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.
Plus, the upper middle class (top 20%) in the United States is more affluent than that of Norway.
Yeah, that’s sort of my point. The US is turning into a South American country with wealth heavily concentrated at the top. That’s not a good thing in my opinion.
Yeah, I would generally agree with this. I’ve been fairly privileged, dad made and makes a lot of money, but I think in a developed country, people deserve to live a decent life. There are plenty of slackers, both rich and poor, who are in fact entitled or they think they’re entitled. Fraud is rampant, but welfare fraudsters still have pretty ****ty lives for the most part. Fraud and scams are the biggest problem I think which is why I have a problem with the dogmatic stance politicians like Bernie Sanders take.
At some point you suck it up and accept that the US will never be a Norway. We just don’t have that kind of culture.
Sure, everyone DESERVES a decent life. That doesn't mean everyone is entitled to it. you have to WORK for it.
My dad, and mom, and uncles, and aunt all grew up dirt-poor. Tenement-style NYC, no heat during the day, shared bathroom with other tenants, watered-down soup for dinner. Yet, every single one went on to graduate from college, with some returning (later in adulthood) for advanced degrees.
Now, granted....they were all quite bright and their good grades earned them free college. But you don't even have to be that bright to move from poverty to "a decent life." Stay in school.....don't get pregnant or father babies....study, study, study so you can at least get a C....and then enroll in a post-high school trade school or community college. (Pell Grants will cover it.) Go at night if you have to work during the day.
Anyone with an IQ of 90+ can do it. It just takes motivation, sacrifice, hard work, and a desire to become self-sufficient.
Sure, everyone DESERVES a decent life. That doesn't mean everyone is entitled to it. you have to WORK for it.
My dad, and mom, and uncles, and aunt all grew up dirt-poor. Tenement-style NYC, no heat during the day, shared bathroom with other tenants, watered-down soup for dinner. Yet, every single one went on to graduate from college, with some returning (later in adulthood) for advanced degrees.
Now, granted....they were all quite bright and their good grades earned them free college. But you don't even have to be that bright to move from poverty to "a decent life." Stay in school.....don't get pregnant or father babies....study, study, study so you can at least get a C....and then enroll in a post-high school trade school or community college. (Pell Grants will cover it.) Go at night if you have to work during the day.
Anyone with an IQ of 90+ can do it. It just takes motivation, sacrifice, hard work, and a desire to become self-sufficient.
Oh, I agree. I’m descended from dirt farmers in Kansas on my dad’s side.
But nowadays, getting “rich” is not quite the same as it once was. Opportunity costs are higher, socioeconomic lines are harder to break through.
It doesn’t mean I don’t agree with you that there is an entitlement class that slacks their way though life.
I just think the scamming and the fraud is just as much of a problem among the rich (taxes) as it is the poor. And the middle class gets screwed.
Oh, I agree. I’m descended from dirt farmers in Kansas on my dad’s side.
But nowadays, getting “rich” is not quite the same as it once was. Opportunity costs are higher, socioeconomic lines are harder to break through.
It doesn’t mean I don’t agree with you that there is an entitlement class that slacks their way though life.
I just think the scamming and the fraud is just as much of a problem among the rich (taxes) as it is the poor. And the middle class gets screwed.
Yeah, we're pretty much on the same page.
As far as the title of the thread, I'd prefer the goal be moved from "the poor getting rich" (which, as you say, as higher opportunity costs than it once did) to "the poor becoming middle class." That is completely doable for 95% of the population. The formula has been proven again and again: stay in school, don't make babies before marriage, and attain some sort of marketable skill or start a business filling a need.
As far as the title of the thread, I'd prefer the goal be moved from "the poor getting rich" (which, as you say, as higher opportunity costs than it once did) to "the poor becoming middle class." That is completely doable for 95% of the population. The formula has been proven again and again: stay in school, don't make babies before marriage, and attain some sort of marketable skill or start a business filling a need.
Yeah, that’s sort of my point. The US is turning into a South American country with wealth heavily concentrated at the top. That’s not a good thing in my opinion.
So, to be fair, in assessing Norway, we should realize that Norway became rich not because it has generous welfare programs...but because it has massive oil reserves. Their leaders were smart enough not to blow every last cent on everyday consumption and now their Sovereign Wealth fund has the monetary value per capita that is enormous. Additionally, Norwegians will still continue working to support each other with basic services as it is the culture....but they know the entire system falls apart if too many people come in and take over so they don't want immigration.
Norway isn't socialist as much as it is a very rich country that wants its culture preserved and will use a system of carrots/sticks to make sure it stays that way. Regardless of wealth level, most Norwegians will work.
Residents in Alaska get an oil check each year. They have the opposite problem. They need more workers. They want immigration. Where's that magic point of incentivizing someone to come and work, but not incentivising so much that people immigrate but don't work?
We have another point as well. Look at Saudi Arabia. They have tremendous wealth from oil and most Saudis do not work. They import their workers. Those workers don't have many rights. You could almost describe it as a period of indentured servitude.
This appears to be what the Socialists in the US want. A system where I can lie around all day and be covered or significantly overpaid for my contribution because I am a victim, while an imported underclass can enter easily to do the actual work. There's a delusion that we have giant oil riches that just aren't being shared, and they'll stop at nothing to rationalize their way into the wealth others have legally acquired and why they should be allowed to have it. They will demonize the rich. They will say the situation for the poor is hopeless and the fault of the rich. They will ignore that many of the rich did not start that way. They developed something of value that helps people.
Socialists are parasites. They weaken the host. The Nordic countries are not socialist. They flirted with it in the past, but turned back. They do maintain many programs because capitalism and high taxes made them wealthy. They have found solutions for themselves. Don't confuse that with socialism. It's more like compassionate liberalism with a xenophobic twist.
Socialism destroys wealth. It is not a way for a poor person to become rich. It is a way for a poor person to forever remain poor.
Except the "American Dream" of bootstrapping out of poverty statistically doesn't happen in the United States; social mobility is MUCH better in Europe and Canada.
"..Of the eight countries studied—Canada, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Norway, Germany, the UK and the US, the US had both the highest economic inequality and lowest economic mobility"
I've often wondered about these studies. They often describe mobility as climbing from X to Y percentile. In the western European social democracies, wealth accumulation is far less than in the USA. There are fewer millionaires and billionaires. So the greater mobility could simply be a measure of a smaller range of income and wealth. Which does not measure an increase in quality of life or even disposable income if taxes are heavily progressive.
To answer the OP, unless one comes from a background with a lot of social capital, progressing from poor to rich is a multigenerational process in the USA. Being "rich" involves more than having a lot of money; you need to be socialized from a young age in a certain way.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,601,062 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocko20
Generally, small 1st world homogeneous countries are doing better than a massive diverse one? No way!
It's almost as if liberals are now arguing against all immigration.
Sorry for inviting the world's poor in America, which in turn ruins our global economic mobility statistics, I guess we better build a wall and travel ban, huh?
What does ethnic background have to do with anything? People are people, unless you're racist, or stereotype other ethnicities
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.
