San Francisco, Oakland Among America's Most Unequal Big Cities (Montclair: 2014, loans)

[jade408]

We have so many problems, and it is hard to encapsulate it into a short set of thoughts.

Part of the reason we have income inequality, is because once people have "made it," they think everyone has a similar path to success. Particularly when your pay was easy, we assume everyone has the same access to opportunity as you did. And the same lucky breaks.

Because of this general lack of empathy, we don't feel like it is necessary to come up with a concrete way to get the people at the bottom up to a level where they can sustain moderate success.

Our society is built in a way, that if you don't have access to the easy path, you need to be absolutely extraordinary to succeed (or maybe it is really survive in relative comfort). But not everyone can be extraordinary. Or has the potential to be extraordinary. And instead of coming up with success paths for ordinary people, we decide we need more rewards for the extraordinary people. Those exceptions. The poor kids who grow up to be millionaires. The college dropouts that become the next Mark Zuckerberg. The Kobe Bryants on the basketball court (or his peers in the NFL, MLB, and NHL). The Beyonces and Jay-Zs. And we keep asking, why can't more people be like those people, exceptionally driven, and lucky enough to catch all of the breaks.

And we don't ask, how can we get everyone, no matter what their starting point is, enough education, access and opportunity for well-paying careers so they can afford a decent life.

And increasingly, the "good life" is only affordable to the top 20%, instead of the top 50%.

[mini_cute]

Originally Posted by jade408

We have so many problems, and it is hard to encapsulate it into a short set of thoughts.

Part of the reason we have income inequality, is because once people have "made it," they think everyone has a similar path to success. Particularly when your pay was easy, we assume everyone has the same access to opportunity as you did. And the same lucky breaks.

Because of this general lack of empathy, we don't feel like it is necessary to come up with a concrete way to get the people at the bottom up to a level where they can sustain moderate success.

Our society is built in a way, that if you don't have access to the easy path, you need to be absolutely extraordinary to succeed (or maybe it is really survive in relative comfort). But not everyone can be extraordinary. Or has the potential to be extraordinary. And instead of coming up with success paths for ordinary people, we decide we need more rewards for the extraordinary people. Those exceptions. The poor kids who grow up to be millionaires. The college dropouts that become the next Mark Zuckerberg. The Kobe Bryants on the basketball court (or his peers in the NFL, MLB, and NHL). The Beyonces and Jay-Zs. And we keep asking, why can't more people be like those people, exceptionally driven, and lucky enough to catch all of the breaks.

And we don't ask, how can we get everyone, no matter what their starting point is, enough education, access and opportunity for well-paying careers so they can afford a decent life.

And increasingly, the "good life" is only affordable to the top 20%, instead of the top 50%.

Well, America is the poster child of Capitalism. In Capitalism, there are inherently winners and losers. The problem goes back to the foundation of the economic structure of the US.

One way America can become less Capitalist is to become more Socialist. But half of America won't be having that. They think socialism = USSR.

I wonder how this ugly high income inequality is going to play out. The last time it was like this, we had the Great Depression and then the social programs to follow along with other factor which unleashed a large middle class and the most prosperous time for all Americans in history. It hasn't happened this time around. So what will be the result? At this point, it ain't looking pretty.

And actually, I think America has in its history, mostly been unequal. I think the only time things were more equal was the 50s and the couple of decades after. That was an anomaly. America has mostly been quite unfair going back all the way to stealing the land from the Indians and the wars with them, slavery, and so on. America has for the most part, always had a large underclass that gets trashed upon.

American values are touted as being Freedom and Opportunity for All. Well, I think the highest value in the US, at least right now, is Capitalism. The Freedom part is only there to help support and prop up Capitalism. Opportunity for All, well whatever opportunity there was for all has gone out the window. Besides, a lot of that opportunity was driven by cheap land that was stolen from the Indians.

[jade408]

Originally Posted by mini_cute

Well, America is the poster child of Capitalism. In Capitalism, there are inherently winners and losers. The problem goes back to the foundation of the economic structure of the US.

The problem we have is not only the capitalism. But the fact that in our American ideal, anyone can be a winner if they try hard. But reality, not all winners try as hard as the losers. It isn't as simple as "pulling yourself up by your bootstraps" when some people don't have access to boot straps, and other people have bootstraps made of cotton candy.

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by jade408

The problem we have is not only the capitalism. But the fact that in our American ideal, anyone can be a winner if they try hard. But reality, not all winners try as hard as the losers. It isn't as simple as "pulling yourself up by your bootstraps" when some people don't have access to boot straps, and other people have bootstraps made of cotton candy.

Right so even without even a word of judgment against poor people, what are cities supposed to do with this ranking?

[Marv101]

If anybody's pushing out the middle class from SF, LA or the rest of California it's the Democrats in Sacramento and especially the so-called 'San Francisco Six' which consist of Gov(Brown/Kamala Harris, Gavin Newsom, Nancy Pelosi, Sen. Feinstein & Sen. Boxer) in Sacto and DC,

They and tons of their Democratic Party predecessors, all of whom are undeniably liberal, pro green jobs (a job killing entity of its own), pro slow-growth and/or urban containment zealots (why is that a problem?), have steadily and repeatedly initiated various economic policies which have sent our gasoline prices and prices for real estate in large swaths of the state into the stratosphere.

Consequently,to the surprise of no one except the sleepyheads in the liberal press has been devastating to the middle class, and certainly goes along way towards explaining the rock bottom numbers of children between ages 4-15 which has been plunging for several years according to Joel Kotkin and other noted demographers, which will demolish the state's house-of-cards revenue base within the next two decades as millions of child-bearing women continue to flee the state for prosperity and the much chance at a better life in numerous thriving communities nationwide.

They've also systematically destroyed the state's public schools which have gone from best in the nation to worst in the nation (or pretty close to it) over the course of the past 35+ years, and continue to do so DELIBERATELY without a peep of protest from the liberal newspapers statewide and nationally who are supposed to point out their tactics which have also destroyed the manufacturing base in this state thanks to them.

Even with the current snowpack in the Sierras at 21% of normal as of last month according to NPR, the drought plaguing large portions of the rest of the state is solely their fault, since they decided to cast their lot with environmentalists, (yet another standout job-killing entity with few equals) decades ago, much to the detriment of everybody else except the one-percenters whom are their number oneconstituency, as well as civil service unions, and the Calif. Teachers Union in particular.

[Stephen1110]

To begin with, America can not be wholly defined without inequality: accordingly, it has to reveal itself somewhere.

Can't Have Your Cake
These cities where disproportionate rich and poor populations exist, we call unequal. Should the poor be shut out of these cities - which are job centers, transportation hubs, and loaded with amenities and infrastructure?

And Eat It Too
Gentrification - in which the middle class displaces the poor. Surely, this would create a more equal city. But the process is still controversial. The poor are moving into suburbs at a historical high. Are they better off there? Or does inequality get relocated, but not dealt with?

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

I don't know what they want us to do about this. So we have a lot of very wealthy people and a lot of very poor people living in the same city. Is there something inherently wrong with that? I don't think so. I mean, rich and poor both need somewhere to live and if it happens to be in the same city, then that's just the way it is. Do they want us to hoard the bank accounts of the richest people and distribute it to the poorest?

Maybe they want "Upper Rockridge" and Montclair to peel off and form their own enclave, like Piedmont. That might be kinda cool, actually. They'd take Lake Temescal along with them.

[chessgeek]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

I agree completely.

So what can Oakland and SF do to change the tide? I ask because I really don't know.

Don't Daly City (nearby SF suburb) and San Leandro and Hayward (nearby Oakland suburbs) have some areas where the middle class live? That was my impression anyways. Maybe that has changed.

[andyadhi01]

Originally Posted by mini_cute

Well, America is the poster child of Capitalism. In Capitalism, there are inherently winners and losers. The problem goes back to the foundation of the economic structure of the US.

One way America can become less Capitalist is to become more Socialist. But half of America won't be having that. They think socialism = USSR.

I wonder how this ugly high income inequality is going to play out. The last time it was like this, we had the Great Depression and then the social programs to follow along with other factor which unleashed a large middle class and the most prosperous time for all Americans in history. It hasn't happened this time around. So what will be the result? At this point, it ain't looking pretty.

And actually, I think America has in its history, mostly been unequal. I think the only time things were more equal was the 50s and the couple of decades after. That was an anomaly. America has mostly been quite unfair going back all the way to stealing the land from the Indians and the wars with them, slavery, and so on. America has for the most part, always had a large underclass that gets trashed upon.

American values are touted as being Freedom and Opportunity for All. Well, I think the highest value in the US, at least right now, is Capitalism. The Freedom part is only there to help support and prop up Capitalism. Opportunity for All, well whatever opportunity there was for all has gone out the window. Besides, a lot of that opportunity was driven by cheap land that was stolen from the Indians.

Well most likely America will get into war in another country in the name of capitalism, freedom and opportunity and the poor masses of America will rise up in a jingostic passion and forget their own problem-

[Ultrarunner]

I am the only one to say not everyone desires to be rich?

My grandmother would say money is the root of all evil...

I don't begrudge someone for being rich and I admire those that achieve wealth through innovation and design... the old finding a need and filling it.

Some are just content with what they have and isn't happiness related to being content?