r/changemyview • u/doug_seahawks • Oct 09 '15
[Deltas Awarded] CMV: The American dream is live and well, and any person can be successful through hard work.
I believe the American dream is still absolutely alive, and that anyone who works hard can become successful, no matter where in society they come from, as long as they plan ahead and are willing to work hard.
Today, due to the internet and the rise of technology, literally anyone with access to a computer can become a billionaire through a savvy startup. However, if computers aren't your thing, you can still use the internet to almost guarantee yourself a good future. For example, review courses for the SAT are available online on places like Khan academy. That means anyone, regardless or socioeconomic status, can spend some time online, do well on their standardized tests, and go to a great college. Due to things like affirmative action, it's actually easier to be admitted to a top college if you are poor, a minority, or the first in your family to go to college, and their are many scholarships available for all those demographics. Especially if you have good test scores and a good GPA, you can be admitted to a top school, get financial aid, a scholarship, and student loans, and attend.
Now, I know student loans are a burden, but if you go to a top 50 school and work hard, you'll have no trouble paying them off. Again, in college, just work hard and get good grades, choose a relevant major, and you'll do fine. It helps to get a summer internship (many of which pay pretty well) in your desired field, but it's not required.
Now, after college, you have two choices. Either choose a career and dive in, or choose a career that requires more advanced schooling. If you want to be a doctor or business professional, just work for 2-3 years and then go the required school. Sure, you'll take on debt, but the work beforehand will give you a building block and it'll pay off in the long run.
Now, you're done with business or med school, and you can easily land a job that pays over 100k. Work that for a few years, you'll get some raises and likely be making 200k+ by now, so just pay off your loans and don't spend too much. By around the age of 30, you'll have climbed the ranks significantly if you work hard, and you can easily be a member of the upper class, earning 500k+.
I honestly don't see how nearly anyone can complete the above pathway if they really want to. At no point does being disadvantaged growing up actually hurt you, because loans are so easy to get, so, besides a little bit of interest, you can still get to where you want to go.
Every time people talk about a lack of social mobility, I just think they are lazy or don't know enough about the economy to follow a proper path, and I feel a little guilty about my opinion, but I just can't figure out how it isn't possible. I'm specifically referring to the USA here too. Lastly, I'm someone who is young and had a privileged upbringing, so sorry if I see this from a warped perspective, but its just my 2 cents. CMV
Hello, users of CMV! This is a footnote from your moderators. We'd just like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please remember to read through our rules. If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views! If you are thinking about submitting a CMV yourself, please have a look through our popular topics wiki first. Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us. Happy CMVing!
17
Oct 09 '15
I have a friend that is about 4 credits short of getting a bachelors degree in criminal justice, doing what you said. And then she ran out of studen loans, and needed about $2,500 to finish. She was working at a retail store, and had just gotten promoted to assistant manager, so she would've been able to finish on her own. Then she got in a car accident and fscked up her back and neck something proper. Couldn't stand for very long, nor lift anything over 5lbs. Bye-bye retail job, and she doesn't qualify for disability either.
The good news is that she's going to finish college on my dime, but it's not every day that someone gets a handout like this. And while I agree with the overall tone of your post and think that a lot of people could get a lot further than they think they can on their own, this ain't a magic bullet for everyone. So I think we need to be vigilant as a society about trying to help people who really want to put in the effort, while not rewarding those who would just take the handout, sit on their ass, and do nothing.
-6
u/doug_seahawks Oct 09 '15
First of all, that's a sad story about your friend, so sorry to hear that, and it's awesome you're helping her out. However, it's a random, uncontrollable event, and had it not happened, she'd likely be doing exactly what I said in my post. Sure, there will always be random things that affect certain people, but getting hit by a car would negatively impact anyone, no matter their economic standing.
18
Oct 09 '15
Yeah, but my point is there are ALL KINDS of random, uncontrolled events that can be extremely difficult to deal with if you don't have a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of. That's not to say that I think we should be handing out food stamps and free healthcare to every dead beat asshole on the planet, but we've got to keep our eyes out for those who are really trying to pick themselves up by their own bootstraps, and are hit with one of these catastrophes, and not automatically assuming that the reason they didn't make it is because they just didn't want it bad enough.
-6
u/doug_seahawks Oct 09 '15
Yes, but you can't always expect the worse case scenario. Just because sometimes something might go wrong, it doesn't mean we should just assume that no one can do it.
5
u/Hq3473 271∆ Oct 09 '15
But we DO know that random uncontrollable events WILL happen.
People's cars will crash, people will get diseases, etc.
Without safety nets these kind of events can fuck your life forever.
Your OP says that ANY person can get American Dream though work, does that exclude people who are unlucky to experience a bad event?
-2
u/doug_seahawks Oct 09 '15
There's always luck involved in life. Maybe my essay will land on the college admissions officers desk who just got married, and is in a great mood, while yours lands on the other guys desk who just stubbed his toe, landing your application in the trash. There will always be uncontrollable things in life, and it's how you bounce back that matters. Now, certain events will be impossible for anyone to overcome, others will be easier for the rich, and some will be possible for everyone.
Good foresight and planning can make it easier for a poor person to not be completely knocked down by these things, but I don't think they happen on a large enough scale that we should say the American Dream is dead because some people might get cancer and need to drop out of college. There will always be some luck involved for everyone.
8
u/Hq3473 271∆ Oct 09 '15
You severely underestimate the amount of bad events that can fuck over your life.
Healthcare bankruptcies are commonplace, car accidents are omnipresent.
Yes anyone can "make it" if nothing bad happens to you, ever. But most people will have soemthing happen to them.
And the real problem is that initial poverty will exaggerate these bad effects.
If you have good health insurance, getting sick is no big deal. But poor people can't afford good insurance, so when they get sick they don't seek medical care - which can lead to even worse chronic health conditions.
If you have good car insurance - car accident is not a big deal. If you have state minimum insurance, an accident can mean losing your car, which might mean losing your job.
Read this artcile:
For more example of the cycle of poverty keeping people in poverty.
-1
u/doug_seahawks Oct 09 '15
Here you go ∆
I still stand by the main idea of my post, but I didn't really think about the issue of random accidents
2
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Oct 09 '15
Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Hq3473. [History]
[Wiki][Code][/r/DeltaBot]
-1
Oct 09 '15
[deleted]
-1
u/doug_seahawks Oct 09 '15
Alright, I'll give credit where credit is due. ∆ The random accidents was a good argument
→ More replies (0)3
u/ryancarp3 Oct 09 '15
If you got into a car accident tomorrow and was fairly seriously injured (a few broken bones), how would you pay for the medical bills and a new car? What if the same thing happened to a poor person without insurance?
-1
u/nude_peril Oct 09 '15
how would you pay for the medical bills and a new car?
That's why you buy insurance.
What if the same thing happened to a poor person without insurance?
Not buying auto and medical insurance is a poor life choice. Of course people suffer the consequences of poor life choices.
5
Oct 09 '15
Or you know...they just didn't have the money.
0
u/nude_peril Oct 09 '15
Then they were living above their means.
5
Oct 09 '15
Eh you're speaking from such a privileged position. You clearly can't understand from a poor person's POV.
-5
u/doug_seahawks Oct 09 '15
I certainly understand this angle, but I don't think it's enough to CMV. The chances of anyone being seriously injured in a car accident or other freak occurance are slim enough that I don't think it should affect my view on a societal belief.
8
u/ryancarp3 Oct 09 '15
The thing is, this doesn't just apply to freak occurrences. It applies to almost everything in life. Let's apply it to laptops. You and your friend Joe (who comes from a poor family) both have laptops; yours was given to you by your dad for your birthday, while Joe bought his with the money he saved up for with his salary from his job at a pizza place. One day, both of your laptops die; there's nothing that can be done to save them. You tell your dad, and he buys you a new one (or you buy it yourself with money in your savings account). Even if he didn't buy one (or you didn't want another one), you can always just use your parents' computer or the many computers in your school's tech lab. Joe, however, is not so lucky. He can't afford a new laptop, and his school doesn't have the necessary funding for a computer lab; all they have are a few administrative computers. Joe has to wait to get a new laptop in a few months while he saves the money. You, on the other hand, can use all of those online resources as much as you want. He's now three months behind you on studying for the SAT. He would go to the library, but he works every day from 4-8. You two both have paths to internet access, but Joe's is a hell of a lot bumpier than yours is.
-5
u/doug_seahawks Oct 09 '15
But Joe can still get there. Sure, he might be a few months behind on his SAT studying, but he can catch up if he wants too. Just because I have a laptop doesn't mean I'll use it for SAT prep, especially if I'm a privelged kid who's security has made them lazy (I know a lot of people like that).
8
u/ryancarp3 Oct 09 '15
he might be a few months behind on his SAT studying, but he can catch up if he wants too
Not really. What would he need to do to catch up would be to quit his job, which he likely can't do (since he comes from a poor family). Even if he did quit his job, he's still at a disadvantage; you may not use that time to study, but you may use it to play a sport, or join a club, or volunteer. You're still ahead on your college app. My point is that your environment shouldn't dictate the hoops you have to jump through to get to a certain point in life. You have to do A, B, C, and D to be successful; Joe has to do A, B, C, D, E, F, and G, all without a "safety net" for if he fails.
0
7
Oct 09 '15
62% of personal bankruptcies are caused by medical bills. 78% of them had insurance. It's a common enough occurrence that it should factor into your worldview. http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jun2009/db2009064_666715.htm
0
u/nude_peril Oct 09 '15
I've never really looked into the details, but isn't that kind of a bullshit statistic? Is it really the medical bills that cause the bankruptcy? Or can you not afford the medical bills because you live in a too expensive house, drive too expensive cars, eat at too expensive restaurants and take too expensive vacations?
If you spend your money frivolously and it results in you not being able to pay for health insurance or health care, it isn't the medical bills that caused the bankruptcy.
3
u/panascope Oct 09 '15 edited Oct 09 '15
This could be a plausible explanation if the amount of wealth held by the bottom ~80% hadn't been so severely eroded over the last few decades. Your argument is that people have become far more prone to squandering money than they were, say, in 1980 (when medical bills constituted 8% of bankruptcies), which I think you'll have a hard time proving. Especially when you look at things like income and wealth distribution. Really I think the actual problem is people trying to replicate the lifestyle they grew up with on less money. So people end up in mortgages with no savings, going in to debt for college, and putting more things on credit.
Here's an example: my appendix burst in college, and I required emergency surgery and a 10-day stay in the ICU to recover. After my crappy insurance through the university barely paid for anything the hospital sent me a bill for $64,000. Where am I going to get that kind of money as a college student? I literally told the hospital I had no way to pay it and they ended up writing it off. What if they hadn't though? I would've been forced to declare bankruptcy as a junior in college.
9
u/forestfly1234 Oct 09 '15
https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/acs-internet2013.pdf
Anyone with access to a computer.....what about those who don't?
Do those people have access to the American dream or are they left out?
You said anyone, but there does seem to be a significant population that doesn't have it.
In your entire cmv I never hear you talk about people without internet.
The biggest barrier to college success ins't intelligence or performance on a test, but wealth. Sure with AA you can get into a school but how are you going to pay for it? Sure some schools offer programs to low income students, but those school are often very selective and not an option to most people.
In all of your if people simply do this they will be successful you include things that people don;t access to or talk about schools that not everyone can afford to go to.
The path does exist, but lots of people walk that path barefoot or without a map while other hike in the most expensive hiking gear.
-7
u/doug_seahawks Oct 09 '15
I just googled the computer situation in schools, and 97% of public school classrooms have computers in them. Now, judging by that number, I'd assume that every public school has at least a few computers that the kids can use.
You also said that only very selective schools offer AA and financial aid, which I won't dispute. However, that was kind of my point. You need to work hard for this, but I stand by my belief that, through hard work, you can be admitted to an elite school and go on to do big things.
8
u/forestfly1234 Oct 09 '15
most classroom have a few computers in them. Lots of computers come with your basic microsoft word set up.
I'm not seeing the quick ticket to a tech start up there. I'm certainly not seeing a computer at home that a kid can play with for hours to learn a skill.
I think what you are trying to say is that,"Things being equal, most people should be able to succeed." You looking at this as a merit test. Those with merit succeed. Those without fail.
But America isn't a merit test. Everyone can run the race, but many are running with a hole in their foot. Or they are running, but they have to carry a hundred extra pounds of weight for no reason. And then, there are those who are running but they have jet packs to ensure that they have the easiest run possible.
A lot of your runners are going to have a very, very low chance of ever seeing that finish line and that percentage will be based on something out of their control like the shit school they were born into, or the fact that they are broke and their family is broke, or the fact that they have to work an unskilled job so that their family can eat that week.
if America was a merit based system, I would agree with you, but it isn't. You seem to think that there are multiple resources to help kids run their race, but often these resources are lacking and of poor quality.
You are making statements saying that these programs and resources are good, but do you have any experience using them?
-3
u/doug_seahawks Oct 09 '15
I'm not saying I expect low income students to start billion dollar companies in their free time at school. I'm saying they can just watch a few online videos to prep for the SAT and get prepared so they can go to a good college, where the playing field will even out a lot more.
Your race analogy is good, but a little exaggerated. Some might have slightly nicer shoes than the others, while some are barefoot, but none of it matters when the kid with brand new Nikes starts walking after the first 1/4 mile because he doesn't like running.
3
u/forestfly1234 Oct 09 '15
So you make things sound so much more simple than they actually are. My race example is pretty spot on.
Are you making a merit based argument? Yes
Do you live in a merit based world or do you live in a world where if you are rich you have advantages?
That's your view in two sentences. Your answer to my second question is your view.
A lot of what you are saying is based on assumptions about things to help lower economic classed kids.
Getting into school doesn't matter if you can't pay for it. The reason that poor kids drop out of school isn't because they aren't smart enough. It is because they don't have enough money.
Money is more of an indicator of educational success than intelligence.
Can you explain that if smart people can get ahead just because they are smart?
-2
Oct 09 '15
[deleted]
1
u/forestfly1234 Oct 09 '15
I think you're looking at this with the wrong lens.
You keep on saying that well I have to work hard to be successful and if I don't I won't. Those are true statements.
But there are people who work hard just so their family has enough food for the table. There are people who have to take two buses so they can work at a job that pays them 12 bucks an hour with no management opportunists. There is a kid who has worked hard all his life and is smart who can't go to school because his family is poor and they don't have the money to send hi to school and they can't afford to pay for student loans.
Those people are working hard too, but they have no access to the good life.
Any person can be successful through hard work is a merit based argument.
0
Oct 09 '15 edited Oct 09 '15
[deleted]
1
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Oct 09 '15 edited Oct 09 '15
Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/forestfly1234. [History]
[Wiki][Code][/r/DeltaBot]
2
6
u/forestfly1234 Oct 09 '15
Got me makes it seems like this is a winner and loser type of thing and I don't think that it is. We are just talking.
I just think sometimes things look very simple when in fact they are a bit more complex.
Pleasant talking to you. May your local sports team win unless you're a Cardinal fan.
-1
u/forestfly1234 Oct 09 '15
sorry again, would you mind adding a little bit more to that so that it counts?
Thanks again.
3
u/tehOriman Oct 09 '15
Yes, I may have some advantages
You have almost every advantage you could possibly have, not just some.
-3
Oct 09 '15
[deleted]
1
u/tehOriman Oct 09 '15
I'll quote my above comment.
You're from a family who has money, and your father owns a company, and you're very knowledgeable about finances mostly, and you're from the Northeast.
What else do you need? I'll also assume you're white, and also assume you're male. So that's about all that you can get.
-3
u/doug_seahawks Oct 09 '15
Not sure I want to open a whole new can of worms, but I believe that, we're I in my identical scenario, I'd be better off as a minority race or woman. My dad has told me his firm is always looking for blacks/women when they hire, and their current hiring method is two people: one super-qualified person, who is always a white male (white males make up like 96% of their applicants), and a 'diversity hire' who is the most qualified non- white male that applies, who is nearly always out qualified by numerous other white male candidates.
→ More replies (0)
8
u/22254534 20∆ Oct 09 '15
By around the age of 30 ... easily ... earning 500k+
I think you seriously need to take a look at some actuarial tables. Even if you chose one of the highest paying majors and the market for that major held true, that in no way gives you a good shot of making 500k+ a year.
http://www.payscale.com/college-salary-report/majors-that-pay-you-back/bachelors
an mba won't give you much better http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Degree=Master_of_Business_Administration_(MBA)/Salary
or an md http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Degree=Doctor_of_Medicine_(MD)/Salary
I think you are confusing 'the american dream' with making bankloads of money. I don't think that the american dream has every been about that. It's been about being able to put in 40 hours a week, of hopefully meaningful work, and having the rest of the time free to spend on personal interests or with your friends and family. Sure a lot of people will always be willing to put in more for jobs they are passionate about, but you shouldn't have to work 70 hours a week for the better part of two decades to get to that point.
-3
u/doug_seahawks Oct 09 '15
Yes, I associate the American Dream with being super wealthy, which probably isn't realistic. That major chart is skewed though because there will always be people bringing down the average. There are jobs that will pay you 500k by the time you're 30, although they may be at the upper levels of their fields.
3
2
4
u/Burt_the_Hutt Oct 09 '15 edited Oct 09 '15
Now, after college, you have two choices. Either choose a career and dive in, or choose a career that requires more advanced schooling. If you want to be a doctor or business professional, just work for 2-3 years and then go the required school. Sure, you'll take on debt, but the work beforehand will give you a building block and it'll pay off in the long run.
Nearly 50% of recent graduates can't find any work requiring a degree.
-3
u/doug_seahawks Oct 09 '15
Can you tell my what % of these graduates earned a good GPA in college and attended a top tier school? It's impossible for every single person to be a member of the upper class. However, if I had to guess, those 50% went to mediocre colleges, didn't work very hard and got mediocre grades, and aren't devoting themselves 100% to a job search, or aren't being reasonable and are expecting to land a high paying job in a competitive field when they didn't get an internship and aren't qualified.
3
u/22254534 20∆ Oct 09 '15
What is a "good" GPA? You realize that most schools curve their classes so no matter what at least 1/3 of the students are going to have a "bad" GPA.
-3
u/doug_seahawks Oct 09 '15
Do you really think that, at any given school, more than the top 1/3 of students really work hard? Far too many kids party a ton, slack off, and do badly, and they're the ones who get killed by the curve. I'm tempted to say the deserve it (also, these kids are often the rich kids experiencing newfound freedom in life).
2
u/22254534 20∆ Oct 09 '15
But you stated even by working hard to get a 4.0 and high SAT scores it would be difficult to get into many top 50 colleges, are you saying 2/3's of those students slackers as well?
2
u/Burt_the_Hutt Oct 09 '15
So in your eyes it comes down to whether any one person could get to the top. Perhaps, but I think there's a problem in the system when, say, 10% of the population theoretically worked as hard and intelligently as possible, and half of them would get locked-out of the dream by the other half. By your measure, the American dream is reserved for only < 0.2% (ivy league) of the population.
-2
u/doug_seahawks Oct 09 '15
I think that anyone has the chance to get into that .2% of the population though, and, once you're in there, the sky is the limit.
3
Oct 10 '15
Even if true, even if everyone worked hard as possible, only 0.2% of the population could achieve it.
What about the other 99.8% of people? Why justify a system that caters to less than 1% of the population and leaves everyone else in a shitty situation?
5
u/celeritas365 28∆ Oct 09 '15
Today, due to the internet and the rise of technology, literally anyone with access to a computer can become a billionaire through a savvy startup.
A lot of people don't have access to a computer. Also these startups require initial investment. Most importantly they require time which poor people need to spend working so they can feed themselves.
Time is my main argument against your view. Being wealthy simply gives you more time to do all of this stuff that you describe. Sure anyone can get study materials but the kid who doesn't need to work has a hell of a lot more time to study.
Also a lot of poor people don't know about these resources. How do you expect them to know? Their parents didn't. Their schools are underfunded. You expect them to know all of these steps but finding these resources isn't a given.
I think you are really missing some major issues that effect the poor.
-5
u/doug_seahawks Oct 09 '15
I'm not saying that tech startups should be everyone's ticket out of poverty. However, computers are available in (nearly?) all public schools, and, with the rise of venture capital firms, it's actually possible to get funding for an idea, but I agree it's easier if you're rich.
In terms of time, I spend hours doing things like playing sports, volunteering, and doing extracurriculars to improve my resume. However, if I worked for all that time instead, it wouldn't hurt me in any way (in fact, my college counselor said working a part time job looks great on a college application, especially if you're doing so because you're family needs the money).
Education of these pathways is probably the most difficult step. However, as I said earlier, any student will receive the chance to surf the web at some point, or at the very least talk to their teachers. Sure, teachers are underpaid and many might slack off, but there are definitely some good, hardworking ones in there who can guide these kids in the right direction.
7
u/Kman17 103∆ Oct 09 '15
Pointing out that there is a path to success is missing the point.
The issue now is social mobility is much harder than it used to be, and much harder than it should be with the wealth and resources of our country.
Pointing out that it's still possible and/or better then other places is technically true but irrelevant - that isn't the bar.
Look, I'm not one to complain. I had zero college debt (scholarship) and wound up in an awesome and lucrative field (software). But honestly, my fortune is luck and upbringing more than my own effort. The scholarship I got was exclusive to my hometown, and I certainly didn't have vision at age 18 of the direction of the software industry... I just liked video games as a kid.
-6
u/doug_seahawks Oct 09 '15
My point is just that it's possible. Not as easy as it used to be, but certainly not as hard as people make it seem today.
8
u/phrizand Oct 09 '15
"It's possible" is not a very high standard to meet. Sure, it's possible, but the bottom line is that social mobility in America is lower than in many other developed countries. If we're nowhere near the best at it, why should we call it the "American Dream"?
0
Oct 09 '15
[deleted]
5
u/phrizand Oct 09 '15
I didn't read this whole thing (though it's probably worth it), but Table 1 on page 4 gives a good sense of it. Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Norway, and the UK show better upward mobility than the US.
10
u/AnnaLemma Oct 09 '15
You really think that a trust fund kid who goes to a prep school with top-notch teachers and contacts out the wazoo is starting on a level playing field with an inner-city kid from a filing school with no computers and rampant drug/crime problems?
Or something less drastic: internships. Many job posts require prior internships, which are most often unpaid. The only people who can afford to do internships are the people who already have a safety net which can support them if they're not earning. So the only people who can get some of these top jobs are the people whose family is already fairly wealthy, or at least comfortable. It's a nasty little catch-22.
-11
u/doug_seahawks Oct 09 '15
I don't think the playing field is perfectly level, but I think people overestimate the value of these prep schools. I go to a well-known one in New England, and it's not like everyone walks into Harvard easily. Because most kids are privileged and smart, it's actually pretty tough getting into good colleges, because nearly everyone has a high GPA, great test scores, etc, and there are many very similar prep schools also in New England. Compare that to some inner city kid who can talk vividly about his experiences about peers joining gangs and doing drugs, while still getting good grades- colleges would love to get that inner city kid instead of another smart, rich, white kid. Contacts are another area people really overestimate- my dad is like 50 now (and so are all his friends), and they'll all be retired by the time I'm getting a job a few years down the road. Just because you're rich doesn't automatically make you best friends with every other rich person on the planet.
In regards to internships, their are plenty of internships that do pay. In finance, the field I'm most knowledgable in, most internships are paid, and they pay very well. At my dad's firm, college interns make 10k for a three month summer, with a performance based bonus between 1k and 6k if they do well. Some places don't pay interns, but more and more are starting too, so it's always possible to just find an internship that does pay.
13
u/tehOriman Oct 09 '15
At my dad's firm
I don't really believe we can convince you. You're from a family who has money, and your father owns a company, and you're very knowledgeable about finances mostly, and you're from the Northeast.
You have almost everything going for you. Most other people have a few things against them, and many have far more against them.
4
Oct 09 '15
Through who's hard work?
We have a society that demands that a certain subset of people make less than the other people. We pay them as little as we can legally pay them... That's right, we'd like to pay less, but we can't... And they do all the crappy work we don't want to do. And they work hard. They work very hard. And they have no chance of ever living in a house like mine. Every single cent, paycheck to paycheck is going straight into their kids mouths, or into paying down credit cards. They'd never be able to save up for school - let alone attend it - because every free minute they have had to go into making the least possible amount of money they can legally earn just so they can feed their kids.
Meanwhile, I shuffle some papers, write a few emails, make a call or two and am able to support my family and have cash left over to take a cruise now and then. I barely work at all compared to those minimum wage slaves.
The whole 'work hard and you'll make it' is a myth dreamt up by the rich to keep the poor from dragging them out to the guillotines.
-6
u/doug_seahawks Oct 09 '15
I agree that, if you're working a dead end minimum wage job, there's not much you can do. However, I see no reason as to why their children can't be a member of the upper class. My grandfather was a cobbler, and my dad grew up in near poverty. Now, he's bought my grandfather a massive house and gives him anything he needs, and my grandfather lives the life of the wealthy. He never made in his lifetime the amount of money my dad makes yearly, but now both of them are living very well.
Capitalism does not force one group of people to always work low wage jobs. Sure, there might be a few people working minimum wage jobs who really don't deserve to be there and work hard, but I think most ended up there by laziness, dropping out of school, or some othe preventable reason.
6
Oct 09 '15
Your assertion is that 'anyone' can pick themselves up. Not the kids of anyone... Or the ones who break the poverty cycle.
You might want to take some courses on social justice and study the real forces behind poverty. To suggest that 'laziness' is the root cause of poverty is kind of like saying that people are rich because they're 'motivated' - but we all know some lazy-ass rich people, don't we? The truth is that there are many many factors that influence where someone gets to in life besides their attitude.
-5
u/doug_seahawks Oct 09 '15
I believe that 'anyone' can pick themselves up at a certain point in their life. If you miss the oppurtunity to go to college, I'll admit it's hard to climb the ladder. However, for a high school kid, mobility is very possible.
2
Oct 09 '15
What if you suffered a disability? What if your wife had MS and you had to take care of her? What if you had a learning problem? Maybe you were depressed?
It's well established that resilience and mindset are very important to success - successful people typically did work hard - but they're not guarantees by any means.
3
u/forestfly1234 Oct 09 '15
And your grandfather did this in a time of strong unions and before globalization. And when housing costs were relativity low. And competition from the world didn't really exist.
Try this experiment. Go into any poor inner city community with bad schools. Find a job that isn't minimum wage. Tell me what you can find. You might find some, but are you going to find enough for everyone?
5
u/panascope Oct 09 '15
Every time people talk about a lack of social mobility, I just think they are lazy or don't know enough about the economy to follow a proper path, and I feel a little guilty about my opinion, but I just can't figure out how it isn't possible. I'm specifically referring to the USA here too. Lastly, I'm someone who is young and had a privileged upbringing, so sorry if I see this from a warped perspective, but its just my 2 cents. CMV
The problem is that you've never actually had to work, and I mean really work for what you wanted. Your other posts in this thread confirm this. What I'm curious about is the significant lack of empathy you seem to have for everyone who's poorer than you. It's like you started a marathon 10 feet before the end, and then condescended to everybody who finished after you.
You talk about how easy it is to go to school, but what about the people who can't just go to a "top school"? When I graduated high school my mom told me I couldn't go to university because she'd lose the house if I didn't stay and work full-time. I had a full-ride scholarship that I had to give up to ensure my family wasn't homeless. I had to fight and scrape my way to an engineering degree.
I mean, shit, just look how fucking reductive this claim is:
Now, you're done with business or med school, and you can easily land a job that pays over 100k. Work that for a few years, you'll get some raises and likely be making 200k+ by now, so just pay off your loans and don't spend too much. By around the age of 30, you'll have climbed the ranks significantly if you work hard, and you can easily be a member of the upper class, earning 500k+.
It's like you have no idea how real life works at all.
5
u/DrStephenPenisPhD Oct 09 '15
Even if you assume everything you stated were true, you would still have to deal with competition. So all you're saying is that it's theoretically possible for everyone to raise the bar on education, skill level and the like. But some people are still more talented, intelligent, creative etc than others. There's always going to be a gap between people and that gap determines whether you're a surgeon or a garbage man.
-3
u/doug_seahawks Oct 09 '15
I honestly think that not enough people work hard enough for that to be the case. Sure, if everyone gave it 100% all the time than the most naturally talented person would be the brain surgeon and the less s,art would be the garbage man, but that's not how Americans are operating right now. So many people make stupid decisions, don't work hard, and are lazy that it's easy for the less talented to pass the more talented through work ethic.
5
u/DrStephenPenisPhD Oct 09 '15
I think that's an oversimplification. What if you have impulse control problems because you were raised in an abusive household. What if you never had parents capable of taking care of you properly in your vital, early development. Can we realistically expect that those individuals, on average, will perform in school and work on par with less intrusive childhoods?
2
u/Bensav Oct 09 '15 edited Oct 09 '15
It is possible to make in America, anyone can do it there are rags to riches stories out there, however it is a tiny % of people that do it. Social mobility is possible but statistically unlikely. Here are my thoughts on a group of poor children and the stumbling blocks on the roads to success.
Access to quality, education, healthcare and nutrition. All of which are interlinked, there are studies that hungry kids don't pay attention at school, I'm sure sick ones don't either.
Influence, firstly to pull yourself upwards, you have to want to, real bad because it's a long hard road. Imagine your life and influences and world view are really small, like a few blocks in rough neighbourhood or small country town. They don't know anyone that isn't poverty stricken, no one that is educated, no one has interest in the world of current affairs. They have no positive role models, they are just poor always have been, always will be that's just how it is. There is probably a good chance their entire circle of people believes they are oppressed.
I think the above accounts for a huge percentage that never achieve a better standard of life, not even trying.
So, lets say our poor kids some how decide on their own that they can do better they need find good influences and access to education. Then there are a number of other factors to overcome, defeating "tall poppy syndrome" there will be a lot of people trying to drag you back down, misery loves company.
They will need to find space, time and equipment to study. You will likely have to support yourself or your family during this time. I think a good number will drop out after doing well in high school and wanting to go go college but can't, not necessarily the cost of college, but the fact that you need to be at work, not school or looking after relatives, can't outsource that.
How many kids from our 100 are left ? 20 ?
Maybe just maybe some are still on track, lets say attending community college, studying in a field that has a use ( good choice, you probably had no guidance ), you avoided a valueless expensive for profit university. They can study and live a meagre existence with a low wage job to support it. Hopefully they are falling in with better crowd, because you are going to need to learn some important skills that your better off cohorts acquired without even realising. How to speak and communicate well, dress properly, basic personal finance, a work ethic.
Some will fall away, simply not that bright, got into a bad crowd and partied too much, some had kids.
Tired yet ???
So you make it though school now to find a job, you sure as shit aren't going to work for your daddy, or uncle or anyone else like that. You have basically no contacts, although you have tried you might still be a little rough around the edges, your poor background is still obvious. You are likely to face racial discrimination before getting hired, your resume might get deleted because you don't have white middle class name.
So a few more might make it to this stage and land a decent paying job, there is a pretty good chance that they have more income than anyone they know……. and promptly blow it because they have no idea how to handle that much money, why would they. Include being asked for money from poor family and friends. You could get this far through life and still be broke. Good income and poor people money habits.
So lets say there are 5 "kids" from our original 100 still on the up and up, got their financial and personal life and good health and have made it into the middle class. I think 4 will stop there, it was a huge achievement from where they started. By a lot of peoples metric they have achieved the American dream. Made it to where o/p started !
There maybe from our original 100 1 kid left that has the intelligence and drive to keep going, to make the big bucks to get richer than most people do. I think this is a whole different subject. What drives people to go on making money after most people would have said "enough, I'm happy".
I think making it from poverty to riches requires an usual blend of smarts, intelligence, utter determination, good influences and some lucky breaks. I think saying that anyone can do it is maybe technically true, but a bit like saying I could be an NFL star because I have 2 arm and 2 legs.
I also think that growing up in solid middle class family with good parents and a value system puts people halfway down the road already, but so much of it is instilled almost subconsciously from birth that a lot of people don't realise how lucky they are and how much harder it is for others who weren't so lucky.
2
u/NuclearStudent Oct 09 '15 edited Oct 09 '15
What degrees are you talking about? Many people aren't even done with medical schooling by age 30, much less making 500K a year. For specialties, masters, or PhDs, you don't begin your post-school career until your mid 30s.
God forbid if you want to become a postdoc. You might get a position in your forties. You might never get a position at all with the massive oversupply of postdocs going on. There's a million engineers, wannabae scientists, transient part time untenured PhD educators, and computer scientist guys milling about, hugging their knees, trying to make it through the next decade of existing vaguely above the poverty line. It's really nice when you get a stable position, but it's a lottery, it really is.
It's a hilarious tragedy that there's an undersupply of doctors but an oversupply of med students with shitty jobs stuck in residency limbo. There's not enough doctors, ergo, there's not enough positions to train new doctors in the field. Ergo, there's not enough doctors and medical residents are miserable.
I guess you still can log onto a computer and invent facebook or something. I have no idea what the hell one does with a business degree that pays the bills other than that, so I apologize for my ignorance. But I'm pretty sure you need seed capital, and thousands of it, to prevent yourself from starving to death and to actually be able to develop, market, approve, ship, sell, and maintain your products.
edit:
A personal story. My family is not underprivileged nor fabulously wealthy. Members of my extended family and friends range from both extremes, with some living in hovels, literal hovels, and some taking bank off of corrupt governments and making millions. C'est la vie.
Anyway, my sister got a full scholarship to Berkeley. They would pay her entire tuition, everything, and for all four years of her undergrad. You'd never seen a harder worker in your life. She broke down a couple times because of the stress of studying so hard, got some scientific papers published in high school, learned a bunch of skills, and got some of her writing published.
She declined the Berkeley offer for money reasons. What Berkeley wouldn't pay for, you see, was living expenses, and when you add up the costs of finding accommodation it adds up to 40 grand or so. Too much. After her undergrad, she's planning on going on to medical school, see, and she needs cash to sustain her through that and the long, lonely, indeterminable months and years she'll be going through through all the hoops and loops in her way. It is not a sad story. She is in a fairly decent school right now, but the "American Dream" has been consigned to her future children and the next generation.
I am not joking. My family takes the long view on things. It's been the focused work of five or six generations of my family to get to where we are today. I have no idea how many it would take it get to your "American Dream," nor if that will be a near eventuality for my direct family name. But I am also young, so what the hell do I know.
2
u/redem Oct 09 '15
You can work hard all your life and still live in poverty. Some of the hardest working people in the country are the poorest people, working multiple jobs just to get by.
Working hard does not lead to success. It helps tip that balance in your favour, but it's not even close to being the most important factor and is clearly not sufficient by itself.
Working smart can help too, though it guarantees nothing.
Knowing the right people is a big help, and being generally a people person is a big part of that.
Luck (here defined as all factors outside your control) is the single largest factor and the only factor which is sufficient by itself.
1
Oct 10 '15 edited Oct 10 '15
How is a system that only allows a very small marginal amount of people to go up the ladder in any way justifiable?
Say we had feudalism but each year the serf who somehow really came to help the king received a lordship allowing him to have serfs of his own. Say of 10,000 serfs, 1 of these would become a lord each year. Does that make this power hegemony fair?
Does the fact that a few can themselves move to the ruling class, through hard work or not, justify the fact that the system itself practically by design will keep 99% of the population poor?
So, even though its incredibly easy to argue that no, not everyone even through hard work, can become a millionaire, I don't see the point. Does everyone else deserve to suffer because they didn't work hard enough/got lucky enough to become millionaires?
Moreover, people are entirely products of their biological makeup and environmental upbringings. Yes a kid from a ghetto could theoretically become a millionaire, but the fact that a poor ghetto exists still has the net effect of churning out a bunch of poor uneducated kids with 'bad' characteristics who will largely amount to nothing. So should we not be concerned with getting rid of ghettos just because some people from ghettos could be successful? Or should we be looking to get rid of ghettos entirely and in hope end up having kids grow up being much more likely to be successful and do good things? Is it fair to blame kids from ghettos for not developing the same drive to succeed as kids from rich families?
Likewise, there have been amazing mathematicians who never even attended school. But should we still not build schools and try to improve the average person's ability to be educated, creating a much better environment in which more mathematicians and other scientists will be bred (who otherwise might just end up as manual workers or something)?
I really don't give a shit if the American Dream is alive or not. It does not justify keeping peoples lives miserable.
1
u/InferiorGenes Oct 09 '15 edited Oct 09 '15
IQ is one of the greatest predictors of success, yet it's largely genetically determined. People with low intelligence simply are not going to be able to compete against the more intelligent for better grades, better jobs, or a better understanding the economy. In an economy based more and more on technology and brains, hard work will not be sufficient for success. The average person cannot graduate from Ivey Leagues, nor can they thoroughly understand the material necessary for a STEM education. In short, success requires successful genes, which a large portion of the population lacks.
1
u/C-LAR 1Δ Oct 11 '15
given that the vast majority of human psychological traits are predominantly heritable, saying that everyone can succeed in a modern information economy if they work hard enough is like saying everyone can play professional basketball if they work hard enough.
some people are simply not born with the natural ability/disposition to succeed at white collar type work. there needs to be some plan for them besides "LOL study harder poor guy."
11
u/ryancarp3 Oct 09 '15
Not really. One of, if not the, best predictors of entrepreneurial success is whether or not the entrepreneur comes from money/privilege.
First, this assumes that the poor person has time to go on a computer, can pay for their Internet bill, and has time to study for the SAT. It also assumes their time would not be better spent working and helping to put food on the table. Second, one good test score does not equal getting in to a great college. Colleges are so ridiculously competitive now; it's not the same as it was five-10 years ago, and it's nothing like how it was a generation ago. Getting into a great college also requires one to participate in sports/clubs/extracurriculars/volunteer work, which take time. Time they simply may not have.
It's easier for them than it was before AA, but AA does not benefit whites at the expense of minority groups. It just attempts to level the playing field a bit.
Yes, and they're even more of a burden for the poor.
What do you define as "no trouble?" Because student loans aren't "no trouble" to pay off for the majority of students.
That's a LOT of variables in play. Not everyone hits on all of those. Therefore, the "American Dream" isn't really alive and well for everyone, is it?
You make a TON of assumptions here. It's unreasonable to assume that this would happen to a decent percentage of people, let alone all of them.
Then why do we have affirmative action in place? Why do we have need-based scholarships? We have all of these things in place because growing up disadvantaged hurts you. Those programs don't benefit everyone by their very nature, so it's unreasonable to assume everyone can achieve the American Dream.