Basically, the Scandinavians have the stability and security, and it should be no surprise that Scandinavian countries are the first, second, third, fourth, and seventh happiest countries, where the US is way down, in the 23rd place. (Israel, the Netherlands, and Norway are #s 5, 6, and 7; #s 1-4 are Finland, Denmark, Iceland, and Sweden).
People in Scandinavian countries don't have to worry about having huge medical debts wipe them out, or paying for their children's college education, or that a $400 bill will up end their lives, something that is a problem for half of all Americans.
I believe this is true....we should look more closely at the Danish and Finnish and other countries
that are consistently considered the happiest...It is almost a novel opinion in America so I thank you for bringing this up so clearly. It should be noted that those that have become successful (i.e. money and possibly fame) are not always the happiest people in the world...
Thank you Oren. The post WW2 era through Reagan was the era of Middle Class domination--because workers had a seat at the table with elites. Immigration was low, unions were strong. It's not a coincidence that this era was the time of the American Dream. Now we live in a winner take all society in which Hobbes reigns.
Finanxial stability creates more time with family. Decreases the pressure on good values.. Adult children can afford to stay living closer to their parents so their children can experience grandparent support and older parents have the support of their children. Children can grow up with less pressure to perform and an identity based more on earning than character.
Great read. Do we know whether Harris team's policy proposals are more indicative of "climb ladder" or "stability"? I heard her phrasing and welcomed it, but I interpreted get ahead as stability and I wonder if other regular folks (and Harris' team) are doing the same.
A lot of good points, but I think the topic is more nuanced than your essay indicates. Fairness is important to most people, whether it’s members of minority groups feeling the opportunities to advance at work are diminished or whites who believe they’re being elbowed out by minorities and illegal immigrants. Further, most of us are not risk takers, it’s unremarkable that overwhelmingly people say a well-paying, stable job is a top priority. It’s the path I chose.
Great essay. It's no accident that as stabiity and security have declined so has entrepreneurship. The number of IPO's has plummeted from the 80's and 90's to just a fraction today and many of those spin offs of failed acquisitions.
The Boomers really seem to have been the most entrepreneurial generation and maybe this is because they grew up in relative security and stability and had a secure platform to take risks from.
The desire to do better economically is a basic immigrant aspiration, without which people do not leave home and everything they know to achieve. The drive for something better has kept
Oren, I appreciate all your commentaries. While you're a self-professed conservative, it's clear that your viewpoints fall far outside mainstream politics on either side. Politicians design policies to get elected, which is very different from policies that get results.
Great read. I agree the American Dream looks very different depending on your vantage point. Reading through Kamala Harris' bio it seems to me that she was born into a wealthy, well positioned family and had many helping hands that moved her up the ladder. Few are born into those circumstances and those who are seem not particularly aware of just how much of an advantage it gave them over others.
But there are highly viable potential policy paths that enable “opportunity” and “mobility” AND “stability” and “security.” But those paths involve re-decentralization and re-diffusing the economy, even just reverting some key sectors of the economy and the associated distributions of level of government (ie state, cities vs federal) responsibility back to where they were in the latter 1970s could do it..
I think that this is a country of elitists. Tho we always talked egalitarian and equality it was BS. We only value first place. We only value top dogs. Except for the period of after WWII till around 1970 we were and are elitists here. Win or you're a loser.
Equality of opportunity is important for the talented few. But in a democracy like ours, what is needed is a society in which anyone, regardless of talent, who works hard and plays by the rules can realistically look forward to a rich and fulfilling life. Oren should reconsider my thoughts on what such a society might look like: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00U0C9HKW
Thank you, Oren, for expressing humane conservative values.
This is a terrific essay.
Basically, the Scandinavians have the stability and security, and it should be no surprise that Scandinavian countries are the first, second, third, fourth, and seventh happiest countries, where the US is way down, in the 23rd place. (Israel, the Netherlands, and Norway are #s 5, 6, and 7; #s 1-4 are Finland, Denmark, Iceland, and Sweden).
People in Scandinavian countries don't have to worry about having huge medical debts wipe them out, or paying for their children's college education, or that a $400 bill will up end their lives, something that is a problem for half of all Americans.
https://www.afar.com/magazine/the-worlds-happiest-country-is-all-about-reading-coffee-and-saunas
Words of wisdom.
I believe this is true....we should look more closely at the Danish and Finnish and other countries
that are consistently considered the happiest...It is almost a novel opinion in America so I thank you for bringing this up so clearly. It should be noted that those that have become successful (i.e. money and possibly fame) are not always the happiest people in the world...
Thank you Oren. The post WW2 era through Reagan was the era of Middle Class domination--because workers had a seat at the table with elites. Immigration was low, unions were strong. It's not a coincidence that this era was the time of the American Dream. Now we live in a winner take all society in which Hobbes reigns.
Finanxial stability creates more time with family. Decreases the pressure on good values.. Adult children can afford to stay living closer to their parents so their children can experience grandparent support and older parents have the support of their children. Children can grow up with less pressure to perform and an identity based more on earning than character.
Great read. Do we know whether Harris team's policy proposals are more indicative of "climb ladder" or "stability"? I heard her phrasing and welcomed it, but I interpreted get ahead as stability and I wonder if other regular folks (and Harris' team) are doing the same.
Thank you.
I think the professional-managerial class is very welcoming to those who seek the modern medieval family crests (bachelors degree or higher).
All others are deplorables.
A lot of good points, but I think the topic is more nuanced than your essay indicates. Fairness is important to most people, whether it’s members of minority groups feeling the opportunities to advance at work are diminished or whites who believe they’re being elbowed out by minorities and illegal immigrants. Further, most of us are not risk takers, it’s unremarkable that overwhelmingly people say a well-paying, stable job is a top priority. It’s the path I chose.
Great essay. It's no accident that as stabiity and security have declined so has entrepreneurship. The number of IPO's has plummeted from the 80's and 90's to just a fraction today and many of those spin offs of failed acquisitions.
The Boomers really seem to have been the most entrepreneurial generation and maybe this is because they grew up in relative security and stability and had a secure platform to take risks from.
The desire to do better economically is a basic immigrant aspiration, without which people do not leave home and everything they know to achieve. The drive for something better has kept
Oren, I appreciate all your commentaries. While you're a self-professed conservative, it's clear that your viewpoints fall far outside mainstream politics on either side. Politicians design policies to get elected, which is very different from policies that get results.
Great read. I agree the American Dream looks very different depending on your vantage point. Reading through Kamala Harris' bio it seems to me that she was born into a wealthy, well positioned family and had many helping hands that moved her up the ladder. Few are born into those circumstances and those who are seem not particularly aware of just how much of an advantage it gave them over others.
But there are highly viable potential policy paths that enable “opportunity” and “mobility” AND “stability” and “security.” But those paths involve re-decentralization and re-diffusing the economy, even just reverting some key sectors of the economy and the associated distributions of level of government (ie state, cities vs federal) responsibility back to where they were in the latter 1970s could do it..
I think that this is a country of elitists. Tho we always talked egalitarian and equality it was BS. We only value first place. We only value top dogs. Except for the period of after WWII till around 1970 we were and are elitists here. Win or you're a loser.
Equality of opportunity is important for the talented few. But in a democracy like ours, what is needed is a society in which anyone, regardless of talent, who works hard and plays by the rules can realistically look forward to a rich and fulfilling life. Oren should reconsider my thoughts on what such a society might look like: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00U0C9HKW