A recent New York Times article titled, “Harder for Americans to rise from lower rungs” reveals a real blind spot in the way far too many Americans view both our nation’s present and our future.
We are hearing conservative politicians brag about “American Exceptionalism” as if it’s a God-given entitlement that’s guaranteed and can’t ever be taken from us.
But numerous recent studies have shown we are deluding ourselves if we believe we will continue to “lead the world” into the 21st century!
The NYT article points out how it continues to grow more difficult for those at the bottom to rise out of poverty as income inequality grows greater under ‘trickle down economic folly.”
And in similar fashion, it notes how much easier it is for children of the wealthiest Americans to stay in the upper income brackets due mainly to educational opportunities they enjoy that are becoming much less accessible for those at the bottom.
In 2006, Professor Miles Corak, an economist at the University of Ottawa, reviewed 50 studies from nine nations. He found that Canada, Norway, Finland and Denmark led all nations in upward mobility, followed by Sweden, Germany and France, with the U.S. and Great Britain at the bottom!
There is a very simple explanation and it’s called the education factor.
In countries where upward mobility is the greatest, quality public education is a given and low or no-cost higher education is available to every citizen!
America faces a choice, invest in affordable higher education for all, or fall further behind!
Rod Livdahl
Mesa
Dale Whiting posted at 8:52 am on Sat, Jan 7, 2012.
Rod,
Nice piece.
But I'm not confident that we have all of the cause and effect factors lined up. From my experience perhaps more that what you know, it's who you know that determines success. For example, Jon Huntsman, Jr. knew Jon Huntsman, Sr., Mitt Romney knew George Romney, Donald Trump was financed by his father and knew the right people to get his start, including entrance into Wharton, where he made more acquaintenances. I am not aware that any of these kids of the rich did especially well learning the tricks of their trades in school.
The self made types are becoming fewer and fewer inbetween. Barack Obama is one. John McCain is not. And Sarah Palin is the perfect example of being in the right place at the right time but without much by way of education.
I suspect the more predictive cause and effect relationship is the social network, that schooling opportunities follow and further support that social network, and that for the masses, while education is still important, our nation's competitive position with respect to the rest of the world is a more important factor to determine our future well being. That will become the factor which makes jobs [both high tech, high paying and otherwise] available either here or in China.
The cause and effect relationship between education and income remains. But there are other factors, factors which can and likely will become more determinative.
Leon Ceniceros posted at 9:13 am on Sat, Jan 7, 2012.
The writer doesn't mean "invest" in affordable higher education...he means...."FREE" higher education. The "lower rungs of society" as he so eloquently calls them ....ALREADY ARE GETTING $5000.00 .."PAYBACK FREE US GOVERNMENT "PELL GRANTS" FOR UP TO 4 YEARS.
Did any of you Senior Citizens get ....$5000.00...TAX-FREE...from Uncle Sam in your whole life.
We are facing a $15,000,000,000,000.00 ($15 TRILLION DOLLARS) DEFICT and the Obama Administration is....GIVING AWAY...YEAR AFTER YEAR.....HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS (Billion = 1000 Million Dollars) to these "Lower Rung Americans".
I am sorry that there are no longer any "good salary" jobs out there but that's....LIFE.
Heck...I can remember when you were able to take the interest from credit cards, house loans, car loans, all state and city sales taxes....OFF YOUR INCOME TAX....but those ..........DAYS ARE OVER TOO.........NOW YOU CAN'T EVEN TAKE YOUR OWN FUNERAL OFF YOUR INCOME TAX....WHY..BECAUSE THE DEMOCRATS HAVE TO TAX THE FEW WORKERS TO PAY FOR ALL THE "COUCH POTATO" NON-WORKING AMERICAN "LOWER RUNGS".
Ask yourself this......HAVE YOU EVER SEEN A 300LBS ...."WORKING AMERICAN"....THE ANSWER IS ..............N.O......THEY WEIGH 300+ LBS BECAUSE THEY SIT AT HOME ALL DAY WATCHING OPRAH AND JERRY WHILE WORKING AMERICANS GET TAXED TO DEATH TO PAY FOR THE "NEVER-ENDING" UNEMPLOYMENT CHECKS AND THE MEDICAID AND WELFARE AND FOOD STAMP PROGRAMS.
Accuracy posted at 10:38 am on Sat, Jan 7, 2012.
Rod Livdahl mentioned: “We are hearing conservative politicians brag about “American Exceptionalism” as if it’s a God-given entitlement that’s guaranteed and can’t ever be taken from us.”
---------------------------------
The idea of American exceptionalism dates back to the nation's early days when Alexis de Tocqueville was the first writer to use the term "exceptional" to describe the United States.
The modern concept of American exceptionalism generally refers to the notion that America is a special country because of its unique beliefs in liberty, individualism, equal rights and a laissez faire marketplace. Most believe America 'Exceptional.’ Although the term does not necessarily imply superiority, many American conservative writers have promoted its use in that sense.
The issue works for liberals as well . . . President Obama, who used the expression while on his first trip overseas. "I believe in American exceptionalism - just like I believe the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism," Obama said.
sockratties posted at 11:39 am on Sat, Jan 7, 2012.
Right on, Rod
While who you are and who you know are important, education is the one factor that can level the playing field. We must recognize that we are loosing ground to countries willing to invest in education, that recognize education for the power tool that it is, and that provide the status and respect deserved by professional educators. The self made, self taught genius is a thing of the past. Education is mandatory for those who will be competitors in the technological fields that define the wealth creating industries of the future.
Agriculture and manufacturing jobs have gone to countries that are riding agricultural and industrial waves of cultural evolution that America rode in the 20th century. Those jobs will not be coming back. New jobs require ever increasing levels of knowledge and technical skills as we move farther into the information age. Agricultural and manufacturing jobs that can be done here will depend on automated control and equipment our workers will not be academically prepared to maintain, let alone develop.
Countries that realize those facts are rushing to be sure the needs of 5, 10 and 20 years from now are going to be filled by their workers. The U.S. is not positioning itself to be competitive in either the short or long term. Those who think affordable education is not a true investment, providing a valuable return, are in denial or so far out of touch they haven't noticed that the world is passing us by.
Rational Human posted at 2:58 pm on Sat, Jan 7, 2012.
More bull.
Cerulean posted at 4:33 pm on Sat, Jan 7, 2012.
Hmmmm, yes I too think education is important but I wonder more and more about what that means. I oft hear people say that Asians-Americans have the upper hand in educational pursuits. Those who express these thoughts also conclude that it must be a cultural thing. There may be some truth to that idea. I recently read an article in New York magazine titled ‘Paper Tiger’ by Wesley Yang . The article is a series of interviews with Asian-Americans driven to achieve and the ruse of studying to the test.
“But intrinsic intelligence, of course, is precisely what Asians don’t believe in. They believe—and have ¬proved—that the constant practice of test-taking will improve the scores of whoever commits to it.”
The article also vents on the difficulties Asian-Americans have after success in school “It is a part of the bitter undercurrent of Asian-American life that meritocracy comes to an abrupt end after graduation.” Suggesting that test taking achievement really only prepares one to become a “super doer”. Honestly I think that is what Catholic schools emphasize as well – super doers.
You can read the article here: http://nymag.com/news/features/asian-americans-2011-5/
Evidence suggests that there is a latent preference toward tall white boys for leadership positions in the U.S.. Can education sway this bias to allow leeway for inclusion of those with innovative and inspired minds? Can we educate innovation?
One positive sign can be seen when The Donald awards Ivanka, his only daughter, an ‘executive vice president’ position. That’s progress.
sockratties posted at 5:09 am on Sun, Jan 8, 2012.
Cerulean -- Good observation. The real challenge here may be to correct the test.
If you’re not teaching to a test, what are you measuring with? There are 3 parts that need to be considered when testing; 1) what you want the student to be able to do when they finish school, 2) what do they need to know to be able to do that, and 3) how do they prove they can do what is expected.
Part 1 is the learning objective. Part 2 can be taught and tested with computers and available help. Part 3 must be taught with hands-on practice. Finally the test must measure skill and performance, not the ability to answer a question.
If you just want students to be able to answer questions then being able to get good scores on written tests is a plus. Tests, such as AIMs are damaging bureaucratic instruments. Testing should measure student ability to perform realistic tasks that either represent future employment expectations or acceptable skills and knowledge required to enter the next level of education.
Arizona Willie posted at 9:17 am on Sun, Jan 8, 2012.
Leon, what the government gives to poor kids for college is a drop in the bucket compared to what it gives Corporations and Industries in subsidies and tax breaks.
Not even close.
The poor kids have to be below a certain income line to get those Pell grants I believe.
Corporations don't have to be broke to get government tax breaks and subsidies.
And Obama means that SOCIETY should invest in higher education by making all higher education tuition free.
You should get into Harvard based only upon your academic accomplishments ... not based upon who your Daddy is and can he afford to pay $75,000 a year in tuition.
Companies today require receptionists to have a BA. Which is totally ridiculous.
But the degree requirements prevent people from the lowest levels of society from getting a decent job.
Most people raised in the ghetto / barrio don't even know about Pell grants and no one is going out of their way to tell them.
America is truly on it's way to becoming a Republican dream -- a third world slum with only two classes. Super rich and dirt poor.
Only by having free education all the way through graduate school can the country be truly classless.
Money defines how much education you get and how much education you get defines how much money you get. A vicious circle.
Yes, with a LOT of luck and perserverance, a child born in the ghetto can SOMETIMES work their way through school ( although not an Ivy league school ) and eventually move up the ladder a bit. But it takes a lot of factors falling in place for that to happen. For most poor kids it won't.
It is a rare event.
VofReason posted at 12:58 pm on Mon, Jan 9, 2012.
I am sorry, isn't public education free through 12th grade? Is it not free enough. Are any of the we need more education crowd going to say that these "lower rung" children and their parents are putting forth all possible effort in the education they get? My guess is no. You want to spend good money after bad and pay for their college education with no foundation? How about this, if kids don't put forth effort in school, make them go to school on weekends and make their parents work off the extra cost. My guess is that problem will correct itself
Arizona Willie posted at 1:41 pm on Mon, Jan 9, 2012.
VofReason, as long as our society worships athletes and show business people and scorns intellectual achievement, there will be many who don't put out any effort in school.
We heap money on the football and basketball players and scorn teachers and claim they don't do a good job. Well, just how much can you expect when you start teachers at $30,000 and require them to buy classroom supplies out of their own pocket?
And parents want to just dump the kid(s) on the school bus in the morning and forget it.
They want to come home and sit in front of the tube and swill Bud and they don't pay any attention to their kids doing their homework ( what homework? ).
Parents don't read to their little ones to get them started loving to read. They park the kid in front of the TV to watch Sesame street all the time ( or similar programs ).
Laziness will always be with us.
But that isn't a reason to deny those who ARE trying. And free education through high school is NOT enough anymore. The days of graduating from high school and getting a good job in a factory where you could support a wife and kids are over.
Higher education SHOULD be free to anyone who can pass entrance exams.
What in the world to colleges and universities do with all that tuition? They certainly don't pay it out in salaries to the professors.
Ahhh yes, gotta pay those coaches $750,000 a year while telling teachers they aren't worth $40,000.
VofReason posted at 1:32 pm on Wed, Jan 11, 2012.
Agree to a point Willie. Here is where we differ. Parents who don't take the appropriate time or effort with their children should likely not be parents. It seems society has somehow got passed the question of whether all people should be parents. Kids are not a right- nor is success. The 30K for teachers is a good point, but one the Teachers Union prevents from changing. They pay teachers by tenure and level of education, not performance like the private sector. If they did, those who taught better would get paid better. If they have to buy their own supplies, that is a failure of the district. How come the teachers in private schools don't tell similar tales and tuition for private schools in many cases is less then what public schools get per student?