Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think you are old enough to remember a time when the idea of "we are all in this together" was celebrated rather than ridiculed. Our income/wealth/social disparity was relatively small back then. The divisive free-for-all of propaganda and lies was considered fringe nonsense. What it meant to be an American then is very different than now.
I'm old enough to remember the end of it. The thing about the whole social contract is it was a TWO WAY STREET. Then, starting in the late 1960s and 1970s, the excuse making began. Some of it was good. Civil rights, gay rights, women's rights. But those virtues turned into vices because they went to extremes. In some circles, it has gotten to a point where nothing is anyone's fault any more, unless you're a privileged white male and/or rich--then you're the evil boogeyman.
You can't compare a few small European welfare states to a large nation of over 300M. Apples to oranges. The cultures and attitudes of the people are too different. The fact remains that people who get at least a high school education, work full time, marry, then have kids...in that order, are much less likely to be poor than those who don't do things in that order. Even the liberal think tanks like the Brookings Institution have said as much.
Yep. People are tribal. Some 5 million population Nordic country with a big sovereign fund from North Sea oil money where everyone is the same race, speaks the same language, and shares the same values is very different from a country with black people, brown people, and white trash who are mostly culturally disconnected from the top-50% of the country. It's easy to vote for a generous social safety net for my neighbor who is pretty much just like me. It's really hard to get a country to support that kind of safety net when most of the people receiving the benefits don't belong to your tribe. If I'm educated, high income, and live in a leafy suburb or trendy city, black people in a slum, brown people in a barrio, and white trash in shacks aren't part of my tribe. Trump and the Republicans have managed to convince white trash in shacks to vote against the social safety net because black people and brown people get benefits, too.
The problem here is lousy parenting and lousy education. I got the memo growing up. I got my education and launched my career long before I ever considered a long term relationship. Asian & Indian immigrants largely got the memo. Our top universities have to discriminate against them so at least some white people can get admitted. Most of those went to the same poor people school systems the permanent underclass attends so it's largely not the school system.
I'm old enough to remember the end of it. The thing about the whole social contract is it was a TWO WAY STREET. Then, starting in the late 1960s and 1970s, the excuse making began. Some of it was good. Civil rights, gay rights, women's rights. But those virtues turned into vices because they went to extremes. In some circles, it has gotten to a point where nothing is anyone's fault any more, unless you're a privileged white male and/or rich--then you're the evil boogeyman.
We haven't seen anything of inequality yet. Soon, there will be somatic enhancements available for those who can afford it, making them super-human compared to today's mere-mortals. The rich and their kids will have so many more skills thanks to bionic enhancements and robotics that they don't even need the labor of the masses any more. Then it's full-on "let them have cake".
Today's cut may be where you grow up and what school you go to. Tomorrow's cut is when you get your first (expensive) somatic implant that let's you learn 100x faster than just humans.
And welfare state lovers always think if we just jack up taxes and start a bunch of welfare programs that we can turn America into Sweden. They turn a blind eye to the corruption and ineptitude of our own government or naively believe that if we just vote in someone like Bernie Sanders all will be well. It won't. But I'm sure you'll not be convinced of that no matter what I say.
I actually don't resemble anything you are accusing me of. Just because I called out your "big" excuse doesn't mean I'm in the "welfare state" camp.
I don't want to be like Sweden. I think we can do better.
I think you are old enough to remember a time when the idea of "we are all in this together" was celebrated rather than ridiculed. Our income/wealth/social disparity was relatively small back then. The divisive free-for-all of propaganda and lies was considered fringe nonsense. What it meant to be an American then is very different than now.
By my reckoning, the times of "we are all in this together" were brief and transitory; an example was WW2 (way before my time), or perhaps the response to national tragedies, such as the Kennedy assassination. in recent memory, such coming-together was very brief, lasting for perhaps a few months after 9/11. Otherwise, America has always been an atomized and localized society, where the different colonies and different states and different regions, looked askance at the others; cities and countryside imputed to the other all sorts of stupidities and failures; former immigrants rejected recent arrivals... and so forth.
Disparities weren't necessarily less; but they were more tied to effort and expectations. By this I mean, that say 60 years ago, all college-graduates expected to do well, and to do well as a cohort, vs. say those whose formal education stopped at high-school. Today this is markedly not the case, as large portions of college graduates fail in finding remunerative or rewarding employment. By this I mean not merely those who went to third-rate schools, vs. the Ivies. Rather, I mean for example the graduating class of engineers at say a flagship state university. Some go on to become fabulously successful, while others founder and do no better than their counterparts who majored in art-history, or those who dropped out. It was always the case, that those who make foolish decisions, who don't accord due effort, etc., would probably do poorly. But it has recently become broadly the case, that even amongst those who do put in the effort, who do things more or less correctly, there is vast disparity in outcome.
To give another example, take the case of football players at the Division-1 college level. All are superb athletes, for otherwise, they would not have made the team. But some of these players go on to brilliant careers in professional football, or at least good-enough careers to make substantial money. Others will play notably well throughout their 4 years in college, and then will play no more. The disparity in talent is minor. The disparity in effort may be next to zero. But the disparity in outcome is enormous. It is this kind of inequality, I think, that is becoming rampant.
The history of income/wealth inequality has been shown by the Stanford ancient history prof Scheidel. Since people started to settle down and use agriculture around 9000 years ago in Europe, inequality has always been sky-high with only three short-term aberrations:
1. Fall of Roman Empire / Justiniac Plague ~500 AD
2. Black Plague ~1300
3. Mass Mobilization Warfare Era WW1 and WW2
In each exception - era the equalization effect lasted a couple to a few generations. However, the prior extremes were reached again quickly and stabilized there. This is what we are seeing right now - the effects of mass mobilization warfare are subsiding and inequality reasserts itself again vigorously across the world. It would either take a devastating plague, state collapse or mass-mobilization warfare to equalize wealth & income. Not going to happen.
For more details - his book is: The Great Leveler: Violence and the History of Inequality from the Stone Age to the Twenty-First Century https://www.amazon.com/Great-Leveler.../dp/0691165025
Kurt Vonnegut wrote a story about a society that enforced equality. Successful people were handicapped in some way to reduce their abilities to match those of unsuccessful people. For example, talented ballerinas were forced to dance with heavy weights attached to their limbs so they would not perform better than untalented people who thought they should also be ballerinas. Intelligent people had implants that produced random loud noises in their heads so they would not outperform less intelligent people. Etc. As I recall, it didn't end well.
By my reckoning, the times of "we are all in this together" were brief and transitory; an example was WW2 (way before my time), or perhaps the response to national tragedies, such as the Kennedy assassination. in recent memory, such coming-together was very brief, lasting for perhaps a few months after 9/11. Otherwise, America has always been an atomized and localized society, where the different colonies and different states and different regions, looked askance at the others; cities and countryside imputed to the other all sorts of stupidities and failures; former immigrants rejected recent arrivals... and so forth.
Disparities weren't necessarily less; but they were more tied to effort and expectations. By this I mean, that say 60 years ago, all college-graduates expected to do well, and to do well as a cohort, vs. say those whose formal education stopped at high-school. Today this is markedly not the case, as large portions of college graduates fail in finding remunerative or rewarding employment. By this I mean not merely those who went to third-rate schools, vs. the Ivies. Rather, I mean for example the graduating class of engineers at say a flagship state university. Some go on to become fabulously successful, while others founder and do no better than their counterparts who majored in art-history, or those who dropped out. It was always the case, that those who make foolish decisions, who don't accord due effort, etc., would probably do poorly. But it has recently become broadly the case, that even amongst those who do put in the effort, who do things more or less correctly, there is vast disparity in outcome.
To give another example, take the case of football players at the Division-1 college level. All are superb athletes, for otherwise, they would not have made the team. But some of these players go on to brilliant careers in professional football, or at least good-enough careers to make substantial money. Others will play notably well throughout their 4 years in college, and then will play no more. The disparity in talent is minor. The disparity in effort may be next to zero. But the disparity in outcome is enormous. It is this kind of inequality, I think, that is becoming rampant.
this is largely untrue.
yes there is some small overlap with fringe nfl players/practice squad players/ d1 players almost good enough to make the nfl. some of it comes down simply to luck (you're a fringe guy at postion x who gets drafted by a bad team that needs someone at that position, another guy at the same position gets drafted by a better team with an established player at that position)
the vast majority of nfl players are leeps and bounds better than d1 players who don't make the pros.yes those d1 players are (for the most part) better than d2, d3 and high school players who never make it any higher but that doesn't make them close to nfl players.
same for baseball,same for basketball. there's a lot more to being a pro athlete than just being a superb athlete.
now you are right that the difference in lifestyle bw being an elite nfl player and someone who plays d1 but doesn't make the nfl is massive- but that doesn't make them close in talent.
Yes that was an odd example. Talent, size within narrow parameters per position, work ethic, intelligence (processing speed seems to be a huge one)...lots of factors. Also ability to stay healthy and a good dose of luck.
Regarding the we're in it together thing...I remember a brief time after 9/11 being like that. Then it became divisive about war. And that was a big economic downturn that 9/11 contributed to...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
