Who’s Next?
#141
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2019
Posts: 241
#142
Aeronautical Colleague
Joined APC: Aug 2016
Posts: 25
Social mobility is a politically driven catch phrase that fundamentally ignores the natural factors that lead to mobility. The vast majority of the countries who are considered the leaders in "social mobility" are Western European countries with homogeneous populations. Sweden, Netherlands, etc. A country with a naturally diverse population of over 300,000,000 people will of course lag behind such countries.
#143
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 644
Ah yes, the "natural factors of mobility"! Which part of our "diverse population" would you say is holding us back? How can the country homogenize the population to better help those helpless diverse people attain upward mobility?
You also seem to be missing some other socioeconomic factors in those western European countries besides their lack of the dreaded diversity. Or how some countries, like India, are very homogeneous, yet have incredibly poor social mobility. They may operate under a brutally cruel caste system, but at least they aren't diverse, am I right?
You also seem to be missing some other socioeconomic factors in those western European countries besides their lack of the dreaded diversity. Or how some countries, like India, are very homogeneous, yet have incredibly poor social mobility. They may operate under a brutally cruel caste system, but at least they aren't diverse, am I right?
Northern Europe and, to a lesser extent, Australia have huge tax burdens. Everyone is taken care of far better than the US, you're not going to end up on the street in Norway like in the US, but there just isn't a lot of purchasing power. So even if you put in the work to make more money, there are other barriers to preventing you from living the dream. Like, a Camaro costs $100k/yr in horsepower/CO2 tax, VAT is painful, and everything is highly regulated and expensive, like riding a motorcycle, getting a driver's license, DIY house projects, etc. Their culture keeps people solidly in the middle class. If you're a complete screw up, you get pulled up to the middle and if you work your ass off, you get pulled back to the middle, which is more egalitarian, but less socially mobile.
#144
Line Holder
Joined APC: Oct 2019
Posts: 79
Yes, we have a great deal of cultural diversity which can affect your mobility. In the US it's not skin color by-and-large that limits people, it's your cultural circumstances and values... the opportunity is there for everyone, you just have to CHOOSE to take advantage of it. If you cling to cultural values which don't emphasize health, education, and work then you've made your choice.
Yes we all know there are still dark corners of rural America where your skin color will affect your mobility, but nobody says you have to stay there, greyhound tickets are cheap, that's how I got out of my nowhere-fast town at age 18.
Yes we all know there are still dark corners of rural America where your skin color will affect your mobility, but nobody says you have to stay there, greyhound tickets are cheap, that's how I got out of my nowhere-fast town at age 18.
The idea that you merely get to "choose" to be successful and "pull yourself up from your bootstraps" is simply fantasy in this day and age. The biggest predictor of economic success is how much money your parents had growing up. Are there stories of people coming from nothing and making it big? Yes, but these are the exception rather than the rule.
Combine that with the corruption of our political system, and it becomes apparent that the "American Dream" is a thing of the past, if it ever existed at all. We are a flawed democracy, on par with countries in South America, and the barriers to social mobility are entrenched in the system as a result of undue corporate influence over our politicians and the infinite money that oligarchs get to spend influencing politicians as a result of Citizens United. In short, outcomes in this country are not predicted by "the right attitude," but rather who you know and what class you were born into.
#145
The idea that the U.S. was intended to be, or should be, a "democracy" is a flawed idea that assumes facts not in evidence. The U.S. was founded on, and continues to be, a representative republic. A pure democracy would be a complete disaster, and is not something I would want to live under.
I'd also add that taking a picture from an opinion piece and calling it "data" is specious at best...
I'd also add that taking a picture from an opinion piece and calling it "data" is specious at best...
#146
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2017
Posts: 3,771
The idea that the U.S. was intended to be, or should be, a "democracy" is a flawed idea that assumes facts not in evidence. The U.S. was founded on, and continues to be, a representative republic. A pure democracy would be a complete disaster, and is not something I would want to live under.
I'd also add that taking a picture from an opinion piece and calling it "data" is specious at best...
I'd also add that taking a picture from an opinion piece and calling it "data" is specious at best...
#147
Line Holder
Joined APC: Oct 2019
Posts: 79
The idea that the U.S. was intended to be, or should be, a "democracy" is a flawed idea that assumes facts not in evidence. The U.S. was founded on, and continues to be, a representative republic. A pure democracy would be a complete disaster, and is not something I would want to live under.
I'd also add that taking a picture from an opinion piece and calling it "data" is specious at best...
I'd also add that taking a picture from an opinion piece and calling it "data" is specious at best...
#148
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Position: in a Big Box that moves back,forth, up, down and makes cool sounds
Posts: 352
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post