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.
Those born in lower incomes don't have a network working for them, while those coming from the higher income ranks have influential family associates willing to assist. It works something like this, the Senior VP's son or daughter gets and internship with dad's company and now has a leg-up on everyone else; a sizable donation to a good college get's that C offspring a college acceptance; dad's golf partner takes a chance hiring dad's daughter, etc.
I would also add that we see evidence of this all the time. George W. Bush was a mediocre student yet was able to use family connects to attend Yale. Bush was also able to use those Yale connections in the business world, eventually becoming a partner in the Texas Rangers a few minutes before the government decided to build a stadium for the Rangers making Bush's 2% share worth $600,000.
This kind of thing happens all the time for the elite and to think that their success is somehow genetic is silly. They have the power and influence and they use that power and influence to help their own.
You are referring to a very small minority. You are ignoring the army of busboys and dishwashers who work hard and long hours for little pay. Your thesis is that unless you start your own business you are necessarily lazy, which isn't true.
Busboys and dishwashers? LOL. You forget that those are usually people from remote villages in Mexico with very minimal education. Those were disadvantaged in Mexico and are disadvantaged in America. There is plenty of immigrants who never bused tables or wash the dishes in the restaurant. I am talking about your Chinese restaurants, Korean grocery stores and dry-cleaners, Indian Dunkin-Donuts owners, real estate agents, doctors, nurses, construction workers, limo drivers... Bud, just look around, there are successful immigrants everywhere.
This is from Alan Krueger, the chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, who is also a Princeton professor. It's from his speech. You can also see the Powerpoint.
What the data says is that income mobility is lower in the U.S. than other nations:
This is from Alan Krueger, the chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, who is also a Princeton professor. It's from his speech. You can also see the Powerpoint.
What the data says is that income mobility is lower in the U.S. than other nations:
You forgot that none of the industrialized countries have to deal with social issues that we do.
Huge mostly disadvantaged Black population and huge uneducated immigration from third world countries.
I don't think you can compare the US to any other industrialized country.
I have traveled around the world and I think the US is one of the few countries in the world with so much opportunity to advance socially and economically. Look at the example of Marco Rubio - son of poor, uneducated Cuban immigrants who became a successful attorney and US senator. America is still the land of opportunities.
You forgot that none of the industrialized countries have to deal with social issues that we do.
Huge mostly disadvantaged Black population and huge uneducated immigration from third world countries.
I don't think you can compare the US to any other industrialized country.
I have traveled around the world and I think the US is one of the few countries in the world with so much opportunity to advance socially and economically. Look at the example of Marco Rubio - son of poor, uneducated Cuban immigrants who became a successful attorney and US senator. America is still the land of opportunities.
So you dispute the analytical results of a large amount of data with an anecdotal case about Marco Rubio?
The data doesn't say that nobody moves out of their income segment, it says that movement, relative to other countries is lower. Walt Frazier, the former basketball player, was a poor Harlem kid who now lives on the upper East side of Manhattan and has a vacation home in the Caribbean. Frazier's case isn't evidence that it's typical for poor Harlem kids to move out of their parent's income group.
You forgot that none of the industrialized countries have to deal with social issues that we do.
Huge mostly disadvantaged Black population and huge uneducated immigration from third world countries.
I don't think you can compare the US to any other industrialized country.
I have traveled around the world and I think the US is one of the few countries in the world with so much opportunity to advance socially and economically. Look at the example of Marco Rubio - son of poor, uneducated Cuban immigrants who became a successful attorney and US senator. America is still the land of opportunities.
And it shows clearly when Rubio speaks, how thankful he is for the American Dream. He is someone who ceased the opportunity, to get ahead in life, and took advantage, of that American Dream. I appreciate him, beause he is a person who is so grateful for the opportunity provided him, by someone who believed in working hard, and you can achieve the American Dream.
Not someone sitting on his duff, waiting for things on a silver platter, as some. And he speaks clearly and you can understand him, he is very educated you can see this in his speeches.
I appreciate his hard work ethics, and is someone who does not make excuses, for beling held down. There are many people out there, who sincerely beleive, they are owed by the system, i loathe those people.
And it is sad that the system works so much more poorly for people like Rubio than the systems of other nations.
The whole notion of America as the land of opportunity is a myth that dies hard. Its because it was so true for so many years. Most people viscerally don't want to believe its not true any more. Facts be damned. But most things people start to take for granted starts to decline.
Who gave you the right to speak on behalf of everyone?
Of course it is a vital interest: people often defend their property even sacrificing their lives. People often spend their entire lives to increase the amount of things they own. It's human nature we like to have. Posessing things gives us security. How can you deny it is a vital interest?
Im not speaking on the behalf of anyone. To be vital, a thing has to be absolutey neccessary for that thing to exist. Private property is not vital to anything. For most of the human existance, there was no concept of private property, yet man existed somehow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rebel12
Apparently despite being baptized you never considered yourself a Roman Catholic. Those who do accept the Pope as the highest authority of the church.
And you know every Roman Catholic?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rebel12
But of course. Communism does not event have a concept of value in a traditional sense which is based on law of supply and demand. You use capitalistic terms like "profits" or "value" when talking about communist economy. That by itself is funny
Im not using capitalistic terms while talking about a "communist economy". Im using them when talking about a state run capitalism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rebel12
Yes. Because the state is an expression of common will of the majority. We estabslished the state to protect our individual rights.
That's why we need it.
Thats pattently false, only in a true democracy is the state an expression of the majority.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rebel12
There is only one definition of equal
No, there isnt. "Equal" could be used to describe anything from "god given rights" to mental capacity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rebel12
That's commie pseudo-scientific babble.
No, its fact. Capitalism has no use for people with marginal skills, and actually does its best to completely eliminate them. All forms of capitalism also end up in a oligarchic plutocracy, where the wealthy corporations own the government, and erect laws to eliminate competition.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rebel12
Of course it does. If you take away private property what incentive people have to use their abilities and have ambitions???
That's the problem with communism: it take away the most primal incentive - ability to posess.... Like it or not the greed makes the world go around. The greed makes people strive. Take a way the greed and you have a society when people sit on their asses all they or do just as much as they HAVE to to survive.
Really? Why is it that nearly every major invention, including almost all gains in medicine, were a result of research by non profits, usually Universities?
Believe it or not, some people have the will to actually improve humanity. That is not the goal of those obsessed with accumulation. In fact, improving humanity is completely contrary to the goals of the oil and gas industry, for profit medicine, snack food companies, chemical companies....etc etc.
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.
