Earlier in the quarter, we discussed about American Dream and the middle-class. As income inequality continues to grow bigger and bigger, it seems like there is no place for the middle-class; meritocracy no longer applies to American Dream. America as a middle-class nation is deeply ingrained in the country's politics "whether it defines a concrete socioeconomic identity—a country where most people are neither very rich nor very poor—or an aspiration, the notion that if you work hard and play by the rules." The phrase "everyday Americans" now represents the fragmented economic realities of the 21st-century middle class.
The aspirational idea of the middle class spoke to the notion that even if Americans were in various stages of prosperity, they were all understood to be heading in the same general direction. But what happens when that's no longer true? On one end of the "middle class" spectrum is a dream inexorably receding from view; on the other is a pair of socioeconomic blinders obscuring the harsher economic realities of those further down the scale.
"The aspirational idea of the middle class spoke to the notion that even if Americans were in various stages of prosperity, they were all understood to be heading in the same general direction."
ReplyDeleteThat quote stood out to the most. While we all recognize that income inequality is a a huge issue, there is also an inequality of opportunity in the United States. There is a large disparity in the type of childcare, education, healthcare, etc. that the poor receive in comparison to the wealthy. I think this has contributed to the decreased lack of economic mobility for the poor and has exasperated the decline of the middle class.
I agree with Graham's point here about the inequality of opportunity. I think there's an unfair culture of "if you're not successful it's because you didn't work hard" in the US. It reminds me of what we discussed in an earlier post regarding how the rich have a longer life expectancy. Wealthy people can afford to send their kids to the best schools, provide the best healthcare, etc which sets them up for success much better than an individual from a poor background who can't afford tuition or has to work multiple jobs to support their family.
DeleteI strongly agree with you, Lucas. A big part of the 'American Dream' entails that hard work will take you as far as you can go, so if someone doesn't succeed, it's easy to say that they just didn't work hard enough. As income equality increases, it makes it more and more difficult for normal, hardworking individuals to move upward within their class. Similarly, it's easy to say that individuals didn't work hard enough when you're at the top looking down.
DeleteWhich is preferable, equity or equality? Should everyone have a fair shot, or should advantages exist? It seems like the more we talk about economics, the more that personal ideology comes into play.
DeleteAccording to Democrats’ tax policies, both the top 20 percent and the middle 40 percent are considered a middle class; the former saw the real household income rise of 70% from 1967 to 2013, while the latter saw the rise of only 30% within a few decades with a $348 raise per year. The article underscores that “the top 20 percent is also more likely than the middle 40 percent to believe that hard work gets you ahead in life.”
ReplyDeleteSignificantly less people identify themselves as a middle class after the Financial Crisis, but this probably is not just a result due to a shock in the economy. It is a systematic consequence that led to a decline in the middle class.