倍可親

當今美國窮人難以改善他們的社會地位

作者:路不平  於 2012-1-6 01:31 發表於 最熱鬧的華人社交網路--貝殼村

通用分類:村內互動|已有15評論

經濟惡化,就業不振,美國夢在破碎。
比起其他發達國家,美國窮人更難於改善他們的社會地位。

說流動性差,是指家庭背景對個人成長有較大的影響。
在近鄰加拿大,生活於社會底層10%的孩子,長大后依有16%停留在那裡;在美國是22%;而生長於頂層10%的加拿大孩子,長大后依有18%停留在那裡;在美國是26%。

作為個人,美國的窮人要更努力,方能脫貧。

這是紐約時報上一篇文章 Harder for Americans to Rise From Lower Rungs 所驚醒的。

轉部分如下:

[Harder for Americans to Rise From Lower Rungs]

WASHINGTON — Benjamin Franklin did it. Henry Ford did it. And American life is built on the faith that others can do it, too: rise from humble origins to economic heights. 「Movin』 on up,」 George Jefferson-style, is not only a sitcom song but a civil religion.

But many researchers have reached a conclusion that turns conventional wisdom on its head: Americans enjoy less economic mobility than their peers in Canada and much of Western Europe. The mobility gap has been widely discussed in academic circles, but a sour season of mass unemployment and street protests has moved the discussion toward center stage.

Former Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, a Republican candidate for president, warned this fall that movement 「up into the middle income is actually greater, the mobility in Europe, than it is in America.」 National Review, a conservative thought leader, wrote that 「most Western European and English-speaking nations have higher rates of mobility.」 Even Representative Paul D. Ryan, a Wisconsin Republican who argues that overall mobility remains high, recently wrote that 「mobility from the very bottom up」 is 「where the United States lags behind.」

Liberal commentators have long emphasized class, but the attention on the right is largely new.

「It』s becoming conventional wisdom that the U.S. does not have as much mobility as most other advanced countries,」 said Isabel V. Sawhill, an economist at the Brookings Institution. 「I don』t think you』ll find too many people who will argue with that.」

One reason for the mobility gap may be the depth of American poverty, which leaves poor children starting especially far behind. Another may be the unusually large premiums that American employers pay for college degrees. Since children generally follow their parents』 educational trajectory, that premium increases the importance of family background and stymies people with less schooling.

At least five large studies in recent years have found the United States to be less mobile than comparable nations. A project led by Markus Jantti, an economist at a Swedish university, found that 42 percent of American men raised in the bottom fifth of incomes stay there as adults. That shows a level of persistent disadvantage much higher than in Denmark (25 percent) and Britain (30 percent) — a country famous for its class constraints.

Meanwhile, just 8 percent of American men at the bottom rose to the top fifth. That compares with 12 percent of the British and 14 percent of the Danes.

Despite frequent references to the United States as a classless society, about 62 percent of Americans (male and female) raised in the top fifth of incomes stay in the top two-fifths, according to research by the Economic Mobility Project of the Pew Charitable Trusts. Similarly, 65 percent born in the bottom fifth stay in the bottom two-fifths.

By emphasizing the influence of family background, the studies not only challenge American identity but speak to the debate about inequality. While liberals often complain that the United States has unusually large income gaps, many conservatives have argued that the system is fair because mobility is especially high, too: everyone can climb the ladder. Now the evidence suggests that America is not only less equal, but also less mobile.

John Bridgeland, a former aide to President George W. Bush who helped start Opportunity Nation, an effort to seek policy solutions, said he was 「shocked」 by the international comparisons. 「Republicans will not feel compelled to talk about income inequality,」 Mr. Bridgeland said. 「But they will feel a need to talk about a lack of mobility — a lack of access to the American Dream.」

......


高興

感動

同情

搞笑

難過

拍磚

支持
3

鮮花

剛表態過的朋友 (3 人)

發表評論 評論 (15 個評論)

回復 sousuo 2012-1-6 01:34
中國呢?

什麼比例?
回復 路不平 2012-1-6 02:56
sousuo: 中國呢?

什麼比例?
對政府施政的滿意度:中國>70%;美國<20%。
回復 解濱 2012-1-6 02:57
這是美國 FXXX left wing liberal 的胡說八道! 我來美國時不就是個窮人嗎,相信貝殼村很多人來美國時也是窮人,後來不都成了小康?  

美國窮人大多數是因為懶才無法進入中產階級。 上小學、中學時懶,不願學習,考不出好成績來。 進不了大學也就一輩子靠最低工資過日子。 打工時不努力,無法得到提拔,又不願意吃苦自己創業。 很多大學生學的是軟學科,如社會學、經濟學、音樂,也不容易找到好工作。
回復 sousuo 2012-1-6 03:01
我問的不是這個,而是文章中提到的從底層到上層的比例。

但為什麼人民從令人滿意的地方往不令人們滿意的地方遷移呢?
回復 路不平 2012-1-6 03:07
解濱: 這是美國 FXXX left wing liberal 的胡說八道! 我來美國時不就是個窮人嗎,相信貝殼村很多人來美國時也是窮人,後來不都成了小康?  

美國窮人大多數是因為懶才 ...
"美國 FXXX left wing liberal "是美國的主流。
回復 路不平 2012-1-6 03:14
sousuo: 我問的不是這個,而是文章中提到的從底層到上層的比例。

但為什麼人民從令人滿意的地方往不令人們滿意的地方遷移呢?
"從底層到上層的比例",我找到了會告訴你。
第二個問題,不知你指的是什麼?
我問過一些來美新移民,有的是面子問題,;有的是真以為這裡是天堂;有的是不服輸,想來美闖出一片天。
回復 sousuo 2012-1-6 03:39
同樣的原因,為什麼沒有反方向的?

說的不是海龜呀。
回復 路不平 2012-1-6 03:57
sousuo: 同樣的原因,為什麼沒有反方向的?

說的不是海龜呀。
你不厚道啊。
同樣的960平方公里,一邊是3億人,一邊是14億人,人均自然資源就差很遠。
再說了,懶,是人的本性呢。
回復 sousuo 2012-1-6 04:09
才明白,原來懶人都跑了。

可那邊的懶人怎麼就發展出一個可以容納其他懶人餓地方呢?

日本比我們人口還密吧,也許他們不懶。
回復 路不平 2012-1-6 04:28
sousuo: 才明白,原來懶人都跑了。

可那邊的懶人怎麼就發展出一個可以容納其他懶人餓地方呢?

日本比我們人口還密吧,也許他們不懶。
嘿嘿,您不明白的事還很多...
回復 sousuo 2012-1-6 04:47
不是,這些在我都不是問題的。

只是到了你的邏輯底下,這就都變的不明白了,
回復 xinsheng 2012-1-6 09:35
知道中產擠進上層的比例嗎?這個恐怕很低很低。
回復 路不平 2012-1-6 22:03
xinsheng: 知道中產擠進上層的比例嗎?這個恐怕很低很低。
美國的中產,日子很不好過
回復 路不平 2012-1-6 22:03
sousuo: 不是,這些在我都不是問題的。

只是到了你的邏輯底下,這就都變的不明白了,
你是聰明人
回復 sousuo 2012-1-6 22:13
路不平: 你是聰明人
正常人而已

facelist doodle 塗鴉板

您需要登錄后才可以評論 登錄 | 註冊

關於本站 | 隱私權政策 | 免責條款 | 版權聲明 | 聯絡我們

Copyright © 2001-2013 海外華人中文門戶:倍可親 (http://big5.backchina.com) All Rights Reserved.

程序系統基於 Discuz! X3.1 商業版 優化 Discuz! © 2001-2013 Comsenz Inc.

本站時間採用京港台時間 GMT+8, 2025-6-23 10:01

返回頂部