6 ms·

I just want to point out that you’re living the American Dream. I think you may misunderstand the term as it’s generally used. The phrase isn’t about becoming

I just want to point out that you’re living the American Dream. I think you may misunderstand the term as it’s generally used. The phrase isn’t about becoming a billionaire. It’s rooted in the American frontier period, inspired by Protestant values, and is much more aligned with living a happy upper-middle-class life: owning land, a home, enough resources to have a family, and having meaningful or productive work.

ROTMetro 4y ago
I wouldn't even say upper-middle-class. Descended from Irish orphans, jewish refugees, Pennsylvania Dutch coal miners (so the classic Amish Jewish Redhead, without red hair). A relatively safe work environment, owning a home, feeding their family, not having your government try to exterminate you. That was their American dream. You know, the little things.
Retric 4y ago
The American dream was historically a question of upward social mobility both for you from your parents and your children from you. It’s very much a question of economic, social, and political gain. It stood in stark contrast to countries people immigrated from with extremely limited mobility across generations. In that context it’s clear America is failing due to shrinking social mobility.
- s1artibartfast 4y ago
  The noteworthy part is that the American dream for these people meant mobility from serfdom and abject poverty to a lifestyle that would now be considered abysmal. For an Irish immigrant it wasn't about becoming a billionaire, it was about making sure your children have enough food to survive a winter. Social mobility from nothing to basic necessities is still quite high in the US. Maybe not home ownership, but there are a lot of clear paths to be able to feed a family.
  - Retric 4y ago
    That’s only a small part of the story, middle income and even wealthy people also immigrated to America seeking the American dream of upwards social mobility. Even a surprising number of aristocrats immigrated to America seeking their fortune.
    - s1artibartfast 4y ago
      I agree they are not the only story, but I think a majority of people would fall under that umbrella. Middle class in 1800s looked a lot different than today.
      - Retric 4y ago
        Fair point, though serfdom largely ended much sooner than mass immigration to America and abject poverty by the standards of the time wasn’t that common. EX: “In England, the end of serfdom began with the Peasants' Revolt in 1381. It had largely died out in England by 1500 as a personal status and was fully ended when Elizabeth I freed the last remaining serfs in 1574.[6] Land held by serf tenure (unless enfranchised) continued to be held by what was thenceforth known as a copyhold tenancy, which was not completely abolished until 1925 (although it was whittled away during the 19th and early 20th centuries). There were Scottish born serfs until the Colliers and Salters (Scotland) Act 1775 prevented the creation of the status, and 1799, when coal miners who had already been kept in serfdom prior to the 1775 Act gained emancipation.[7] However, most Scottish serfs had already been freed.“ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_serfdom#Great_Britain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_serfdom#Great_Brita...
        selimthegrim 4y ago
        See also the discussion of villein status in https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somerset_v_Stewart https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somerset_v_Stewart
  - notfromhere 4y ago
    Defending the decline in living conditions by comparing it to standards from a developing economy is a bad justification. The problem isn't that the US isn't generating wealth, its that its poorly distributed. The US is full of poor people but the country has never been poor. It's an amazingly wealthy place.
ska 4y ago
> and is much more aligned with living a happy upper-middle-class life As and ethos I think more accurately it has never been about a particular description of "good life", but more about the freedom and opportunity to try and make a better one for you and your family, however you define that.
the_only_law 4y ago
> and having meaningful or productive work. Hah, if only.

ROTMetro 4y ago

I wouldn't even say upper-middle-class. Descended from Irish orphans, jewish refugees, Pennsylvania Dutch coal miners (so the classic Amish Jewish Redhead, without red hair). A relatively safe work environment, owning a home, feeding their family, not having your government try to exterminate you. That was their American dream. You know, the little things.

Retric 4y ago

The American dream was historically a question of upward social mobility both for you from your parents and your children from you. It’s very much a question of economic, social, and political gain. It stood in stark contrast to countries people immigrated from with extremely limited mobility across generations. In that context it’s clear America is failing due to shrinking social mobility.

s1artibartfast 4y ago
The noteworthy part is that the American dream for these people meant mobility from serfdom and abject poverty to a lifestyle that would now be considered abysmal. For an Irish immigrant it wasn't about becoming a billionaire, it was about making sure your children have enough food to survive a winter. Social mobility from nothing to basic necessities is still quite high in the US. Maybe not home ownership, but there are a lot of clear paths to be able to feed a family.
- Retric 4y ago
  That’s only a small part of the story, middle income and even wealthy people also immigrated to America seeking the American dream of upwards social mobility. Even a surprising number of aristocrats immigrated to America seeking their fortune.
  - s1artibartfast 4y ago
    I agree they are not the only story, but I think a majority of people would fall under that umbrella. Middle class in 1800s looked a lot different than today.
    - Retric 4y ago
      Fair point, though serfdom largely ended much sooner than mass immigration to America and abject poverty by the standards of the time wasn’t that common. EX: “In England, the end of serfdom began with the Peasants' Revolt in 1381. It had largely died out in England by 1500 as a personal status and was fully ended when Elizabeth I freed the last remaining serfs in 1574.[6] Land held by serf tenure (unless enfranchised) continued to be held by what was thenceforth known as a copyhold tenancy, which was not completely abolished until 1925 (although it was whittled away during the 19th and early 20th centuries). There were Scottish born serfs until the Colliers and Salters (Scotland) Act 1775 prevented the creation of the status, and 1799, when coal miners who had already been kept in serfdom prior to the 1775 Act gained emancipation.[7] However, most Scottish serfs had already been freed.“ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_serfdom#Great_Britain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_serfdom#Great_Brita...
      - selimthegrim 4y ago
        See also the discussion of villein status in https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somerset_v_Stewart https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somerset_v_Stewart
- notfromhere 4y ago
  Defending the decline in living conditions by comparing it to standards from a developing economy is a bad justification. The problem isn't that the US isn't generating wealth, its that its poorly distributed. The US is full of poor people but the country has never been poor. It's an amazingly wealthy place.

ska 4y ago

> and is much more aligned with living a happy upper-middle-class life As and ethos I think more accurately it has never been about a particular description of "good life", but more about the freedom and opportunity to try and make a better one for you and your family, however you define that.

the_only_law 4y ago

> and having meaningful or productive work. Hah, if only.