From rags to riches?

[Skybird]

http://www.americanprogress.org/site...8OVF&b=1579981

It sometimes (from an american side: often) is said that "everyone" in the promised country could make it to the top. That everyone could become a rich man if only he tries hard enough, and that everyone could become president, and that this system works og so much better than the"overcontrolled" social regulation in "socialist" Europe. American society thinks irrational here, like i9t is irrational to play Lotto: the chance to win the big jackpot is so thin that all of us in this forum will never know, even hear of someone who won it, and the same is true for our children and children'S children. Nevertheless, millions waste their money playing Lotto. It's an irrational process, turning unrealistically low chances into realistic chances - in our fantasy.

and if you are a street dog, maybe you even need the belief that it will be better for your children, else reality would be to cruel to bear, and the question "Why?" remains unanswered. People need to see sense and reason in their life, else their soul becomes ill.

But Europeans and social-examiners from both continents know it better since long that the reality is slightly different. We ineurope have no reason to copy the american model - "from rags to riches" is illusory only. for every winner, there are hundreds if not thousands of loosers. And it seems that the socalled social mobility already is higher in Europe, than in the US, and chances for improvement of living conditions from one generation to the next are clearly better in European countries, than in the US . Nevertheless "market liberators" and "guardians of unregulated free trade" do not get tired to tell us that doing according to the american way would solve our problems, reduce the level of unemploment, would give anyone better chances if he only works hard enough, and bring our economies into swing again. They are lobbying for the advanatge of a smaller and smaller anti-democratic plutocratic elite only. They are only the lobbyists of the raising plutocratic elite.

[scandium]

Originally Posted by Skybird

http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=1579981

It sometimes (from an american side: often) is said that "everyone" in the promised country could make it to the top. That everyone could become a rich man if only he tries hard enough, and that everyone could become president, and that this system works og so much better than the"overcontrolled" social regulation in "socialist" Europe. American society thinks irrational here, like i9t is irrational to play Lotto: the chance to win the big jackpot is so thin that all of us in this forum will never know, even hear of someone who won it, and the same is true for our children and children'S children. Nevertheless, millions waste their money playing Lotto. It's an irrational process, turning unrealistically low chances into realistic chances - in our fantasy.

and if you are a street dog, maybe you even need the belief that it will be better for your children, else reality would be to cruel to bear, and the question "Why?" remains unanswered. People need to see sense and reason in their life, else their soul becomes ill.

But Europeans and social-examiners from both continents know it better since long that the reality is slightly different. We ineurope have no reason to copy the american model - "from rags to riches" is illusory only. for every winner, there are hundreds if not thousands of loosers. And it seems that the socalled social mobility already is higher in Europe, than in the US, and chances for improvement of living conditions from one generation to the next are clearly better in European countries, than in the US . Nevertheless "market liberators" and "guardians of unregulated free trade" do not get tired to tell us that doing according to the american way would solve our problems, reduce the level of unemploment, would give anyone better chances if he only works hard enough, and bring our economies into swing again. They are lobbying for the advanatge of a smaller and smaller anti-democratic plutocratic elite only. They are only the lobbyists of the raising plutocratic elite.

In fact the existence of the American middle class is largely due to "left-wing" reform through the early 20th century emergence of unions and FDR's "New Deal". All of which is slowly being swept aside as America moves farther and farther to the right while inequality increases and the middle class slowly disappears. Things have reached the point in the US where "liberal" has become a bad word that's used to insult someone with.

[Wim Libaers]

However, the European system is obviously a bad idea if you also provide that service to every third-world refugee who gets in, even if you do not take into account the cultural/religious/ideological issues. And the system attracts those people.

[kgsuarez]

The truth of the matter is, there is no perfect system. Humans are flawed.

There's no way to really solve this problem. People will always take advantage of their power, in one way or another. It's the way things get done... taking advantage of oportunities that present themselves. That's all it really comes down to. Some people get lucky, other people, don't. Succesful people are simply people who have been presented an oportunity, have realized it, and have taken full advantage of it.

Money is everything today. If you have money, you have power, and power insures survival (or at least comfort, in the modern world.)

What a sad world it is.

[Type XXIII]

Good post, Skybird. I might not agree with you on several matters, but it appears that we share the same opinions on economic politics.

You say 'Lotto-mentality' is the reason people supports the market liberal system, but another reason, that may be just as important, is people's tendency to exaggerate their own abilities and chances in a competitve system. People believe that in a competitive economic system, they will be among the winners, but as you say, the great majority will be among the losers.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Type XXIII

You say 'Lotto-mentality' is the reason people supports the market liberal system,

No, that make it sound queer, somehow. I meant the irrational mental approach on lotto chances to hit the jackpot compares to people distorting their cognitions with regard to their own chances in an unregulated market system. To spend yourself some comfort in the presence of not too bright chances, you need to manipulate your perception of it. Psychologists call this avoidance of cognitive dissonance.

I repeatedly said in earlier debates on economics that I consider the US and Europe to be the two extreme poles of the economical continuum - what the one side is exaggerating, the other side is in need of. Europe is overregulated in certain areas, whereas American approach is more like jungle-law due to to little social regulation. The optimum, imo, would be found somewhere inbetween. but the EU seems to be set on a course to centralized over-controlling, paired with hyperliberal economy-philosophy, and the US demands even more disregulation of global trade. And the split between the rich elite and the working poor is widening.

Of course, economical self-perception of business and industry works the same in both regions. They always tend to overestimate their perspectives if they are in favour of their profits, and they always tend to ignore reasons that are in opposition to such perspectives.

Both regions live beyond what they can financially afford, but they waste the money in partially very different ways. But in both cases it costs future generations, and the rest of the world. There is no sign, that the emerging economical superpower of the near future, China, is learning from our mistakes. It seems they are determined to repeat our mistakes.

[August]

Originally Posted by scandium

In fact the existence of the American middle class is largely due to "left-wing" reform through the early 20th century emergence of unions and FDR's "New Deal".

The American middle class far predates FDR.

[joea]

Originally Posted by August

The American middle class far predates FDR.

Indeed. :hmm:

[scandium]

Originally Posted by August

The American middle class far predates FDR.

Where did I say otherwise? I said only that his "New Deal" was one of the things generally creditted to its post-depression expansion.

[August]

Originally Posted by scandium

Where did I say otherwise? I said only that his "New Deal" was one of the things generally creditted to its post-depression expansion.

No you said the "existance of the American middle class", not the "expansion" of the middle class. The American middle class has existed long before FDR and continues to exist in full health today.

In fact one could argue that the elevation of factory laborers to the "middle class" was an artificial condition that has resulted in the complete loss of these jobs to foreign competition.

[micky1up]

the truth is sadly that the european systems have been here an awful lot longer than the US and are steeped in a more cultured and historical back ground, unfortunately for the americans in making the US they destroyed a much more cultured human system that of the native indians

[The Avon Lady]

Now I'm lost. How did we get to the Indians? :hmm:

[scandium]

Originally Posted by August

No you said the "existance of the American middle class", not the "expansion" of the middle class. The American middle class has existed long before FDR and continues to exist in full health today.

In fact one could argue that the elevation of factory laborers to the "middle class" was an artificial condition that has resulted in the complete loss of these jobs to foreign competition.

This kind of hair splitting is a complete waste of time so I'm only going to post one more time on that and then leave it. I'd said the existence of the American middle class is largely (but not exclusively, note the word largely in the sentence) due to left-wing reform through the emergence of unions and FDR's "New Deal". That is the full sentence. It does not say "FDR created the middle class", nor does it read that way unless you're functionally illiterate and have trouble with reading comprehension.

[August]

Originally Posted by scandium

This kind of hair splitting is a complete waste of time so I'm only going to post one more time on that and then leave it. I'd said the existence of the American middle class is largely (but not exclusively, note the word largely in the sentence) due to left-wing reform through the emergence of unions and FDR's "New Deal". That is the full sentence. It does not say "FDR created the middle class", nor does it read that way unless you're functionally illiterate and have trouble with reading comprehension.

Now now Scandium. Just because you exaggerated and someone called you on it that's no reason to act like a jerk.

[Abraham]

The growth/expansion of a middl class in a free society is the logical consequense of the existence of an wealthy upper class.

I don't agree at all with Skybird because the "American Dream" is not based on a lottery, but on ambition and productivity. The American economy expanded much faster in the first half of the 20th century than the European economies and the American "middle class" had a higher standard of living than the European "middle class", as far as I was know/ thaught.
Check August's sig...