Quote:
"The American Dream sounds like apple pie and motherhood. Everyone is for it."
Response:
In this quote by Christopher Jencks, the most simple definition of all is given of the American Dream. There are so many ways in which Jencks could have defined it in his article Reinventing the American Dream but instead he appeals to his audience with things people think of as sweet or nurturing, and how everyone is for it. Jencks in this article is recognizing the importance of the American Dream, he goes on to explain how over the course of time the United States has found itself seeking different forms of the American Dream. At times we tried the Republican dream in which you had to step on some heads and reach the high point and that should be your dream, while other times a more Democratic approach was taken, and just living truly comfortable and being able to support those around you through hard work was always expected. But today, Jencks find that the only way to have any form of an American Dream is change. Jencks adresses issues like the lagging minimum wage, or high school dropout rates and also gives some solutions such as a reduction in the American people's feeling of need for material goods, which hold no true value to them in order to save money and have their American dream, but no real "political" ideas are given as a solution.
Thursday, June 14, 2012
Quote #3: Bulldozing the American Dream
Quote:
"Prohibiting the use of eminent domain for slum clearance would certainly be inconvenient for urban planners. But it would be good for low-income residents."
Response:
In Timothy B. Lee's article featured in The American his story Bulldozing the American Dream covers a small community in St. Louis which was deemed a slum. Lee does a great job of portraying how the government's expectations of their planning and intervention to assist the people occasionally backfire. This quote is near the end of his argument, explaining that eminent domain (reposession of property by government without proper reimburesment) did nothing to assist low income families. Rather than the assistance to the neighborhood it was expected to give, it removed families from their homes and destroyed all local business. Lee gives a deep story of the lives of an immigrant dentist who did pro-bono work for this community who worked incredibly hard to open his own firm. Within the first five years of his successful dentistry business, the government took his current location without any reimbursement. Shortly after this, the man died, and his family removed from their beloved home due to lacking income. Lee's story of this immigrant family gives a heartfelt view into the dangers of allowing the government to assist in things such as housing or business.
"Prohibiting the use of eminent domain for slum clearance would certainly be inconvenient for urban planners. But it would be good for low-income residents."
Response:
In Timothy B. Lee's article featured in The American his story Bulldozing the American Dream covers a small community in St. Louis which was deemed a slum. Lee does a great job of portraying how the government's expectations of their planning and intervention to assist the people occasionally backfire. This quote is near the end of his argument, explaining that eminent domain (reposession of property by government without proper reimburesment) did nothing to assist low income families. Rather than the assistance to the neighborhood it was expected to give, it removed families from their homes and destroyed all local business. Lee gives a deep story of the lives of an immigrant dentist who did pro-bono work for this community who worked incredibly hard to open his own firm. Within the first five years of his successful dentistry business, the government took his current location without any reimbursement. Shortly after this, the man died, and his family removed from their beloved home due to lacking income. Lee's story of this immigrant family gives a heartfelt view into the dangers of allowing the government to assist in things such as housing or business.
Quote #2: The Gravity of Falling
Quote:
"Americans were supposed to continually reinvent themselves, as a kind of self-styled Chosen People, writing constitutions for liberated colonies, defeated foes, or Iron Curtain countries whos Communist rulers had been ground into the mud. Our own '60s protests had alarmed the establishment yet achieved their goals without ripping the body politic."
Response:
In Edward Hoagland's article The Gravity of Falling: having hurtled through the American century, we are distracted and confused. But can we find out way again? Hoagland uses this quote as a way in which to explain how the American people used to be able to always bounce back. Hoagland has lived a long life, born at the end of World War II and writing for nearly 60 years he has seen and written essays on many things. This quote is truly his view of what America was, and how it should remain. Today Hoagland has fears of an America which has lost its power not of military force, but through the respect of surrounding nations, and the faith of the people who live in the United States. Where people stood up for what they believed, and if someone stood in their way they would make sure they were heard, also, if our American way of life was threatened we would find a way in which to prevail. Things such as the the dismantling of Communism, or the 1960's protests the American people and government were a force to be reckoned with. Today this government and people in an economic recession live in fear of the future, rather than excited for what is to come and how they can shape it with their own two hands.
"Americans were supposed to continually reinvent themselves, as a kind of self-styled Chosen People, writing constitutions for liberated colonies, defeated foes, or Iron Curtain countries whos Communist rulers had been ground into the mud. Our own '60s protests had alarmed the establishment yet achieved their goals without ripping the body politic."
Response:
In Edward Hoagland's article The Gravity of Falling: having hurtled through the American century, we are distracted and confused. But can we find out way again? Hoagland uses this quote as a way in which to explain how the American people used to be able to always bounce back. Hoagland has lived a long life, born at the end of World War II and writing for nearly 60 years he has seen and written essays on many things. This quote is truly his view of what America was, and how it should remain. Today Hoagland has fears of an America which has lost its power not of military force, but through the respect of surrounding nations, and the faith of the people who live in the United States. Where people stood up for what they believed, and if someone stood in their way they would make sure they were heard, also, if our American way of life was threatened we would find a way in which to prevail. Things such as the the dismantling of Communism, or the 1960's protests the American people and government were a force to be reckoned with. Today this government and people in an economic recession live in fear of the future, rather than excited for what is to come and how they can shape it with their own two hands.
Quote #1: More Young Americans Out of High School Are Also Out of Work
Quote:
"For this group, finding work that pays a living wage and offers some sense of security has been elusive."
Response:
In Catherine Rampell's article, More Young Americans Out of High School Are Also Out of Work, this quote is pertaining to those Americans who have graduated in the last six years. This quote by Rampell gives insight to the fears that these high school graduates live with each day. Although they have high enough of an education for their fathers and grandfathers to have worked their way through life and lived comfortably, they cannot. Since the financial crisis these people have seen a yearly reduction in full-time employment across the United States, causing them to move back in with parents, take part time jobs, or even go back to school in hopes of a better job. Rampell makes sure in her article in the New York Times to get the insight of not only surveyors and colleges who keep track of current U.S. statistics, but also the direct words from those currently suffering from this lacking employment. These people's American Dream is immediately hindered before they've even started due to there being no work to start off in. Prior to the beginings of globalization, and more advancements in technology these people with only high school degrees were the backbone of the working world, they whether it was factories, construction, or any other manual labor which those with higher education and specialization did not want to do these people always had work. Today however, with changes from a U.S. market economy to a global economy, they have not only lost jobs to faster producing machines, but also foriegn labor forces.
"For this group, finding work that pays a living wage and offers some sense of security has been elusive."
Response:
In Catherine Rampell's article, More Young Americans Out of High School Are Also Out of Work, this quote is pertaining to those Americans who have graduated in the last six years. This quote by Rampell gives insight to the fears that these high school graduates live with each day. Although they have high enough of an education for their fathers and grandfathers to have worked their way through life and lived comfortably, they cannot. Since the financial crisis these people have seen a yearly reduction in full-time employment across the United States, causing them to move back in with parents, take part time jobs, or even go back to school in hopes of a better job. Rampell makes sure in her article in the New York Times to get the insight of not only surveyors and colleges who keep track of current U.S. statistics, but also the direct words from those currently suffering from this lacking employment. These people's American Dream is immediately hindered before they've even started due to there being no work to start off in. Prior to the beginings of globalization, and more advancements in technology these people with only high school degrees were the backbone of the working world, they whether it was factories, construction, or any other manual labor which those with higher education and specialization did not want to do these people always had work. Today however, with changes from a U.S. market economy to a global economy, they have not only lost jobs to faster producing machines, but also foriegn labor forces.
Thursday, June 7, 2012
Source #5
Summary:
In Christopher Jencks’ Reinventing the American Dream originally printed in the newspaper The Chronicle of Higher Education, Jencks portrays his image of what the American dream is and its need to adapt to economic change in order to survive. Jencks imagines there being two different types of the American dream; the Republican version and the Democrat version. The Republican version Jencks describes as “a place where anyone who builds a better mousetrap can get rich” (Jencks, 1) put in simpler terms, the creation of one’s own business. This requires workers, salespeople, security, and the realization of just how much is needed to create such a business. The second is Jencks’ “Democrat” version of the American dream. The idea that any person who works hard and is responsible; will attain a decent standard of living. This “democrat” version is the common idea of a steady job, a home in a nice neighborhood, and believing your children will be more successful than yourself. Both of these American dreams have been used in our past, first the democratic approach, but when this failed theUnited States
Once these two approaches have been defined, Jencks shows both their faults in today’s society. Those adaptations of when to spend, and when pennies need to be pinched need to be realized by both sides. If they would attempt to merge some policies of each, they would be far more compatible with the future generations in theUnited States
Response:
Jencks wrote a great article for the explanation of the American dream; he not only defined it well, but also clarified how different views of how the economy should run stemmed two separate dreams. This really was not my first thought when thinking of the American dream, usually only the dream home and better future Democratic dream comes to mind. Jencks goes into great depths about a “solution” to our failing American dream. His solution of weaning ourselves from the need of material goods, and the feeling of entitlement for constant better things should not be the dream; instead a dream of good health, security, individual freedom, and time to love your family should become the dream. This in a way relates more to the democratic dream, but it has taken a turn from the necessity for material goods, which is a much needed process. Although Jencks does a great job of defining the American dream, and gives a great alternative to the current though process of the American dream, he lacks explanation of how this new mindset can succeed. In order for the American dream to succeed whether it be Jencks alternative, the democratic, or republican American dreams a secure job with steady income may still be something which cannot be attained and is still necessary to have time for family, while good health may require health insurance. Really the only easily attainable aspect of his proposed dream reform would be to change the mindset of the people, to seek less material goods, and seek a more emotional gain. Overall Jencks’ article explored a lot of information that would otherwise go unnoticed such as how even ideas of the American dream can be split by political views, for this, and his inclusion of a possible way of reform Jencks’ article gave the most useful information and possibilities for change of the five articles.
In Christopher Jencks’ Reinventing the American Dream originally printed in the newspaper The Chronicle of Higher Education, Jencks portrays his image of what the American dream is and its need to adapt to economic change in order to survive. Jencks imagines there being two different types of the American dream; the Republican version and the Democrat version. The Republican version Jencks describes as “a place where anyone who builds a better mousetrap can get rich” (Jencks, 1) put in simpler terms, the creation of one’s own business. This requires workers, salespeople, security, and the realization of just how much is needed to create such a business. The second is Jencks’ “Democrat” version of the American dream. The idea that any person who works hard and is responsible; will attain a decent standard of living. This “democrat” version is the common idea of a steady job, a home in a nice neighborhood, and believing your children will be more successful than yourself. Both of these American dreams have been used in our past, first the democratic approach, but when this failed the
Once these two approaches have been defined, Jencks shows both their faults in today’s society. Those adaptations of when to spend, and when pennies need to be pinched need to be realized by both sides. If they would attempt to merge some policies of each, they would be far more compatible with the future generations in the
Response:
Jencks wrote a great article for the explanation of the American dream; he not only defined it well, but also clarified how different views of how the economy should run stemmed two separate dreams. This really was not my first thought when thinking of the American dream, usually only the dream home and better future Democratic dream comes to mind. Jencks goes into great depths about a “solution” to our failing American dream. His solution of weaning ourselves from the need of material goods, and the feeling of entitlement for constant better things should not be the dream; instead a dream of good health, security, individual freedom, and time to love your family should become the dream. This in a way relates more to the democratic dream, but it has taken a turn from the necessity for material goods, which is a much needed process. Although Jencks does a great job of defining the American dream, and gives a great alternative to the current though process of the American dream, he lacks explanation of how this new mindset can succeed. In order for the American dream to succeed whether it be Jencks alternative, the democratic, or republican American dreams a secure job with steady income may still be something which cannot be attained and is still necessary to have time for family, while good health may require health insurance. Really the only easily attainable aspect of his proposed dream reform would be to change the mindset of the people, to seek less material goods, and seek a more emotional gain. Overall Jencks’ article explored a lot of information that would otherwise go unnoticed such as how even ideas of the American dream can be split by political views, for this, and his inclusion of a possible way of reform Jencks’ article gave the most useful information and possibilities for change of the five articles.
Source #4
Summary:
Los Angeles Times columnist Daniel J. Mitchell’s article, Should Taxpayers Fund the American Dream? Revolves around government assistance with home ownership, which caused a spike in real estate purchases in 2008. Mitchell focuses his article on the aspects of housing, but this also represents his distaste for the American government intervening on many areas of the population. Mitchell uses Hong Kong as an example, they have “enjoyed astounding economic success because government rarely interferes in the market,” (Mitchell, 1) The government has attempted to make purchasing housing more alluring through interest deductions and subsidizing for lower income families; where Mitchell finds fault is by making purchasing housing so appealing, the government loses money in other forms of investments. With this decrease in money, the future growth of the economy is stunted and hurt in the long run. The final fault which Mitchell points out, is that other subsidies which our government has placed in the past years, have brought about nothing but more problems. Mitchell expects that loans would be given more frequently to those with poor credit, and does more bad than good. He finishes his article with the strong statement, “Maybe it’s time to replace the government mistakes with market forces.” (Mitchell, 2) To further express the need for less government interference in the market.
Response:
Mitchell writes an argument which lacks a real statistic base, but his emotional response and facts make up for this. Published by the L.A. Times, even without statistics Mitchell is able to explain his ideas for why the American government should not intervene in theUnited States United States , and France
Los Angeles Times columnist Daniel J. Mitchell’s article, Should Taxpayers Fund the American Dream? Revolves around government assistance with home ownership, which caused a spike in real estate purchases in 2008. Mitchell focuses his article on the aspects of housing, but this also represents his distaste for the American government intervening on many areas of the population. Mitchell uses Hong Kong as an example, they have “enjoyed astounding economic success because government rarely interferes in the market,” (Mitchell, 1) The government has attempted to make purchasing housing more alluring through interest deductions and subsidizing for lower income families; where Mitchell finds fault is by making purchasing housing so appealing, the government loses money in other forms of investments. With this decrease in money, the future growth of the economy is stunted and hurt in the long run. The final fault which Mitchell points out, is that other subsidies which our government has placed in the past years, have brought about nothing but more problems. Mitchell expects that loans would be given more frequently to those with poor credit, and does more bad than good. He finishes his article with the strong statement, “Maybe it’s time to replace the government mistakes with market forces.” (Mitchell, 2) To further express the need for less government interference in the market.
Response:
Mitchell writes an argument which lacks a real statistic base, but his emotional response and facts make up for this. Published by the L.A. Times, even without statistics Mitchell is able to explain his ideas for why the American government should not intervene in the
Source #3
Summary:
Timothy B. Lee’s article, Bulldozing the American Dream, was originally published in the magazine The American. Lee takes a different angle than the common magazine; the article begins with an allusion to the life of an American immigrant. The life of Joseph Erondu, fromNigeria , who opened his own dental practice in St. Louis
Throughout theUnited States
Response:
Timothy B. Lee made some very important points in this article around the idea of the housing market, but his two most relevant were in the very start of his argument and the very end. The housing market is a major issue, but is not the most relevant part of the American dream. This housing market paper stems entirely from the governments over-involvement in the market and their attempts to fix it. Lowering costs and assisting with home ownership, while appealing only hurts them in the long run; this is bad business. The government along with helping with home ownership, also at the time of writing the article in the early 2000’s was actually destroying neighborhoods along with local businesses, and replacing them with higher income housing. This government attempt at “helping” by intervening and taking drastic measures only displaced the “slums” they attempted to cure. Moving the people who once called it home, just driving their economic issues even further. The realization was made this idea of “neighborhood reform” was irresponsible and ineffective in 2005, when the Supreme Court handed down its Kelo decision. What Lee fails to recognize is what Kelo is for his audience, which was a court decision in which homeowners would have to be reimbursed in order for the government or local business to remove them from their property. Overall, Lee did a great job of portraying the problems government intervention into things they should not control such as city size or wealth will not work.
Gaslight Square area ofSt. Louis
Timothy B. Lee’s article, Bulldozing the American Dream, was originally published in the magazine The American. Lee takes a different angle than the common magazine; the article begins with an allusion to the life of an American immigrant. The life of Joseph Erondu, from
Throughout the
Response:
Timothy B. Lee made some very important points in this article around the idea of the housing market, but his two most relevant were in the very start of his argument and the very end. The housing market is a major issue, but is not the most relevant part of the American dream. This housing market paper stems entirely from the governments over-involvement in the market and their attempts to fix it. Lowering costs and assisting with home ownership, while appealing only hurts them in the long run; this is bad business. The government along with helping with home ownership, also at the time of writing the article in the early 2000’s was actually destroying neighborhoods along with local businesses, and replacing them with higher income housing. This government attempt at “helping” by intervening and taking drastic measures only displaced the “slums” they attempted to cure. Moving the people who once called it home, just driving their economic issues even further. The realization was made this idea of “neighborhood reform” was irresponsible and ineffective in 2005, when the Supreme Court handed down its Kelo decision. What Lee fails to recognize is what Kelo is for his audience, which was a court decision in which homeowners would have to be reimbursed in order for the government or local business to remove them from their property. Overall, Lee did a great job of portraying the problems government intervention into things they should not control such as city size or wealth will not work.
Gaslight Square area of
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)