The Struggle to Reach the American Dream

     Not all that long ago, countries tried to put Socialism systems into play, and they failed spectacularly. However, the outcome of all prior events does not necessitate that the outcome will be the same for all future events. Yet, people are incredibly adverse to even the aspect of including Socialism-esque mechanisms in their economies, and this holds especially true for America. The law is slow to change, but it does change. Popular opinion can be seen taking hold of the system such as with that of gay marriage, and laws that were held since the constitution formed can be changed in only a few years time.

      This can be further seen with the health care system. While some people may oppose this system, most people would probably not oppose the idea that certain aspects such as health, or in other words, basic necessities of living are, and should be, provided to all citizens; these are Socialism aspects within a Capitalism system and most people would likely agree that these are ethical and should be there.

      Unfortunately, in a system where money speaks loudest, those without it suffer most. To observe the current state of affairs we must go back a few decades. After the depression, the federal government began to take an active role and started to subsidize business, banks, etc. Suburbanization began to thrive in America due to this and a number of laws that made it much easier to get loans and homes. People were able to afford these homes in record numbers and a new quality of life was now available; and so people with money left the cities to take up lovely suburban homes.

      Those without money were left behind, and one aspect of not having money is the inability to pay taxes, or at least not all of the taxes, but when it comes down to bare necessities taxes aren't the first on the list. A lack of taxes results in the city suffering in all aspects, and one of the often first to be cut sectors is education. This might not have been such a problem in older times, but now it certainly is. Jobs nowadays are shifting more towards an intelligence and data specialization rather than a physical assembly line process. Not to diminish the efforts of those that do work in such positions, but one often takes more education than the other.

      This deindustrialization results in less jobs as they are replaced by more efficient machines, and on top of that, globalization also effects people in this position negatively. Globalization helps to accelerate that already collapsing need for “unskilled” labor as factories and the likes are being outsourced to third world countries where that unskilled labor is cheaper. Rapid advancements in technology make the rich richer, and the poor poorer, but in some ways they also help the poor. While there might be less jobs it also becomes more and more affordable to buy objects, especially electronics.

      But there is really no denying that the rich are getting immensely richer. In fact, its fair to say that some of these people have more money than they could even spend in a lifetime, or multiple lifetimes for some of them. One of the key factors in having money is that you have options. Not just the options to buy things, but the option to find a better job (and be temporarily unemployed), invest, etc. People that do not have the money to do this are further nailed into their position by these facts. 

      But what is to be done? The rich clearly have money to spare, but should they? A capitalist society thrives in part because it allows people to reach these levels. The possibility to become rich, or at least wealthy, give people a goal, or dream, no matter how unlikely it might be to reach. Some people might advocate that the rich should simply give some of their money to the poor, in a sort of balance the scales idea. Though the poor might work just as hard for the amount of money they earn, why should the rich do this? Well, because it is ethical of course; some amount of “suffering” on their part could alleviate a great deal of suffering from the poor.

     

But still, it technically is their money barring illegal activities that do seem to accompany wealth and power. Some people would even hypothetically put themselves in their position and state boldly that they would donate large sums of money unlike that person. If they really would isn't quite within our sight to see, however, it is safe to say that even among the rich, and mega rich, there are people who do donate large sums of money, and another portion of them that do not. The point being, discrimination against them is no different from other forms of discrimination.