View Single Post
Old 03-30-11, 06:26 PM   #9
tater
Navy Seal
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 9,023
Downloads: 8
Uploads: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducimus View Post
I think it's implied. The impression I have is America is supposed to be the land of opportunity, make it or break it is up to you, you had the opportunity either way. However, the impression now is that the rich became super rich by removing those opportunities in the way of automation, outsourcing jobs to foreign shores, domestic outsourcing (hiring illegals), etc etc what have you. Sure they made themselves super rich, but seemingly at everyone else's expense in terms of opportunity.
The rich become richer by removing opportunity? Oh, you mean that a loss of opportunity is somehow an accident of the rich becoming rich?

One, that's not redistribution. That means taking something one person has, and giving it to others.

I also don't buy it, anyway.

100 years ago, some robber-baron has a big company, and you invent something in the same field that is the next big thing. Is your opportunity greater or less than someone with a new idea right now? Presumably you think less. There are laws on the books now that are far more restrictive on the big outfit than were around 100 years ago. I think things are not harder now than then.

I think even the basic metric of just relative wealth is only good during limited contemporaneous time intervals, too. Saying that the relative balance of rich and poor is different fails entirely to look at what people actually have. We've all talked about this in other threads. What the average, say, lower middle class family has in 2011 might be less in $ terms relative to the top of the heap, but they have far MORE than a family in the same bracket in 1911. Weight dollars with square footage, mobility, communications, entertainment, etc. Until someone figures out how to value that stuff, I don't think I buy the rich vs poor ratio stuff.

People now complain of high real estate prices making urban areas hard to live in. 100 years ago the lower end people had a simpler solution. They never owned a home in their entire life. We seen the stats in recent, previous years about all time high home ownership... turns out that was a bad idea. My dream might be to own a P-51, but it's a dream, not something that will ever happen. Back in the day the "American Dream" was just that—a dream—for most people.

Anyway, I don't think opportunity has evaporated (ask people what they thought in 1930-something).
__________________
"Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one." — Thomas Paine
tater is offline   Reply With Quote