They're succeeding at the same rates as other poor people, by and large.
Erm ... so what is the issue? I thought it was that the world if against them because of color ... now you are saying that seems to have no effect on the outcomes? That doesn't seem to make sense to me.
No one likes being poor. Being poor isn't 'owned' by any race or ethnicity but some communities seem to be more trapped by it than others.
The vast majority of lower income people remain there. Black people just have the disadvantage of starting lower, on average, so there are statistically more that are poor as compared to white or Asian.
"statistically" there are more poor white people. I think you possibly meant "proportionally"?
"At least five large studies in recent years have found the United States to be less mobile than comparable nations. A projectled 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.
Britain is famous for certain class constraints (upper class) but that is only comparing two countries. Still, it shows that 56%, a majority, do not stay there.
The interesting question is whether those who get themselves out are more or less likely to be black and if so, or if not, why?
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."
I think that has more to do with their being a much larger gap in US vs other countries. The wealthy in the US are obscenely wealthy. Getting in the top fifth is possibly a much harder task and a much worse measure of 'equality' or social mobility as a result. Quoting top level stats without the context can be extremely misleading as to what it really shows.
If you compare things to nordic countries then you will do badly on most measures as they have a very socialist / level type of society by comparison with many others.
"Even by measures of relative mobility, Middle America remains fluid. About 36 percent of Americans raised in the middle fifth move up as adults, while 23 percent stay on the same rung and 41 percent move down, according to Pew research. The “stickiness” appears at the top and bottom, as affluent families transmit their advantages and poor families stay trapped."
That's hardly a shocker. It's harder for the poorest to stop being the poorest and for the richest to stop being the richest. People in the middle can go either way. That seems like basic reality of most societies.
There is a gravity away from zero when it comes to money. If you get into debt then it's hard to get out of it. If you have a lot of money then you get given more just for having it. It's not too surprising that at the extreme ends of the spectrum, the results are most profound.
If you have billions it's probably close to impossible to ever spend enough to compensate for what you'd make from investments and compound interest. If you are heavily in debt then you probably owe more due to interest each month even if you apply your entire pay (if you even have a job).
The American Dream is still one of the biggest cons ever invented - the idea that you can make it to the top if you just work hard enough. You can avoid being at the bottom but that's about it. The top is mostly for the lucky or born-fortunate.
"The United States maintains a thinner safety net than other rich countries, leaving more children vulnerable to debilitating hardships.
Wait, I thought the US was the most aweseomest country ever created by jesus himself?! Again, there are benefits to socialised support systems at the state / federal level. This is an area where the US does a huge disservice to their citizens and makes the "all men created equal" mentra really hollow.
People should have access to basic healthcare. Those who can pay should, those who can't shouldn't. No system is perfect but the US is an outlier among most countries when it comes to healthcare and other social support ... not in a good way.
Poor Americans are also more likely than foreign peers to grow up with single mothers. That places them at an elevated risk of experiencing poverty and related problems, a point frequently made by Mr. Santorum, who surged into contention in the Iowa caucuses. The United States also has uniquely high incarceration rates, and a longer history of racial stratification than its peers."
The trouble with this is that it's self fulfilling. If blacks make up a disproportionate number of poor people then using stats about poor people to prove that black people have things bad works because they are already significantly represented in the group. You end up using the group circumstances to prove the group circumstances!
The number of people incarcerated in the US is deplorable. "Free country" my arse. It's the result of an ill-conceived "war on drugs" that impacted african american / poor communities more. But ultimately, it was the law and you chose to obey it or not.
In other words, black people are only worse in total percentages as compared to race because more black people started off poorer than other races in the first place. They still basically follow the horrible mobility rates of America in general, which is particularly horrible when it comes to poor people escaping poverty. Blaming the issues on some internal community because of some quotes from people on television is basically missing the mountain for the molehill.
Well you were blaming it all on what was shown on TV earlier.
But what you are saying now seem to be that it's not all to do with color, it's to do with wealth and inequality which I agree with to some extent.
So why the insistence that so many things are about race?
