It's the achievement of your goals generally, which would include some degree of wealth, but it would more likely include security, freedom, upward mobility, and greater happiness generally. I'd imagine it's subjective and variable from person to person. If you're currently living the life you desire (more or less), I'd call you successful, even if not wealthy.

What's 'success' then? — Pseudonym

Make money, fuck bitches.

You are right that billionaires are made, not born. You are wrong that the doors to fabulous wealth are wide open. There are certain entry level requirements that working people (most of the population) lack: the habits of middle class parents; a solid education starting in primary school and ending in one of the top ranked universities; contacts among successful, wealthy people; access to investment capital, and so on. — Bitter Crank

Common BC, we both know that those aren't the skills needed to become a billionaire. We both know that most often people become billionaires by starting a business and making lots of sales. Habits of middle-class parents aren't needed; neither is an education if by that you mean what you get in school (or 'top universities' for that matter). 33% of all billionaires are dropouts. Many of the rich people I've met are quite uneducated.

Contacts amongst the wealthy - most self-made billionaires don't have this at the start, over time, they do get it. Access to capital? Irrelevant. If you make sales, you can get capital. In fact, if you make sales and are doing great in that chapter, you can get whatsoever you need - all other problems take care of themselves.

So that's the difficult part. Making sales. Or, alternatively, having the right political connections, and getting those yummy state contracts where they pay x10 market price >:) >:O

It's the achievement of your goals generally, which would include some degree of wealth, but it would more likely include security, freedom, upward mobility, and greater happiness generally. I'd imagine it's subjective and variable from person to person. If you're currently living the life you desire (more or less), I'd call you successful, even if not wealthy. — Hanover

So if your goal was to be a CEO of your own company perhaps (where as a woman you have about half the chance a man has), or maybe you just want the fresh outdoor life of a rancher (where as an Black or African American you have one tenth the opportunity a white person has). Maybe science is your thing (where a Black or African American has half the opportunity a white man has), although you're all right if cleaning is your thing because Hispanics and Latinos are four times more likely to remain in these professions, not sure I know anyone whose dream it is to be a cleaner though, but it takes all sorts.

200 years and the American dream has been through periods of one of the biggest racial genocides in human history, racial segregation, imprisoning people for their political opinions, breaking the Geneva convention, presided over a steady increase in wealth disparity and suicide is still one of the the leading causes of death for most age groups.

If you're trying to build a case for it being some kind of saviour because it's prepared to employ low grade workers at rates marginally above the rates their own countries can afford (largely as a result of Western trading policy in the first place), then I'm afraid it's just not a 'dream' I can really get behind.

I think its origin can be traced back to the Bill of Rights , with its Utopian aspiration:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Here is quote from "The Epic of America" which Truslow wrote in 1931, in the depths of the Great Depression

“The American Dream is that dream of a land in which life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement. It is a difficult dream for the European upper classes to interpret adequately, and too many of us ourselves have grown weary and mistrustful of it. It is not a dream of motor cars and high wages merely, but a dream of social order in which each man and each woman shall be able to attain to the fullest stature of which they are innately capable, and be recognized by others for what they are, regardless of the fortuitous circumstances of birth or position.”

This 'Dream' has evolved over the years. I think R Reagan and M Thatcher had a lot to do with a paradigm shift in the West where individual citizens "... recognized by others for what are, regardless of the fortuitous circumstances of birth or position" became individual consumers, who's success became measured by consumption. Where the more you consume, the more successful you are, the better consumer, hence citizen you are.

It's a difficult subject with a lot of different view points, I think it is and always has been intimately tied up with immigration, why people want(ed) to come to America in the first place. I have a letter written by a family member a long time ago about my great grandparents who where farmers living in Italy around 1860. It indicates that they were planning to come to the United States because they could not compete with the cheap produce being imported into Italy from the US at the time, all they saw was the freedom and opportunity the US appeared to offer.

I enjoyed listening to the following:

Yawn.

Yawn — Hanover

Oh, brilliant. What an insightful piece of philosophy. I can see why they invited you to be a moderator.

[Delete] @Baden

Many of the rich people I've met are quite uneducated. — Agustino

I'm not surprised. The "If you're so rich, how come you're so stupid?" phenomenon.

having the right political connections — Agustino

Political and class connections has been shown to be a part of gaining access to capital, expertise.

Making sales. — Agustino

Granted. When the business is making a product or delivering a service, there follows the necessity of selling it, if you are going to succeed, whatever it is that you have to sell. If no one wants to buy what you are offering, then you're not going to succeed (at least through honest means). Most businesses fail because either no one likes what the company offers, the business doesn't find its customers, it's out-competed, or the Russian mafia blows up the store, office, warehouse, lab, what have you.

If lots of people like what you have to sell and buy it every now and then, you will do reasonably well, barring other business mistakes, which lay in wait. Like expanding too fast, running out of inventory, not changing the style of the clothes you make fast enough to keep up with style changes, etc. Or bad luck -- like an outbreak of food poisoning from your kitchen.

"Freedom is just another word for nothing left to sell" they said sarcastically.

It's just a boring routine, arguing about whether the disparity among various races is caused by government imposed limitations, cultural problems within certain groups, de facto racism, or even genetics. After that discussion, which will entail you vomiting your hyperbolic claims of injustice, we'll be left with the remaining unaddressed question (i.e. the actual OP) of whether success can still be acheived even though some people will have less success than others. A Hispanic immigrant who cleans homes but who gets her child through college has likely lived her American Dream despite all the injustice, inequity, struggle and whatnot. In fact, I'd argue that her success is what makes America great. All of this is to say that I don't find your concerns about class injustice relevant to the topic at hand and your attempt to interject it here is similar to your injection of it in a prior post where the OP concerned the best car to buy.

I get it. You think certain groups are unfairly disadvantaged. I don't need to keep hearing it. It makes me yawn.

I don't give a fuck if it makes you yawn. I'm not here for your entertainment.

It is utterly ridiculous to suggest that unless the American system is 100% successful in repressing the opportunities of migrants and minorities then it's fulfilling its dream. Of course some things can be achieved by migrants in America. It's possible to build a relatively successful business in Zimbabwe, does that mean the Zimbabwean dream is working?

Name me a single country in the world where it is literally impossible, no matter how much hard work and injenuity a person puts in, for them to achieve some minor measure of success (a slightly better paid job, some improvement in living standards). I'd be surprised if you could come up with more than a handful of the worst dictatorships on the planet.

So America offers immigrants a slightly better deal than they get in the countries that Western trading policies trashed in the first place. Well done them.

I don't give a fuck if it makes you yawn. I'm not here for your entertainment. — Pseudonym

Sounds like you do give a fuck.

So America offers immigrants a slightly better deal than they get in the countries that Western trading policies trashed in the first place. Well done them. — Pseudonym

America remains the country where immigrants want to come for a better life, despite very clear declarations they are unwelcome, and they do in fact find great success here. If they didn't, they'd stay home.

I'm not surprised. The "If you're so rich, how come you're so stupid?" phenomenon. — Bitter Crank

And yet, you told me that lack of education is what keeps some from being rich?

Political and class connections has been shown to be a part of gaining access to capital, expertise. — Bitter Crank

Yes, the political aspect is definitely true. Class connections? Not really. In the more corrupt places, it is access to the relevant decision makers. Who knows how you get that? Maybe you went to school with them - several of Putin's friends are now billionaires for example.

Most businesses fail because either no one likes what the company offers, the business doesn't find its customers, it's out-competed, or the Russian mafia blows up the store, office, warehouse, lab, what have you. — Bitter Crank

Yes.

Or bad luck -- like an outbreak of food poisoning from your kitchen. — Bitter Crank

Is that bad luck, or was it maybe planned by someone? >:)

Regardless, it seems that the fact remains that it is possible to go from working class to super-wealthy provided that you have a good product, and you know how to sell it, and no one stops you through force, ill health, etc.

America remains the country where immigrants want to come for a better life, despite very clear declarations they are unwelcome, and they do in fact find great success here. If they didn't, they'd stay home. — Hanover

Immigrants want to leave the countries they are in because Western trading policies and colonialism have trashed their economies. Did you read the example Cavacava gave of the Italians forced out of their country by cheap imports?

America then offers them marginally higher living standards, because it needs the cheap labour to keep making the cheap imports that prevent other countries from developing their own economies.

I don't see what's so impressive about that. If a luxury cruise liner drags a few people off the shipwreck they just caused so they can employ them as cleaners, that would be your idea of a noble dream would it?

The British dream is now a thing: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-41506032

Regardless, it seems that the fact remains that it is possible to go from working class to super-wealthy provided that you have a good product, and you know how to sell it — Agustino

I will grant that it is possible for a working class person with a very bright idea and drive to become a billionaire, and out of 7.3 billion people, a minuscule--no, microscopic number, less than 500, are able to do that. But then, so what? 500 out of 7 billion is hardly a groundswell of opportunity.

Any native-born American can become president of the United States, too. And how likely is that? Over the next 40 years, no more than 10 people can become president, and only 5 if they all serve two terms.

The rare exception to the rule doesn't collapse the rule, it just means that there are rare exceptions. If a black man becomes POTUS, or a woman, this means nothing for the chances of any given black person or woman becoming president.

What matters is if 250 million working class people in the United States can gain a reasonable share of the enormous amount of wealth they produce (labor creates all wealth) and can direct that wealth into uses which bring about a sustainable future. The rich and super rich have not done that. In deed, the rich and the super rich are the ones who have arranged for an unsustainable future for everybody.

That graph is a wonderful demonstration of how societies become enthralled to their own myths.

Nice work.

I think you will find that this is a pattern which is far older than the United States. There is no way for any organism to exist without using resources from ecosystems. — Bitter Crank

But how many organisms do this?: 1.) Take from their environment far more than they need; 2.) Justify this by saying that it is an investment that will lead to a net gain down the road; 3.) Ignoring the destruction the whole process has left, take even more of what they don't really need; 4.) Repeat 1.)-4.).

how many organisms do this — WISDOMfromPO-MO

I was responding only to the idea of "resources borrowed (or taken) from ecosystems". That's the basis of life. Of course, taking way too much, returning nothing, and wrecking the ecosystem is extremely stupid, and that's a specialty of our species. We do it because we can, and because we are unable to think. plan, and act for the long terms (beyond maybe 25 years or so). Sometimes we aren't able to think beyond the next 15 minutes.

I recollect that the Germans had a dream a few years back. Their dream didn't turn out well either. Maybe nations should just avoid dreaming.

[Delete] @Baden

[Delete] @Baden

I will grant that it is possible for a working class person with a very bright idea and drive to become a billionaire, and out of 7.3 billion people, a minuscule--no, microscopic number, less than 500, are able to do that. But then, so what? 500 out of 7 billion is hardly a groundswell of opportunity. — Bitter Crank

Not a fair comparison. ~1700 or so, not 500. And those are only official numbers - I have no doubt that there may be a lot of other very rich people who don't appear on those lists. And sure, becoming a billionaire is super difficult. But pretty much everyone could make $1-10 million over their lifetime if this was their goal.

If a black man becomes POTUS, or a woman, this means nothing for the chances of any given black person or woman becoming president. — Bitter Crank

Why do you think in terms of chances? :s

What matters is if 250 million working class people in the United States can gain a reasonable share of the enormous amount of wealth they produce (labor creates all wealth) and can direct that wealth into uses which bring about a sustainable future. — Bitter Crank

Well yeah, I obviously agree about the sustainable future part. But I don't think that's best achieved by giving 250 million working class people control over wealth. I don't know what makes you think that the 250 million would be good administrators of that wealth.

Presumably the American Dream is about more than the amount of lucre one has accumulated. Isn't it also about the freedom to think, speak, and act politically; to go anywhere in the country without permission; to enjoy the great outdoors without running into too many fences with NO TRESPASSING signs; to pursue the kind of life one wants to pursue, or at least try; free libraries, health, education, and welfare for all; a wide assortment of religious, social, and political views not just tolerated but expected... ???

Maybe all that is utopian. — Bitter Crank

Utopian? Maybe. But I often challenge those who believe in God to show me evidence and when it comes down to it, neither of us knows yet. But until we know, many believe living a life believing in God is not a bad way to live, which is a fair argument.
The same goes for living The American Dream. All America promises is the right to PURSUE happiness, however that happiness is for us to define not others. I find that placing my degree of happiness on any one thing, such as money, is counter productive to my overall happiness in life. Rather I try to live by the idea that if you do what you love and you do it honestly, the rest will follow. So far so good but as with all of life it has it's little up's and downs.

[Delete] @Baden

Because that is the only way to think of this problem. There is only a limited amount of wealth, not everyone can be a billionaire even though the majority may want to and may work harder than those who are billionaires, so I'd be interested to know in which other ways you might think of this problem that does not involve chance. — René Descartes

Do you consider that one becomes a billionaire by chance?

They are the ones who produce that wealth, so I think more than anyone they would know how to use the wealth they produced through work and labour. — René Descartes

This depends. They do not produce that wealth alone but when put in certain systems that are not of their own making. Without those systems, they don't produce wealth, that's why they need the systems - otherwise they'd be working on their own.

There is also the problem that the one who produces the wealth may not know how to administrate it. It doesn't follow all by itself from the fact that one produces wealth, that thereby one knows how to administrate it and use it wisely. All that results from the former, is that the respective person is good at producing wealth.

I know many people who have worked hard all their lives and not even reached such amounts that you talk about. — René Descartes

Working hard is not sufficient. I can work hard in digging ditches all my life - I can break my back, and ruin my health doing it, but I probably won't get rich.

I don't see why you follow the principle that hard work necessarily means big results. If you work stupidly - like trying to cut a tree with a hammer - then you may work super hard and achieve almost nothing. And no, I don't think we should reward people for working stupidly.

[Delete] @Baden

Those jobs are far more necessary in society than being a CEO of something like Facebook. Yet they seem to be paid the least in all society for doing some of the most difficult jobs. — René Descartes

Last I heard, Zuckerberg's salary as Facebook's CEO was $1 :P

So you're saying that wealth that you produce should be given to someone else who has not worked at all for that wealth so that they can 'administrate it'. — René Descartes

No, I just pointed out that being a good wealth-producer isn't the same as being a good wealth manager. Bill Gates doesn't administrate his own wealth for example - he pays others to do it, others who are more knowledgeable than he is at doing that.

What do nomads do, without laws in the wilderness. — René Descartes

They don't have much wealth at all, so no administration is needed.

But the entire American dream states if you work hard enough all your life will achieve success and wealth, even if you start out with nothing you will eventually achieve wealth so by your logic, the American dream is a lie. — René Descartes

Sure, I don't care about the "American dream" or any such notions. I care about the reality. Hard work is not enough to be rich. I generally dislike people who always complain about how hard they work anyway.

Also, someone has to dig those trenches, someone has to clean the streets, someone has to go into the mines: when will they receive a fair share of the wealth they work for. Imagine if there was no one to do those jobs, will the rich feel stupid then for not paying them adequately. — René Descartes

This is a social phenomenon. People don't want to do those jobs anymore in developed countries. It's not about the money, for many of those jobs there is a labor shortage, even if some of them are even well-paid. The reason for that is that these people don't have a good social standing, they may be affected by poorer health, less time for family, etc. So if you think that increasing the pay of those jobs to stupendous amounts will solve the problem, you should think again.

That's why all the immigrants end up getting those jobs - no one else wants them!

Like take an American with a high-school education - do you imagine they'll go to sweeping the streets? :s Suppose that the pay to be - say - a store clerk is $1000/month, and the pay to sweep the streets is $1500/month - what will they choose? The store clerk, of course! I would do the same myself.

[Delete] @Baden