It's on here past my bedtime, but I am hoping to see it online. Here's an amazing bit of history from the turn of the last century,pertinent to the convo here-
http://www.upworthy.com/these-images-by-one-photographer-shocked-the-world?c=ufb1
iris lilies
7-10-13, 12:03am
Not sure what your point is. Do you mean that since it is still better than a lot of other countries we shouldn't care that it's falling?
A measure, a single number, doesn't have much meaning without comparing it to something else.
The OP, PBS in this documentary, and I believe you, choose to compare the American experience to what once was. Assuming that you are correct (and I don't assume that) there is less opportunity here than once was in the days of yore.
I choose to compare the measure of the American experience to the experience elsewhere in many countries.
Here, it is what it is. To give the number meaning we can choose to use glass half full or glass half empty comparisons. Like most things in life, it's a choice.
I also think it's worthwhile to "care" about the American experience as measured in many ways, not just what once was.
gimmethesimplelife
7-10-13, 4:45am
This one is a really hard one for me as I never really believed in the American dream to begin with. This stance is not going to make me friends or influence people but there is a part of me that is relieved to see the America I know trickling upwards - constant fear, what ifs that never go away, no real security, always having a few bags packed just in case.....This is not the America I am currently living (and I am grateful for that) but once you know the America I speak of you never really have all that much faith in the general idea of it. That being said, perhaps in a way there is some good here. With less consumption, the planet will have some breathing room to heal or at least not slide further down into environmental degradation so quickly. And honestly, I have read that with our standing of living going down, the standard of living in some Asian countries is going up to the point where life is more dignified.....I have a hard time begrudging other humans that. And if things keep sliding in the US, who knows, maybe one day the government will be overthrown, though I have a hard time of seeing that happening. There would need to be more hunger, more fear, more police brutality, and more stripping away of constitutional rights. I think with many people it might be something akin to in Gone With The Wind when the townspeople in Atlanta could first hear the sounds of battle, the cannon in the distance, some people woke up and smelled the coffee and realized that the war was lost. I don't think we are at that point yet, or something equivalent to that. But if things keep going the way they are......Rob
flowerseverywhere
7-10-13, 8:03am
I really think you should watch the show. The purpose of the show is not to say this is the way it is for everyone, or the way it will be. It simply documents two families who over the last twenty years have seen the loss of decent paying manufacturing jobs shipped overseas replaced by minimum wage, low benefit jobs that rise and fall with the economic tide. These are people who lived in modest homes and weren't trying to take European vacations, build fancy new mcmansions etc. I used to feel like some posters here as I was going along my middle class life but I have seen too much. And all these people who have had to take lower paying jobs or be out of work for years will enjoy a much smaller social security check than those who were able to keep good paying jobs. We all can't be engineers, nurses etc. And even many of them have watched their benefits and high wages slip away. the timespan of the show was through many administrations so it was not political, just the reality that many people face that worked hard to try to make a middle class life for their family.
I watched this show last night and was struck by the work ethic of the two families shown - salt of the earth, as they were called. Nevertheless, I also saw some bad choices made along the paths of their lives that contributed to their stagnant economic situations. The oldest son of the larger family was the only one to get a college education and the only one to earn a live-able wage. It was eye-opening for me as it made me realize how very fortunate dh and I are to have the income we do without having completed college or other specialized education. Other than entrepreneurs, we are probably the last generation who can pull that off. We were in that poverty mindset and situation once as young marrieds and it is not a pleasant place to be. I believe the opportunity is always there to advance but other factors cancel that out in so many cases.
A measure, a single number, doesn't have much meaning without comparing it to something else.
The OP, PBS in this documentary, and I believe you, choose to compare the American experience to what once was. Assuming that you are correct (and I don't assume that) there is less opportunity here than once was in the days of yore.
I choose to compare the measure of the American experience to the experience elsewhere in many countries.
Here, it is what it is. To give the number meaning we can choose to use glass half full or glass half empty comparisons. Like most things in life, it's a choice.
I also think it's worthwhile to "care" about the American experience as measured in many ways, not just what once was.
I agree, IL. And, I am one of the many whose parents were born in the right time & place to have benefitted from the boom years. I have compared my life trajectory to theirs, and found it lacking. In the 80's, I lived in Guatemala. Wow... Eye opening, to say the least. My life is luxurious, and I live in palatial circumstances comparatively.
My parents have assisted all three of their kids with a college education, down payments on our mortgages, and periodic financial assistance over time as needed. We have been damn lucky. Now, they need that extra cash, both being nearly 86.
It was hard for me to not have a savings account for my stepkids' college expenses. I hate seeing them go into debt to get an education. I know one couple in my very wide circle of friends who paid for their child's private high school, private college education & has $$ stashed for her graduate degree, as well as having their own long term care policy. They are a couple with both substantial inherited money, and long term annual incomes of over 200K.
I don't think we'll ever get back to the days that were my parents years, when one income supported 5 people, a house, and two cars. That era was anomalous.
I really think you should watch the show. The purpose of the show is not to say this is the way it is for everyone, or the way it will be. It simply documents two families who over the last twenty years have seen the loss of decent paying manufacturing jobs shipped overseas replaced by minimum wage, low benefit jobs that rise and fall with the economic tide. These are people who lived in modest homes and weren't trying to take European vacations, build fancy new mcmansions etc. I used to feel like some posters here as I was going along my middle class life but I have seen too much. And all these people who have had to take lower paying jobs or be out of work for years will enjoy a much smaller social security check than those who were able to keep good paying jobs. We all can't be engineers, nurses etc. And even many of them have watched their benefits and high wages slip away. the timespan of the show was through many administrations so it was not political, just the reality that many people face that worked hard to try to make a middle class life for their family.
I agree. I saw the show and found it was very typical of many people who have worked in manufacturing type jobs - whether it;s the auto industry, clothing industry or ...well... just about every industry in America. Many of those jobs were fairly high paying union jobs with great benefits that got shipped off shore merely to reduce all those costs.
But this is in many ways the american reality if you look back in US history. During the late 1800's the manufacturing sectors of Europe off shored their plants to the USA. Causing high unemployment and deep poverty in Europe for the working class (and the ensuing migrations to the US of many Europeans). The east coast became a manufacturing mecca. Mills and factories (and their coal fired smog) dotted the landscape and provided many jobs (low income hard jobs unlike much of the modern manufacturing jobs). Yet even those failed evetually and were off shored to other countries and people lost much and needed to move and to tranistion into other types of works. Now all those old brick factories are trendy malls and loft apts (hiring low income service workers).
The same thing happened to much of the farming culture during the 20's and 30's depression and dust bowl. People lost everything, moved on to lower paying jobs in the service sector or in the newer manufactoring sectors that were arising, and moved to new parts of the country to find those jobs. Same thing happened in the manufacturing decline in the 70's, etc...
So the American Dream as it is now is a relatively new idea in many ways - one that has had to re-invent itself time and time again due to job loss, housing loss, worker migrations for jobs, etc... - and will always be a factor in life. There was a brief period of life after WWII where everything seemed golden but that was more a fluke then a long term reality. And as Roger pointed out, our current dream is one of mass consumption and big houses and big cars and luxury. That was not the norm thru out our history when a small plot of land and a little house that we'd live in until we died (often with a larger amount of extended family living with us) and pass on to the kids when we died. Now a days people don't just want a small slice of the American dream pie - they seem to want the whole pie and more.
gimmethesimplelife
7-10-13, 3:05pm
I agree. I saw the show and found it was very typical of many people who have worked in manufacturing type jobs - whether it;s the auto industry, clothing industry or ...well... just about every industry in America. Many of those jobs were fairly high paying union jobs with great benefits that got shipped off shore merely to reduce all those costs.
But this is in many ways the american reality if you look back in US history. During the late 1800's the manufacturing sectors of Europe off shored their plants to the USA. Causing high unemployment and deep poverty in Europe for the working class (and the ensuing migrations to the US of many Europeans). The east coast became a manufacturing mecca. Mills and factories (and their coal fired smog) dotted the landscape and provided many jobs (low income hard jobs unlike much of the modern manufacturing jobs). Yet even those failed evetually and were off shored to other countries and people lost much and needed to move and to tranistion into other types of works. Now all those old brick factories are trendy malls and loft apts (hiring low income service workers).
The same thing happened to much of the farming culture during the 20's and 30's depression and dust bowl. People lost everything, moved on to lower paying jobs in the service sector or in the newer manufactoring sectors that were arising, and moved to new parts of the country to find those jobs. Same thing happened in the manufacturing decline in the 70's, etc...
So the American Dream as it is now is a relatively new idea in many ways - one that has had to re-invent itself time and time again due to job loss, housing loss, worker migrations for jobs, etc... - and will always be a factor in life. There was a brief period of life after WWII where everything seemed golden but that was more a fluke then a long term reality. And as Roger pointed out, our current dream is one of mass consumption and big houses and big cars and luxury. That was not the norm thru out our history when a small plot of land and a little house that we'd live in until we died (often with a larger amount of extended family living with us) and pass on to the kids when we died. Now a days people don't just want a small slice of the American dream pie - they seem to want the whole pie and more.I think you bring up excellent points, Spartana. That little house you refer to on a small plot of land - I wonder if people were overall more happier and more content when life was "smaller", on a more human scale like you have described. I know that life spans were shorter then overall, but I wonder if the quality of life in general was not higher - even though that life lacked many modern gadgets? That life you describe sure sounds more appealing to me.
And I think you are right that that period of life after World War 2 was a blip on the radar screen. I have heard what happens to jobs being lost in an industry or many industries is called "creative destruction." Right now I am reading a book dating back to 1995 titled "The End of Work" by Jeremy Rifkin, which sort of ties into some of your ideas. But it also is quite depressing as the general premise is that automation and robotics and machinery is killing jobs not just here but also in the countries to which our jobs have been shipped over to. I don't know the answers but I do believe the future is going to look very different than the typical American expectation of life. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
7-10-13, 3:22pm
Something I just noticed as I left this site and moved on over to yahoo to check my email - on the yahoo news page there was a piece about the "jaw dropping homes of the stars." Get real, how many people are going to have that in their lives, honestly? As a society it might be better if we focused more on the paid off double wide on an acre of land that is organically farmed somewhere with fairly cheap land, say in some part of Texas that still gets rain? Or maybe Kansas?
My point is that it might be wiser to focus on more realistic expectations for the future. Rob
iris lilies
7-10-13, 5:14pm
Something I just noticed as I left this site and moved on over to yahoo to check my email - on the yahoo news page there was a piece about the "jaw dropping homes of the stars." Get real, how many people are going to have that in their lives, honestly? As a society it might be better if we focused more on the paid off double wide on an acre of land that is organically farmed somewhere with fairly cheap land, say in some part of Texas that still gets rain? Or maybe Kansas?
My point is that it might be wiser to focus on more realistic expectations for the future. Rob
Yahoo isn't exactly News of Important, Deep Items that Require Thoughtful Reading and Analysis.
Now that you mention it, that's another thing I like about America: there can be all kinds of media organizations reporting all kinds of news from the frivolous to the complex. Choice. It's a good thing.
My last wage earning work was in manufacturing with an American company that still prospers. We had jobs for temporary workers that started at $12-$15 hr. hour. Reliable workers had maybe a 50/50 chance of becoming permanent and one of those disappearing middle class jobs with good wage, health care and pension benefits. Entry level work was generally difficult and menial and shifts, but would usually lead to advancement sometimes into management and usually into a decent job.. The company had a policy of team directed work units, where line workers had some say in-day-today operations. In spite of all this, the company had trouble finding reliable people willing to persevere the rough temporary work at the beginning of employment.
I sometimes wonder if those actually wanting the American Dream are less willing to pay the price of admission. My grandmother was a single mother, and provided room and board in her home to pay for my mother's college. Who lets rooms or provides room and board these days? Through all of the hard financial times there have been businesses requiring certain skills, like instrumentation technicians for example, who have had trouble finding workers to fill openings. My father was an undertaker, and again, always had trouble finding good help.
But like Rob has said, how desirable is the modern version of the American Dream anyway, and is it worth the price of admission.
I saw the show, too, redfox. Very moving, and I was glad to see the update on what had happened to the two families and to the next generation.
An especially poignant moment is when the now 49 year old divorced mom/grandmother goes back to the house she lost to foreclosure. The new owners, a young couple, let her in to look around. They had bought her house for $38,000. Yet the bank would not negotiate a lower interest rate or payment with the divorced mom who had owned that house for 24 years. She is now saving up money hoping to get a trailer and live in a trailer park.
Is that a higher standard of living than Zimbabwe? yes is that the bar we've set for life-long working people? Be glad you don't live in a tent??
I sometimes wonder if those actually wanting the American Dream are less willing to pay the price of admission.
Exactly the point I was going to raise Rogar. The American dream is there for someone willing to go after it. It might not be easy to get. In fact, if you're coming from some kind of 'disadvantaged' situation it can be damn hard, but its still there. I know a lot of people who are sitting around waiting for a dream to fall in their laps. It won't. The American dream, at least in my version, isn't winning the lottery. I do know a lot of people who hung in there for years and finally got to where they wanted to be (be it financially, socially, emotionally or whatever). In my mind that's the dream.
I sometimes wonder if those actually wanting the American Dream are less willing to pay the price of admission. My grandmother was a single mother, and provided room and board in her home to pay for my mother's college. Who lets rooms or provides room and board these days? Through all of the hard financial times there have been businesses requiring certain skills, like instrumentation technicians for example, who have had trouble finding workers to fill openings. My father was an undertaker, and again, always had trouble finding good help.
I believe those people still exist. However, I think the landscape has changed.
Our parents had the "luxury" of being able to work in the same job at the same company for their entire career if they showed up regularly and kept their noses clean. They did their 40 hours a week and went home (or got paid for staying). Now the constant push for ever more productivity with ever fewer workers has us checking email at 9 pm and working weekends -- usually both halves of a couple. Today businesses come and go very quickly and feel almost no loyalty to their employees. Jobs are pretty much imperiled at all times. Few businesses take a view longer than the next financial quarter or year, sacrificing employees and long-term prospects to stockholders.
We've also spent years denigrating skilled trades. We gutted middle-class manufacturing jobs. Nobody brags about their son the plumber or their daughter the tool-and-die maker. If you're not college material, you're not much. Or so people think.
And, in fairness, those working as undertakers are a special breed. A college roommate of mine was getting his degree to work in the family funeral home business; he was ideally suited to the job but not everyone is. I can see that being a field where it's hard to attract good help
The new owners, a young couple, let her in to look around. They had bought her house for $38,000. Yet the bank would not negotiate a lower interest rate or payment with the divorced mom who had owned that house for 24 years. She is now saving up money hoping to get a trailer and live in a trailer park.
We've discussed that fiasco in other threads. The house I bought for my mom was sold to me for about half of the price they offered the previous owner as a short sale. Beyond whatever it cost to foreclose on the house, seal it up, and then prep it for sale, the lender took a big haircut. You can easily wonder how that makes sense.
Is that a higher standard of living than Zimbabwe? yes is that the bar we've set for life-long working people? Be glad you don't live in a tent??
Yet many of us have heard this for years. Toward the end of my tenure in the working world, the lousy economy was used as the excuse for laying off scores of coworkers in favor of cheaper off-shore workers. We went without raises or training or anything new for two years and now the annual increase "allowed" for a solid, did-what-they-asked worker is a whole 2-3% -- if you're not over the salary-range midpoint. ("You did a fine job this year. Thank you for helping make the company successful. Too bad we can't give you any more than this free pat on the back.") And I worked at one of the better companies. Much of it is cast in the guise of "globalization". Nevermind that the worker they can hire someplace else for $80 a day doesn't have a $1,000 a month mortgage to pay.
This whole thing is such a complex issue. I was thinking about how very few children are taught any sort of financial literacy in public school. Even my own dd with an advanced degree did not seem to understand the consequences of taking on college loan debt. The whole economic system is I believe unnecessarily complicated - perhaps by design. I DO believe there is endless opportunity for those who have the advantages to pursue them - ambition, intelligence, education, connections, family support etc.
I DO believe there is endless opportunity for those who have the advantages to pursue them - ambition, intelligence, education, connections, family support etc.
+1, but added: All of those are advantages and can afford a shortcut of sorts to the pursuit of the American dream. One of them is the key. You can reach the goal with it and none of the other advantages, but you can't reach the goal without it. Ambition is the key. Everything else only speeds up the process, but none of them are any kind of guarantee of success. I'm sure we all know intelligent, educated people with good family ties who really haven't ever done much with their lives. The ones I know simply lack the ambition. Some folks inevitably site the silver spoon crowd who are born rich and manage to stay that way without ever doing much. Fine, but is that really the American dream?
I believe those people still exist. However, I think the landscape has changed.
Should society change in relation to "the dream" or visa-versa? I think that those who seek out opportunity do so regardless of the climate. Obviously there are times when it is easier to 'make it' and times when it is extremely difficult. Just as obvious are the advantages some people have over others that gives them a shorter road to their goals. Is there ever going to be a time in human history when those two axioms are not in play? I doubt it.
My grandparents were uneducated, poor dirt farmers in Northwest Oklahoma in the 1930s. No matter what happens with the economy, unemployment or any other 2013 macro-factor they had it worse than anyone in the US today. They went on to have a wonderful life because they didn't lose site of what they wanted when it looked hopeless. The other part of their story is that they never once thought they "deserved" anything. They knew that if they were going to make it they had to do it themselves. Anyone who takes that same approach today is going to be just fine.
SteveinMN
7-11-13, 12:56pm
Should society change in relation to "the dream" or visa-versa? I think that those who seek out opportunity do so regardless of the climate. Obviously there are times when it is easier to 'make it' and times when it is extremely difficult. Just as obvious are the advantages some people have over others that gives them a shorter road to their goals. Is there ever going to be a time in human history when those two axioms are not in play? I doubt it.
What do we define as "The American Dream"? The house, the yard, the picket fence, the 2.5 kids, and the dog? Or just the ability to find your niche and run with it? I think that makes a difference in this discussion. I believe society changes in relation to The Dream whether or not they want to. The Dream of working at one career anymore is, I think, dead. The Dream of working to live (rather than living to work) is dying. And I think we've been creating a chasm of social mobility that soon will be difficult or impossible to cross. America already offers less social mobility than many other countries.
The other part of their story is that they never once thought they "deserved" anything. They knew that if they were going to make it they had to do it themselves. Anyone who takes that same approach today is going to be just fine.
Entitlement -- the belief that you did deserve something -- is a change that started with our parents, who expected Social Security and Medicare to pay out well beyond anything they had paid in. It's an expectation brought on by a long tail of prosperity fueled by cheap resources that led workers to believe they would always be paid more next year.
I agree that anyone who thinks they don't deserve anything probably will do fine. But when people attend Tea Party rallies and carry signs telling the government to keep its grubby hands off their Medicare, or when farmers can't even tell you how much they get in federal crop supports but keep electing know-nothings like Michelle Bachmann, entitlement has set in to a level that people consider structural. Removing such supports will not be a popular endeavor.
Something I just noticed as I left this site and moved on over to yahoo to check my email - on the yahoo news page there was a piece about the "jaw dropping homes of the stars." Get real, how many people are going to have that in their lives, honestly? As a society it might be better if we focused more on the paid off double wide on an acre of land that is organically farmed somewhere with fairly cheap land, say in some part of Texas that still gets rain? Or maybe Kansas?
My point is that it might be wiser to focus on more realistic expectations for the future. RobI blame the darn TV for changing the American Dream ;-)!
Seriously, I think you hit on a point that is very true. That now with TV and other media forms that were not available thru out much of history we can see how "the other half (the "better" half??) lives, and we lust for the same thing. Our desire for "more, bigger, better, fancier, prettier, etc..." has grown. We are told that is what we (society) should want and strive for for ourselfs - and you can bet there are a lot of people out there who will loan us the money to make it happen too!
While I don't feel the past was a better place to live in for many other reasons, I do feel that the life goals that many middle class and working class people had were less money/stuff focused then they are now. I see those same old-school financial values in the asian immigrant community I live in. The willingness to live small, often in larger family groups to save money by splitting expenses, the desire to work a hard menial labor low income job (or two) while they strive to improve themselves with education for a better job, and, most importantly, delaying gratification until they can actually afford anything new and shiney and then paying cash for it. Most house bought by the people in my community are paid for with cash earned over many years of sacrifice and communal living.
That of course will change once they become more Americanized (just as they are getting much bigger and fatter from all our crappy food :-)!) and begin desirering those things only the wealthier people can really afford without getting in debt. But for now the older values of frugality, being debt free, and living within your means seems to be the way they live - even if those means are small. The kids are happy to continue to live at home while in collage and will continue to hold a job at the same time to pay for that college. They often continue in to live at home after they are married, even when they have kids, in order to save money in order to buy their own house someday (how many americans 20-somethings would do that? They want there own place and they want it now and will pay half of their income to get an apt at 18!!). Often both spouses will be working 2 jobs each in order to save money while the retired grandparents (most have 3 generations of families members living together) watch the kids. This is how many american families lived just a generation ago.
ApatheticNoMore
7-11-13, 1:33pm
I DO believe there is endless opportunity for those who have the advantages to pursue them - ambition, intelligence, education, connections, family support etc.
Noone actualy has all these advantages do they? Maybe Mitt Romney? Life is not like that for pretty much anyone, so I don't think that theoretical situation is what anyone actually deals with on the day to day. Hey one might be lucky to have one of them (ok I'm probably reasonably intelligent :)).
As for whether or not one can suceed if they have boatloads of amibition etc.. ... it's kind of irrelevant to the question of whether life is getting harder for most people. And that's kind of an important question isn't it? In fact it's pretty much the whole question is it not? Or is this life itself just some afterlife where we spend eternity in tormented contemplation of whether or not we deserve our fates.
Mind you I probably wouldn't enjoy the show. So just profiling a bunch of people and how much their lives suck? You know I can grant that it might not be their fault that their lives suck, that life is bigger than them, that the economic system stinks etc. etc. but still .... A eulogy for manufacturing? Yea but unless anyone has any plans to bring it back (small scale manufacturing etc. might bring it back), it's gone baby gone. And eulogies for the dead are easy to write, what's harder is current politics and figuring out what the next manufacturing (ie the next field that will leave the country) is and what can be done about it.
Noone actualy has all these advantages do they? Maybe Mitt Romney? Life is not like that for pretty much anyone, so I don't think that theoretical situation is what anyone actually deals with on the day to day. Hey one might be lucky to have one of them (ok I'm probably reasonably intelligent :)).
I was born in a US Naval hospital to an enlisted man and a RN, both hillbillies from Ohio/Kentucky. Several of my grandparents lived in trailers in the woods, the rest in old run-down farmhouses.
My father was bankrupt several times before I reached adulthood.
I was the first member of my family to graduate from college. And not Ozark Community College, but an Ivy League institution.
I "retired" when I was 36, with a significant amount of capital.
And my last name isn't Romney.
It seems the pursuit of the American Dream is still there, for those who want it, but it is getting quite a lot harder to actually catch for most people (notwithstanding those who have always existed who want a free ride). I too worked damned hard to get where I am in life, but I'm not sure I would have the same results in these times, no matter how much blood, sweat and tears I was willing to shed.
Time to change the dream, perhaps.
Noone actualy has all these advantages do they? Maybe Mitt Romney?
And Barack Obama. ;)
What do we define as "The American Dream"?
And that's where this kind of discussion can get kind of silly. What we need to do is provide opportunity for people to define and then chase whatever their version of that dream is. The pursuit of happiness? Anyway, the government and the rest of society simply should not be putting up roadblocks for anyone who is striving for their dream (with all the usual 'don't hurt anyone else' safety measures in place, of course). Let them go, it will benefit us all.
Entitlement -- the belief that you did deserve something -- is a change that started with our parents, who expected Social Security and Medicare to pay out well beyond anything they had paid in. It's an expectation brought on by a long tail of prosperity fueled by cheap resources that led workers to believe they would always be paid more next year.
+1 Yea, its going to suck when the cheap resources gravy train ends, but it has to sooner or later.
Anyway, the government and the rest of society simply should not be putting up roadblocks for anyone who is striving for their dream (with all the usual 'don't hurt anyone else' safety measures in place, of course).
I love when I agree with you, Gregg :D But can you give me an example of such a roadblock, so I can be clear on what you mean?
I can really see all sides of this. There were times in my life when I had to use every scrap of resourcefulness and intelligence I possessed to keep moving forward toward my own version of "the dream." And it does anger me when I am around others who have the expectation that it will all just be handed to them. But it is so many shades of gray.
Truthfully, I have a lot more fun discussing with people what they'd like their own personal version of the American (or global) Dream to be. I know that mine is to live simply and well, well connected with my family/friends/community, safe from physical tyranny, and with the reasonable ability to earn an income that can feed my family and keep us sheltered, fed, healthy, and happy -- no six-figure toys, 500 channels, trust fund, world domination required. In return for it, I am willing to work hard and learn how to play well with others (I'm getting better at that as I age), and as a good friend says, "Ask for what I need, and offer everything I can."
I love when I agree with you, Gregg :D But can you give me an example of such a roadblock, so I can be clear on what you mean?
Lol. Sure pug. Things like excessive regulatory and licensing requirements to start a small business. We have way too much red tape. For people not well versed in navigating those waters that has two outcomes. Either the would-be entrepreneur gives up or it forces them underground into the cash economy. The first robs the community of more options for that particular service and limits the individual to getting whatever someone else is wiling to pay. The second robs the community of taxable revenue and essentially turns an ambitious person (who probably has no desire to break the law) into a criminal.
Also in the small business arena are things like access to capital. My Dad always said his banker was happy to lend him an umbrella as long as it wasn't raining. Its true enough. Start up is one of the most capital intensive phases for most small businesses, but it is also the most difficult time to access it. The SBA is a good organization, but it is also weighed down with red tape. By the time a loan guarantee is approved an entrepreneur can be broke and back in his old job. I'm not saying we should just throw money into the street for anyone with an idea, but the people who have good ideas shouldn't be shut down just because they can't access funds.
How about the cost of education? Since the costs probably aren't coming down we have to find ways for more people to have access without saddling them with a lifetime of debt. Not everyone should go to college, but the ones who are motivated and willing to put effort into it should be able to attend. Keeping kids like that out of school is a roadblock that is going to come full circle and bite us all on the you-know-what, probably in less than a generation.
How about the cost of education? Since the costs probably aren't coming down we have to find ways for more people to have access without saddling them with a lifetime of debt. Not everyone should go to college, but the ones who are motivated and willing to put effort into it should be able to attend. Keeping kids like that out of school is a roadblock that is going to come full circle and bite us all on the you-know-what, probably in less than a generation.
If someone doesn't latch on to offering a college education via the internet it will be an opportunity missed. I understand it is being used on a limited basis, but could nearly eliminate a brick and mortar education in some or many instances.
I have grown to cringe at the term, "entitlements". Somehow we have built into our economy a system or culture of disincentives for self-development and achievement by providing handouts, whether it is from parents or government programs. The same word and it's negative connotation is also used for helping the disabled, the sick, and the elderly, which seems like a nice benefit of living in one of the greatest nations around.
Gardenarian
7-11-13, 6:20pm
Sorry, didn't read all the previous posts.
I think that it is still easier to get rich (fairly) quickly in the U.S. than anywhere else. Look at Mr. Money Mustache.
If that is what the American dream is.
I think it also easier to find your own wacky community of like-minded people here (not mentioning any forums by name...)
Working at a community college I see people changing their lives every day.
It really depends on what you call the American dream.
If you mean the "try to get rich" thing, there will always be tons people who will, most will fail, and a handful will succeed. And there always have been those folks, regardless of the underlying system.
If you mean the "get a job, do what your employer expects, get paid, move up and get car, house, family and eventually have a comfortable retirement" thing - it's on its way out. Some people will still have this - but nowhere near the numbers that used to. I think this form of the American dream will be sighted in the history books as an interesting anomoly caused by a number of factors, that lasted from the end of WWII until sometime early in the 21st century.
HappyHiker
7-20-13, 10:15am
"I think the "American Dream" is a moving target with higher standards now than a couple or few decades ago when the average home size was much smaller and cell phones, computers, internet, and cable TV didn't exist." This comment, by another poster, is interesting--and true IMHO...and yet...our wages have not kept up with inflation, giving working people less to live on proportionately... even if they lived as they did in the 1950's without all the frills of modern society.
Back then, what did a house cost? What did a car cost? How much did gasoline and food cost? For example, if a house cost $10,000 back then and gasoline 23 cents a gallon, have our wages gone up enough to pay for them today? I don't think so.
Seems to me, with globalization and the hollowing out of our manufacturing base, our wages for the working class (and that's most of us) have shrunk while inflation has expanded. Much of the middle class is sinking lower and lower into poverty. The disparity between the haves and the have nots is now a huge gap. We're (the working/middle class) going backwards....
True happy Hiker but our changing habits and lifestyle and the expectation for "more" often drives prices up. Wally and the Beaver shared a bedroom (as did all those other TV family kids - including the Brady kids) in the small house that was a lifetime "home" rather than just a "starter" home. Same with most 1950 - 1970 families. We had one car that was shared and if the teens wanted one, they had to buy the old clunker themselves. If they wanted to go to college they needed to work and save while in high school and while in college to help pay for it themselves. Now we "need" seperate bedrooms for each kid - plus a den, family room, a 3 car garage, and all the toys like boats and jet skiis, etc... And we constantly want to move up to accomadate a growing family or the accumulation of m,ore stuff. Parents are now expected to buy their kids new cars rather than old ones (and finance insurance and fuel), fund their college educations, keep them clothed in stylish fashions ($100 jeans and tennis shoes), and on and on. Of course it would be hard to keep that level of lifestyle on current incomes.
Added to that is the fact that we are unwilling to pay the high prices for goods that we'd have to pay if manufactured by a higher income/benefitted American labor force. So we buy our $4 chinese-made tee shirts at Walmart instead of the $20 ones from an American made product. Hard to pay decent wages to employees in the manufacturing sectors if people are unwilling to pay higher prices for the goods and services.
HappyHiker
7-20-13, 1:49pm
Spartina, I take your point, and much of what you said is true. But having watched the series by Bill Moyers profiling those two families, it seems they couldn't make a go of it in today's job market, and one family lost their home to foreclosure--even while living a simple lifestyle. Neither of the two families seemed to live in an opulent home...
So, even "getting by" these days is not in the cards for many...too many unemployed, too many job-seekers, not enough jobs. And many of the jobs, for those without a needed higher degree, are service sector jobs that don't pay a living wage.
Many Walmart workers are kept part-time and earn so little they're getting food stamps, have no medical benefits. And you're right, that's why we should be supporting locally-made goods and products...and not buying from companies whose employee pay is so low that we citizens are paying for corporate welfare for their workers.
Ahh The Simple Name
8-18-13, 3:29pm
I am familiar with the PBS program. I've done quite a bit of research on this topic. There's a series of posts on my blog titled "A New American Dream: A Simple Life". Here are the links:
http://www.ahhthesimplelife.com/a-new-american-dream-part-i/ (http://www.ahhthesimplelife.com/a-new-american-dream-part-iii/)
http://www.ahhthesimplelife.com/a-new-american-dream-part-ii/ (http://www.ahhthesimplelife.com/a-new-american-dream-part-iii/)
http://www.ahhthesimplelife.com/a-new-american-dream-part-iii/
The disparity between the haves and the have nots is now a huge gap. We're (the working/middle class) going backwards....
As noted in the other discussion, the issue is more skilled vs unskilled than anything else. I've been a bit down on our prosepcts given what I've been seeing in some parts of my city. I just don't know how we are going to significantly move the needle on skillled labor.
Saw this today. It's a narrow study but my bet is you can extrapolate the results more broadly.
http://hbrblogs.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/global-value-chain-of-german-cars.png
ApatheticNoMore
5-19-14, 2:41pm
High skilled there probably mostly means around a decade of investment in colllege (like doctors), medium skilled I suspect is jobs I've held, but really they're not that medium skilled. It's all easy, 10% of one's brain. Pretending we're all so skilled is making mountains out of molehills (medium skilled stuff like software development is easily outsourced, even what might be called "higher skilled": lawyers can be outsourced, some doctor stuff can be outsourced etc.). Skilled is discovering relativity. :~)
But not actually seeing a society where everyone has to go through the equivalent of med school education as particularly feasible OR even DESIRABLE IN ANY SENSE!!! (it's sometimes admirable and worthwhile, but it postpones adulthood far more than is normal or maybe even healthy for most people) - I support improving wages at the bottom - I support the fast food strikers. Of course some kind of trade school alternative works if your Germany (I don't know that there are that many other countries the German model actually works for besides Germany).
...medium skilled stuff like software development ...
I suppose that depends on what you mean by "software development"... Most development efforts I've been involved with required incredibly skilled practitioners.
High skilled there probably mostly means around a decade of investment in colllege (like doctors), medium skilled I suspect is jobs I've held, but really they're not that medium skilled. It's all easy, 10% of one's brain.
Apparently people sit around and classify stuff like this:
Three types of workers are identified on the basis of educational attainment levels as defined in the International Standard Classifification of Education (ISCED). “Low skilled” (ISCED categories 0, 1, and 2) roughly corresponds to less than secondary schooling. “Medium skilled” (3 and 4) means secondary schooling and above, including certain professional qualifications, but below college degree. “High skilled” (5 and 6) includes those with a college degree and above.
Apparently people sit around and classify stuff like this:
Three types of workers are identified on the basis of educational attainment levels as defined in the International Standard Classifification of Education (ISCED). “Low skilled” (ISCED categories 0, 1, and 2) roughly corresponds to less than secondary schooling. “Medium skilled” (3 and 4) means secondary schooling and above, including certain professional qualifications, but below college degree. “High skilled” (5 and 6) includes those with a college degree and above.I wonder how they would peg a highly educated person who is choosing to work in a "low skilled" type of job? Or visa versa? Education level and job skill/type are 2 different things.
I suppose that depends on what you mean by "software development"... Most development efforts I've been involved with required incredibly skilled practitioners.So do most plumbers and mechanics I know :-)!
My brother is a highly educated qualified civil engineer and at one time owned two profitable businesses. He needed good health insurance and has been a USPS mail carrier for 15 years.
Then there is the rare, highly skilled, and poorly paid job of being a good stay at home parent.
I watched an interesting interview with Elizabeth Warren talking about her new book, A Fighting Chance. She told the story of how, in her early fifties, her mother became a single parent with no other skills than home keeping. She immediately put on her best dress and shoes and applied for a minimum wage job at Sears, where he went to work supporting her family. Her point was that in that time, minimum wage could actually support a family, while now it is hardly enough to support a single person head of house hold. She pointed out that since then the minimum wage has barely crept up while worker productivity has increased times 22.
I think I can remember from my young days of single mother in my neighborhood that got by with poorly paying jobs.
I'm sure that there are tons of highly educated Liberal Arts PhD's out there working lower income jobs. Unless they can get into academia, there aren't a lot of jobs a Philosophy or Elizabethan Poetry major can find. So that's why I take those kinds of studies with a grain of salt. They don't take into account the many people on both sides of the educational/job fence who don't fit the mold. A high school drop out may earn more working a blue collar tech job - or perhaps has started their own very lucrative business - then a highly educated "Doctor" of French Literature does.
Then there is the rare, highly skilled, and poorly paid job of being a good stay at home parent.
I watched an interesting interview with Elizabeth Warren talking about her new book, A Fighting Chance. She told the story of how, in her early fifties, her mother became a single parent with no other skills than home keeping. She immediately put on her best dress and shoes and applied for a minimum wage job at Sears, where he went to work supporting her family. Her point was that in that time, minimum wage could actually support a family, while now it is hardly enough to support a single person head of house hold. She pointed out that since then the minimum wage has barely crept up while worker productivity has increased times 22.
I think I can remember from my young days of single mother in my neighborhood that got by with poorly paying jobs.My Mom was one of those single Mom's who, after 15 years as a SAHP, had to go back to work in an unskilled labor (i.e. factory) to provide for her 3 kids. Even then a minimum wage job didn't cut it and she usually worked 2 or even 3 jobs (and also rented out one of the bedrooms in our house) until she was able to train for a marketable skill and get a better job with better pay. I think many single women, unlike my Mom, got alimony - and child support if they had kids. That probably helped to make the minimum wage go much much further. Today we have never-wed parents who may not have financial assistance from the other parent and have to depend solely on their own income to make ends meet.
Yes, I suppose even in the sixties, a single parent would have to use some imagination or have a little supplemental income to make ends meet on a minimum wage. It seems like a family taking a boarder or renting a room was much more common then. Elizabeth Warren is an interesting lady that I know little about. She is at least one politician who struggled financially to make a go of it and a champion of the middle class. I did a very quick internet check and she is listed as one of the 100 most influential people in the world by someone's account. I may have to check out her book to see what her story is.
I'm a big fan of Elizabeth Warren myself - at least back during the financial debacle. I'd personally think she'd be a much better fit as Pres then Hillary or many other democratic candidates out there. Seems very down to earth and sensible. I was trying to look up minimum wages in Calif for the time period my Mom went back to work (early 1970's - maybe '73) and it looks like it was around $1.60/hour compared to todays $10/hour. Rent and food was much less then of course but gas was higher when compared to todays dollar value (oh I remember the gas shortages and lines in the '70's when my Mom tried to fill up her car) and interest rates were very high - over 10% and an unemployment rate to match. Pretty tough times for the working class minimum wage earner. Most who did work minimum wage also did things like shared housing or did without cars, etc... otherwise they wouldn't have been able to get by. But today it seems to me that people who work minimum wage jobs expect to live a more middle class lifestyle then people in the past - and those with middle class incomes expect to live like the rich.
....But today it seems to me that people who work minimum wage jobs expect to live a more middle class lifestyle then people in the past - and those with middle class incomes expect to live like the rich.
That's pretty much my impression.
I guess I'll have to read the book to find out if and how Warren's mother supported a family on minimum wage. I can remember a lot of the things we talk about on the simple living forums being much more common place. Gardening and canning, taking a renter, and walking and using the bus. Even in my middle class youth things like dishwashers, disposals, and even clothes dryers were luxuries. Not to mention cable TV, internet access and computers, microwaves, cell phones and especially Master Charge But it's hard to compare the two eras as I'm sure there are many basic things now that are relatively cheaper.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.