Posted on 08/18/2005 9:14:42 AM PDT by minus_273
Humphrey Hawksley asks whether that once universal idea of the American dream still exists.
It was a brilliant, hot day on the Seattle waterfront, with unspoilt views across the sound to outlying islands.
Just beyond a stretch of grass where people lay with books and lovers, came the melody of live unaccompanied singing from deep within the bustle of the nearby Pike Market.
It turned out to be four men outside a cafe singing a love song about Cupid, each with different voice ranges, and a deep, swaying crowd, clapping along.
The Starbucks logo of the cafe struck me as a little old-fashioned until someone mentioned that this was the first Starbucks ever opened anywhere in the world.
I had come to Seattle because of a recent survey by the Centre for Economic Performance in London, on how easy or difficult it was to get rich in different parts of the world - or if not rich, at least move out of poverty.
"If you are born into poverty in the US," said one of its authors, "you are actually more likely to remain in poverty than in other countries in Europe, the Nordic countries, even Canada, which you would think would not be that different."
Possibilities
The study, together with general anti-American sentiment which has become more prevalent since the Iraq war, raised for me a question about the American dream - the idea that the United States is a place where anything is possible.
American culture is about self-reliance and the individual fighting a way through
I had chosen Seattle not only because Starbucks was created there, but also because Microsoft and Amazon Books and Boeing airliners all come from this small city. Dreams, if you want, which began small but are now global brands.
"Great day, isn't it?" I turned to see the lined, and drawn face of a man I will call Dave.
"Are you getting what you want?"
We had met a couple of days earlier when he was having breakfast at a charity for the broke and homeless, and I had asked him if he believed in the American dream.
"The American dream," Dave said, eating a muffin and wiping his lips with a paper napkin.
"Well, it comes and goes. It will come again."
Winners and losers
In a low-ceilinged eating hall, maybe 100 men sat side by side along trestle tables.
Seattle - the home of American dreams and big brands They had queued up since five, registered in case there was any work, then ate while security guards watched over them in case there was trouble.
In Europe or just across the border in Canada, they would get social security, but this was America, where society is starkly divided into winners and losers.
Strangely, though, there seemed to be little resentment or blame of government. American culture is about self-reliance and the individual fighting a way through.
"The American dream," said one of the men, his eyes dartingly alive, his nose so skewed it must have been broken many times in different fights.
"I guess you are talking about a home, wife, children and all that."
"Do you have it?" I said.
"No. No. I don't. I had my opportunities, but I lost."
Control
Just up the road in a small print shop, a fit, thoughtful former air force officer, Bobby Ray Forbes, was slotting calendars into envelopes.
In America, I felt a sentiment that the more say the government has over you, the more you carry a sense of failure
His life collapsed when his marriage went wrong. He had ended up on the street, but recently had managed to get a job and keep it.
"Oh sure, I have had the house, picket fence, two cars," he said.
"But I put myself in a position where the government could take control. Right now I am happy just being back in control. You see, what a lot of people do not know is that the key is not getting the American dream. It is holding onto it."
In Europe, the government is entwined with a lot of what we do, yet in America, I felt a sentiment that the more say the government has over you, the more you carry a sense of failure.
Yet millions still yearn to come and take up the challenge.
A million a year settle to start the process of becoming American citizens. Half a million actually take the oath.
Flag waving
At the landscaped Seattle centre, using cards and newspapers to shield themselves from the sun, rows and rows of immigrants at a naturalisation ceremony listened to local officials speak about various aspects of the American dream.
They came from everywhere: Britain, France, Iran, Iraq - the name of every country read out, to cheers, as if we were at the Oscars and, of course, the waving of American flags.
"Why do you want to live here and not in Europe?" I asked a young woman from Ethiopia, who tipped back her Seattle Mariners baseball cap and looked at me as if I were completely mad.
"Europe," she said disdainfully.
"What do they ever hope for in Europe? Here they have a law that you can dream to be happy."
I saw it first! (Post #8)
WHOA! A little harsh, doc...
As for the report that this article was based on...I say hogwash...it is far to complicated an issue to say it is easier to move "up" in Europe or Canada than it is here...
People born into poverty in the US would be rich if they lived in Europe.
I called Conspiracy Guy and Darksheare!
Fluffy hasn't eaten for a while...
Nice kitty!
Another question - when I quickly read the report on "Intergenerational mobility", I failed to discover if "mobility" was limited to "upward mobility" or whether "mobility" goes both ways.
I'd also like to suggest that by some other measures, America isn't such a bad place to live. Our per-capita income is one of the highest in the world (If not the highest, noting the comments on Luxembourg and Bermuda in the link below).
Another question - when I quickly read the report on "Intergenerational mobility", I failed to discover if "mobility" was limited to "upward mobility" or whether "mobility" goes both ways.
I'd also like to suggest that by some other measures, America isn't such a bad place to live. Our per-capita income is one of the highest in the world (If not the highest, noting the comments on Luxembourg and Bermuda in the link below).
Include me in the yodelhead category...
But you belong in this category there, Doctor Doctor...
"Doctor, Doctor. Can't you see I'm zotted, zotted."
Now that's one happy cat!
Nobody should be allowed to do that to a cat!
Try this research instead: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/BG1418.cfm
Many academic studies have found remarkably consistent results that suggest there is substantial income mobility in the United States. 1 For example:
* A 1992 Treasury Department study showed that between 1979 and 1988, 86 percent of those in the bottom income quintile moved to a higher quintile, and 35 percent in the top income quintile moved to a lower quintile. 2
* A 1995 Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas report showed that almost three-fourths of those in the bottom quintile in 1975 were in a higher quintile by 1991, and almost 40 percent in the top quintile moved down to a lower quintile over the same period. 3
* A 1996 Urban Institute study showed that large numbers of Americans move into a new income quintile, with estimates ranging from 25 percent to 40 percent in a single year. The same study found even higher mobility rates over longer periods: about 45 percent over five years and 60 percent over 9-year and 17-year periods. 4
* In 1998, the Census Bureau reported that, on average, over 41 percent of Americans increased their inflation-adjusted income by 5 percent or more per year from 1984 to 1994. 5 The primary reasons for changes in income from year to year were changes in marital status, changes in the number of workers in the household, and moving into or out of full-time, year-round employment. * A 2000 Economic Policy Institute study showed that almost 60 percent of Americans in the lowest income quintile in 1969 were in a higher quintile in 1996, and over 61 percent in the highest income quintile had moved down into a lower income quintile during the same period. 6
The direction of income mobility is also important. The upward movement of workers in the second-lowest and middle-income quintiles is larger than the downward movement. From 1969 to 1994, the income of 53 percent of workers in the second-lowest income quintile had increased enough to move them up into a higher income quintile, and 38.7 percent of workers in the middle quintile had moved up compared to 37.9 who moved down. 7
Additionally, the unemployment rates in the US and UK are far less than the unemployment rates in most of the other countries mentioned in the research.
And BTW, posters here at FR prefer logic, data to back up your assertions, and sarcasm; not personal attacks.
Another thing to ponder:
I lived in Norway for a year, a number of years ago. Buying a cotton, button-down, long-sleved shirt cost me $48 at the time. At the same time in the US, it would only have cost me $18. Even when people make less money in this country, we are still better off because our money goes further - fewer taxes.
(Look closely)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.