Should American buy in American Dream?

[Drakkith]

But that would suggest the loss of the american dream, our the inability to obtain it, is not because of a sense of entitlement on behalf of the average person that things should be easier, but because doing the same amount of work as thirty years ago no longer gets you what it once did.

I'm hesitant to believe Turbo's statement without seeing some data to back it up.

 

[mheslep]

The working age includes those that are age 16-17.

Of which would expect few to have a full time job in an up or down economy.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

The kind of story that build an empire from nothing with bare hands?

But of course, it is very tempting isn't it? Like my fav. American Dream denialee, George Carlin, he got rich by telling jokes! And most (normal) people like him! Although he was not filthy rich.

Do most American still buy in that? Or do they laugh at it as if it's some kind of joke? Does it wield no power over current American, as it should be considered something belongs to the 50s?

Empires are built in the US through hard work, every day. You can't even begin to imagine how out of place your question seems to me. As an entrepreneur I see it all the time - some of those people hire me! Times have been tough since the crash of 2008 but slowly we are recovering. In fact the Dow is now approaching an all-time high for the first time since 2007. That represents a tremendous amount of wealth that has been created since Obama took office. Watch the first link in my sig to recall just how far we've come.

I make a good living doing what I love from the place I love; mostly working from home in the lush, green hills and valleys of the pacfic NW. I call that the American dream and I have it. It was certainly my dream.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Another consideration is that for every empire, there are multitudes of failures. And that has always been true. Empire-building means taking risks. As a rule, the greater the risks, the greater the rewards. But risks are real. That dreams can come true doesn't mean they will, and never has. You might work hard and smart your entire life and never truly succeed. But that depends a lot on how you define success, and whether you are willing to put everything you have at risk for the chance of huge rewards.

 

[nitsuj]

I'm not following you on this. Can you elaborate?

In many countries, the state isn't able to or willing to protect the equity of it's citizens.

In the states, if someone steals from my store, (or police harassing a fruit stand owner without just cause ) I have the ethic of the entire country behind me in seeking restitution.

Here is an excerpt from Canadian, which would be simular to the US.
"Everyone has the right to the use and enjoyment of property, individually or in association with others, and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with law and for reasonable compensation."

If the state decides to take my property for whatever purpose (and I'm sure it must be "for the greater good") I get reasonable (market) compensation. Which probably includes any costs related to the move.

I think that clarifies what I mean. especially the stark comparison between the fruit stand merchant in ummm, i forget where and say a fruit stand merchant in the US. The "dream" is your efforts are protected, and the "fruits of labour" are yours. Just a different take on the American dream.

 

[Drakkith]

Ah ok, I see what you mean now Nitsuj.

 

[nitsuj]

"108.616 million people in America are either unemployed, underemployed or "Not in the labor force". This represents 45.5% of working age Americans.

If you count the "Part time employed for non-economic reasons", you get 126.8 million Americans who are unemployed, underemployed, working part time or "Not in the labor force". That represents 53% of working age Americans."

Read more: http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-01-24/markets/29974517_1_part-time-unemployment-labor-force#ixzz1pRnGb1HZ

These numbers get real interesting in the context of global wealth, as opposed to the N.American individual context.

Very general abstract of Wiki page here

N.America 5% global population 27.1% global wealth
Europe 10% global population 30% global wealth
Asia 52% global population 30% global wealth
Africa 10% global population 1.50% global wealth

So even with "126.8 million Americans who are unemployed, underemployed, working part time or "Not in the labor force"" N.America has a 5.21 greater than equal share of the global wealth? cool! With second place a good effort of 2.74, maybe only one car / tv per household with a 15-25% obesity rate in that region.

Poor Africa is in at 0.14. That's 7 times less a fair share, they must complain allot about "bad jobs" & unemployment

 

[wuliheron]

These numbers get real interesting in the context of global wealth, as opposed to the N.American individual context.

The thread is about the American dream and not life, the universe, and everything. However, if you like interesting numbers try 42.

 

[phoenix:\\]

Chiro, the word "empire" was poorly chosen by the OP - it was not meant in the way you used it.

Many still believe in the American dream. Perhaps as important as what Americans believe, the immigrants still streaming in believe in it too.

However, my perception/fear is that it is being perverted by removal of the "work hard" part, replacing it with a sense of entitlement.

Hard work takes a back seat to placement.

 

[Evo]

I made my way up from nothing. My dad was the first in his family to get a college degree and he got it even though he was legally blinded by a shrapnel hit to the face during WWII.

I finshed high school when I was 14 due to being an over acheiver, went to Europe to visit family, then returned and started college at 16 in a business degree, which I didn't want. (my apologies to the members that have heard this a thousand times). My dad was an EE and we weren't rich. I started as a long distance cord board operator for Bell Telephone while I was in school.

Long story short, through hard work and intelligence, within a few years I was promoted to a managerial position at AT&T making well over 6 digits a year.

It can still be done, but due to overpopulation, there is much more competiton. You really have to stay on your toes if you come from a poor family and have no connections, but it can be done.

 

[russ_watters]

Hard work takes a back seat to placement.

Wrong. Hard work and placement are independent of each other. Neither affects the other, so neither can take a back seat to the other. In other words, someone else's placement cannot cause your hard work to be futile.

 

[nitsuj]

The thread is about the American dream and not life, the universe, and everything. However, if you like interesting numbers try 42.

Did you honestly miss my point that is in regards to the American Dream? The American Dream is about life-style.

The "dreamy" landscape of the American economy still exists, and it's defined only by comparison. Not sure whos post I orignally quoted, but it looked like a complaint of the state of unemployement in the US, which is a laughable perspective, in a thread discussing the American Dream.

I preffer the number 72, 42 sucks. I also preffer posts with info in them.

 

[turbo]

I was the first person on either side of my extended family to attend college. Had to leave college to earn more money, and never looked back. Made more money than any of my relatives (through hard work and perseverance) ever did. I'm not intimating that my relatives were lazy - many were hard-working and dedicated, including my father, but they would would be shocked to know how much money I've racked up over the years.

My uncle has an HVAC business, and he says that his wife has figured out that he can afford to retire when he's 91. Yesterday, he suggested that I might be able to make a few bucks helping an older guy invest in some antique firearms. I told him that I'd be happy to do so, but that my sue-happy former employer would tie me up in court for the next couple of years. I had to sue that jerk to try to get the bonus pay that he owed me, then he counter sued for $650K, claiming that I was trying to damage his business. That counter-claim was thrown out in federal court, but it was a PITA.

Anyway, once you have made somebody a millionaire several times over, don't expect them to be nice to you. That ain't happening.

 

[wuliheron]

Did you honestly miss my point that is in regards to the American Dream? The American Dream is about life-style.

The "dreamy" landscape of the American economy still exists, and it's defined only by comparison. Not sure whos post I orignally quoted, but it looked like a complaint of the state of unemployement in the US, which is a laughable perspective, in a thread discussing the American Dream.

I preffer the number 72, 42 sucks. I also preffer posts with info in them.

The American dream isn't about lifestyle, its about being able to go from rags to riches or, at least, a middle class lifestyle. There are even some American millionaires like Warren Buffet famous for living in modest homes or out of hotel rooms because they really don't have any interest in acquiring things. Others that have won the lottery, and continue to work ordinary jobs. At least one millionaire has even given away his fortune after discovering it did not make him happy, but he's still an American success story.

 

[nitsuj]

The American dream isn't about lifestyle, its about being able to go from rags to riches or, at least, a middle class lifestyle. There are even some American millionaires like Warren Buffet famous for living in modest homes or out of hotel rooms because they really don't have any interest in acquiring things. Others that have won the lottery, and continue to work ordinary jobs. At least one millionaire has even given away his fortune after discovering it did not make him happy, but he's still an American success story.

Lots of "stuff" i could point out in your post but ill leave it at this,

Warren Buffet giving away billions of dollars and committing large portions to African causes, is completely against the grain of capitalism and in turn the American Dream. I like to think this gesture speaks of his true character. It's fantastic!

That being said I feel a more sane approach is to spend it within the relatively tight checks & balances of lawfully developed states and put into health care / education infrastructure for example.

 

[wuliheron]

Lots of "stuff" i could point out in your post but ill leave it at this,

Warren Buffet giving away billions of dollars and committing large portions to African causes, is completely against the grain of capitalism and in turn the American Dream. I like to think this gesture speaks of his true character. It's fantastic!

That being said I feel a more sane approach is to spend it within the relatively tight checks & balances of lawfully developed states and put into health care / education infrastructure for example.

Promoting the idea that giving money is somehow unamerican is disgusting and vulgar.

 

[chiro]

Promoting the idea that giving money is somehow unamerican is disgusting and vulgar.

While I don't agree with his exact word usage, I do agree that having a system where unfair subsidies of any sort are a natural part of the system is not a good idea.

This is what some people refer as the 'Too Big To Fail' movement. The idea is that in a fair capitalistic society people rise and fall on their own merits and on their own success.

The idea that there should be so called 'state-controlled capitalism' is something I personally am against since for some corporations, it transfers the risk from the corporation to the government and eventually to the taxpayer.

Capitalism in my mind when it is 'fair' (I don't have a complete definition but for now I'll say that a system is fair when there is no system-level arbitrage: i.e. everyone is capable of starting a business and operating in an environment where other companies can not unfairly do things to otherwise cause an unfair advantage: I know it's not well defined but bear with me here) is the best model to have and although I haven't given a good definition of fair, I am very confident in saying that any kind of taxpayer subsidised system is anything but.

So on this interpretation of handouts with respect to a capitalistic perspective, it does make sense that in this viewpoint the author has a valid point.

 

[phoenix:\\]

Wrong. Hard work and placement are independent of each other. Neither affects the other, so neither can take a back seat to the other. In other words, someone else's placement cannot cause your hard work to be futile.

Hard work takes a back seat when it comes to placement and the primary cause of this is a person having the necessary connections in place to become successful without working hard. Chances of success are high whereas chances of success through diligence and hard-work are slim. And in today's climate, hard-work is pretty much useless, it takes smarter work and better connections to become successful.

Of course you can work hard, but the cases for those who have worked hard primarily became successful through their connections they've had. So it is a matter of placement when we are scrutinizing the value of hard-work vs. network in helping one become successful. If you are just working hard at your job and wanting to be successful, chances of you reaching the top are slim. A person with better connections whom works less will, more times than not, beat out one whom works hard but doesn't have as good connections.

And, you really don't have to work hard. I never work hard in school simply because I just work in accordance to what is optimal for me. In other words, I work smarter without unnecessarily overexerting myself through hard work.

 

[ThomasT]

The kind of story that build an empire from nothing with bare hands?

But of course, it is very tempting isn't it? Like my fav. American Dream denialee, George Carlin, he got rich by telling jokes! And most (normal) people like him! Although he was not filthy rich.

Do most American still buy in that? Or do they laugh at it as if it's some kind of joke? Does it wield no power over current American, as it should be considered something belongs to the 50s?

As Carlin said, they call it the American dream because you have to be asleep to believe it. But Carlin was a cynical cokehead, albeit a funny, and sometimes insightful, guy.

What you're asking is can, in America, hard work and perserverence produce a significantly better life for yourself and your family? Of course it can. It might not. But, in America, the chances are that it will -- and, anyway, there's only one way to find out.

Make a commitment. Work hard. Perservere. My guess is that you'll be positively rewarded -- in America.

 

[nitsuj]

Promoting the idea that giving money is somehow unamerican is disgusting and vulgar.

To suggest altruistic gestures are somehow "American" is disgusting & vulgar.

To suggest capitalism & the American dream are "American" is disgusting & vulgar.

 

[Alex_Sanders]

I made my way up from nothing. My dad was the first in his family to get a college degree and he got it even though he was legally blinded by a shrapnel hit to the face during WWII.

I finshed high school when I was 14 due to being an over acheiver, went to Europe to visit family, then returned and started college at 16 in a business degree, which I didn't want. (my apologies to the members that have heard this a thousand times). My dad was an EE and we weren't rich. I started as a long distance cord board operator for Bell Telephone while I was in school.

Long story short, through hard work and intelligence, within a few years I was promoted to a managerial position at AT&T making well over 6 digits a year.

It can still be done, but due to overpopulation, there is much more competiton. You really have to stay on your toes if you come from a poor family and have no connections, but it can be done.

Whoa! That's just amazing! I mean your life... it could be made into a movie! It's pure saga, I can't even imagine!

And I'm so overwhelmed I can't think of any question to ask right now...

 

[DragonPetter]

I made my way up from nothing. My dad was the first in his family to get a college degree and he got it even though he was legally blinded by a shrapnel hit to the face during WWII.

I finshed high school when I was 14 due to being an over acheiver, went to Europe to visit family, then returned and started college at 16 in a business degree, which I didn't want. (my apologies to the members that have heard this a thousand times). My dad was an EE and we weren't rich. I started as a long distance cord board operator for Bell Telephone while I was in school.

Long story short, through hard work and intelligence, within a few years I was promoted to a managerial position at AT&T making well over 6 digits a year.

It can still be done, but due to overpopulation, there is much more competiton. You really have to stay on your toes if you come from a poor family and have no connections, but it can be done.

I'm not questioning your accomplishments, that is impressive that you succeeded so well, but I have to ask, how was your family poor if your father was an EE? Do you mean relatively poor to a spoon-fed trustfund kid? And how can you say you came from nothing? You had high school provided at least. I really wish my father or mother had a post-high school education in sciences/math, and I even just wish I grew up in a scientifically literate family, which you had with your father. Did he not mentor/instill anything in you or devote attention to you?

 

[turbo]

There is (or at least was) a viable American dream. My father was a sheet-metal worker doing his best to support a family of 6. I studied hard and worked on all school breaks/summers and saved all my money for college. I was the very first person in my very large extended family to go past HS. I got accepted to MIT, but the financial-aid package wouldn't have allowed me to afford that school. I got early-acceptance letters from Michigan State and Arizona State, though I never applied to either one. In the end, I stayed with Maine's land-grant college in Orono. I played guitar and sang for frat parties and bought, refurbished, and sold electric guitars and tube amps, and spent every summer working in veneer mills back home. Those earned me enough money to pay for tuition, books, rent, food, etc. It didn't seem too stressful or tough for me, but I had to budget my time so I could keep up with engineering school.

 

[DragonPetter]

There is (or at least was) a viable American dream. My father was a sheet-metal worker doing his best to support a family of 6. I studied hard and worked on all school breaks/summers and saved all my money for college. I was the very first person in my very large extended family to go past HS. I got accepted to MIT, but the financial-aid package wouldn't have allowed me to afford that school. I got early-acceptance letters from Michigan State and Arizona State, though I never applied to either one. In the end, I stayed with Maine's land-grant college in Orono. I played guitar and sang for frat parties and bought, refurbished, and sold electric guitars and tube amps, and spent every summer working in veneer mills back home. Those earned me enough money to pay for tuition, books, rent, food, etc. It didn't seem too stressful or tough for me, but I had to budget my time so I could keep up with engineering school.

That is an impressive story too.

Sadly today you can work as many part time jobs as you want and still be in big debt after graduation because of the costs of tuition, books, and rent, and you aren't even guaranteed to find a job. The universities are saturated with people who probably are not even qualified to go to them, and the demand only brings the tuition costs higher and higher.

One way around this is to do well in high school and earn scholarships, but even this is not guaranteed since scholarships are often more politically motivated than scholarly motivated.

In Europe, many universities offer free tuition, which I think is more of a dream enabler for poor people than the American higher education system.

I think what Evo said rings true, that there is a lot more competition today than in the past and so it is more difficult to float to the top if you are starting at the bottom, and I think a lot of it is based on luck and being in the right place at the right time, unfortunately.

Edit: Also, in my opinion, private companies should be doing more for their employees to compensate the investment that the employees made in their skills and knowledge (or employees should be demanding more). The employee is doing hard work for them in addition to basically doing 4-8 years of hardwork of training themselves that the private companies got for free. From tuition rises, can we say that higher level training and education is more valuable now than it used to be? I think retro paying some tuition is a fair expectation considering all of the sacrifices that need to be made to get to the technical level that these companies demand of people. I am really confused at the pay discrepancies between educated and uneducated workers, where it is more often becoming financially sound to skip college education and to go into trades or other occupations that don't demand so much education. I don't think less of someone who skips college, because they might love or be really good at their occupation, but I think its a shame if someone with the potential for academic success should be torn between investing in education and having a better job. In the end, it seems to be up to supply and demand though, and its very easy for companies to get what they want as cheap as possible.

 

[turbo]

Many of my jobs were self-employment, and the summer jobs were much more than full-time because I worked all the overtime I could get and a lot of the other employees at the veneer mills (2 in town) wanted at least some time off in the summer so they could go fishing, etc.

As I said, I could not get enough financial aid to attend MIT, but this was back in 68-69 when a lot of young men wanted college placement to avoid being sent to 'Nam, and colleges rolled back the aid packages. Not that it mattered much. After I was already in engineering school, the US came up with a lottery system based on your birth-date. No more student deferments.

 

[russ_watters]

I'm not questioning your accomplishments, that is impressive that you succeeded so well, but I have to ask, how was your family poor if your father was an EE? Do you mean relatively poor to a spoon-fed trustfund kid?

Evo didn't say she was poor, she just said she was not rich [growing up].

And how can you say you came from nothing? You had high school provided at least.

IMO, you're setting an unreasonably high baseline. "Came up from nothing" may be a technically inaccurate cliche', but what it really means is nothing more than what everyone else is provided. I personally consider anyone who passed age 20 without spending a large fraction of their time in a hospital with cancer and didn't earn a high school diploma to have been abused. A parent has to do little more than make sure the kid goes to school and provide a modest amount of encouragement to make sure the kid gets that diploma.

Did he not mentor/instill anything in you or devote attention to you?

My own family history's bullet points look a lot like Evo's so I'll just speak for myself: absolutely, he did. I played the trumpet because he handed me his old trumpet when I was little and started teaching me and before most other kids knew what the word meant (something with trains, right?) I knew I would be an engineer because he was - and we thought alike.

So yes, short of handing a kid a trust fund, the most important gift a parent can give their kids is the gift of ambition. But really - is there anything that makes ambition something anyone can't give their kids? Two examples:

My mother was the first in her family to earn a college degree (caveat; my grandmother had a teaching certificate which at the time was similar to an assoc. degree). She earned it when she was ~50. Why? Because at some point in her early 30s, she discovered ambition. I assume she learned of its power from my dad. So in my house, the idea of college wasn't even something to be discussed. It wasn't even expected: it was assumed. My sister and I were going to college. Period. So we did.

My girlfriend's family was the opposite. She was recently disowned by her family. Her crime? Ambition. The college discussion in her family was a negative one: 'Do you really think you can do it? What makes you better than the rest of us? Heh - good luck with that!' Now she only has an associates degree that she mostly paid for herself, but she's been successfully living on her own, with a job that has a decent career path, since she was around 22. This ambition alienated her from her parents. She's now 33 and is the second oldest of 4 kids and until a few months ago was the only one to move out of the parents' house. The other girl just moved in with her boyfriend - she's 31. That was disappointing for the parents - the rent money was nice to have.

I find my girlfriend's family situation to have been abusive. And, in my perception, this is the most common "barrier" to achieving the American Dream (in quotes because it is psychological, not physical). I've seen few people who were on a path to it who got permanently sidelined by a roadblock completely out of their control. It is my perception that most people who fail to achieve some level of the American Dream fail because they don't believe they can succeed by their own doing, so they choose to make compromises that guarantee failure without luck.

 

[mheslep]

...short of handing a kid a trust fund, the most important gift a parent can give their kids is the gift of ambition.

Aside: from what I can see giving a *kid* a trust fund (beyond paying for education) in most cases is one of the worst things a parent can do. Later in life maybe, but not to youth. Trust funds kill ambition, and may be a metaphor for the larger ills of the country.

 

[chiro]

Aside: from what I can see giving a *kid* a trust fund (beyond paying for education) in most cases is one of the worst things a parent can do. Later in life maybe, but not to youth. Trust funds kill ambition, and may be a metaphor for the larger ills of the country.

Just to add to the ambition comment, I think it's also important to give the kid a level head. Someone with ambition but without being grounded in some sense will not end up in a good situation. Sometimes this situation will help them become grounded and this is probably a good thing, but if they don't become grounded then that can be a potential catastrophe especially if the ungroundedness goes on for a very long time which will probably end up with an equally huge fall.

Chances are though, the ambitious kids that stay ambitious after getting hammered with some kind of failure will probably turn out really well: IMO, but still I think it carries some weight.

 

[phoenix:\\]

Ambition cannot be taught and ambition is more coupled with other things than itself alone. Today's youth, I guess the ones I tend to spend time with (age bracket), aren't exactly ambitious although they talk about ambitious goals most of the time. I say it is a lack of work ethic to see those goals brought to fruition. And the problem is the mindset of young people and how they are brought up, not their trust fund.

 

[mheslep]

Apropos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rg24frs_3oQ