|
Most Americans still believe that their country offers more opportunities
for economic success and advancement than any other country on earth. They
are convinced that American society is basically free and meritorious which
judges everyone according to his individual ability and rewards him for his
accomplishments.
This view undoubtedly reflects the early history of the country when few economic
laws and regulations encumbered economic activity and many European immigrants
managed to rise from rags to riches. It envisions genuine economic freedom
in which the most productive and creative members of society climb to positions
of affluence and eminence. But does it actually describe economic and social
conditions today or does it merely echo old notions and convictions?
Unequal ability, whether innate or acquired, tends to lead to great differences
in personal income and social position in every kind of economic system and
social order. In a market order, men and women who render valuable services
to consumers are rewarded accordingly; others with lesser ability and diligence
who render mediocre services earn and receive less. Consumers are the judges
who determine and allocate the rewards. They select the producers who serve
them best and therefore rise on the ladder of wealth and position. But they
may also demote producers or their heirs who no longer serve them satisfactorily.
Ours is an age of persistent political supervision and intervention that encompass
nearly every aspect of economic life. Countless economic laws and regulations
and onerous taxation muffle the calls and orders of consumers but magnify the
wishes of legislators and regulators. A dense thicket of statutory obstacles
renders it ever more difficult to climb the ladder of success by way of market
service but facilitates success on the route of political connection. Few poor
people have political connection which would allow them to find their way through
the thicket, and few budding entrepreneurs have the means to confront a bureaucracy
set on maintaining the status quo. It takes a large legal staff of Wal*Mart
or Sears Roebuck to challenge the economic edict of a local regulator; it may
take many years of wrangling and many thousands of dollars in legal expense
to obtain a license for business expansion. Strapped beginners need not apply.
Academic analyses now show that it is increasingly difficult to rise from
rags to riches. Some studies reveal, for instance, that fewer and fewer families
in the bottom fifth of the population (as ranked by income and social status)
can make it up the ladder. Nearly 70 percent remain either at the same level
or even do worse than their forebears; similarly, many in the second-poorest
fifth stay put in their class. While all such studies readily agree on growing
social immobility, they may differ on the causes of such a development. Some
may hint at a business plutocracy which is said to exercise its influence on
public affairs. Others yet believe that the education system as it developed
in recent decades is increasingly stratified by social classes. Poor children
attend poor schools while the students from the richest socio-economic class
attend the country's top colleges. They are at Harvard, Princeton, Yale,
and Duke.
This writer is inclined to fault the new economic order known by various labels
such as the New Deal, the Great Society, and other Democratic and Republican
Deals. They signaled the sway of popular notions of social conflict and the
beginning of social legislation. Guided by a motley of economic ideologies
that originated in the Old World, some members of the political elite readily
adopted various versions of the exploitation doctrine according to which government
needs to protect labor from the greed and power of capitalists. Others embraced
the notions of Historicism and Institutionalism according to which production
now is exceeding necessities. Ruthless exploiters use the property rights,
seizing the surplus and living in leisure. Self-interest clashes with the common
good, and money-making motives prevail over service intention and design. Both
doctrines meant to reduce the inequality of incomes and levels of living; both
actually buttressed the thicket and increased social immobility.
Despite the rising barriers of economic regulations and taxation, innate ability
and will power still may attain individual success and advancement by way of
higher education. With the help of much state and federal aid, talented young
men and women of limited means may find their way through college and graduate
school and enter the professions. There are multibillion-dollar federal grants
to elementary and secondary education of students with special needs. There
are financial assistance and guaranteed student loan programs, direct support
for students in health-related research and studies, and federal aid for developing
institutions such as Howard University and Gallaudet College. All state governments
spend a lion's share of their tax revenue on higher education.
It cannot be surprising that some talented youths manage to advance from poor
beginnings to well-to-do professions. Naturally, most of them are forever beholden
to all manifestations of the welfare state and amenable to government largess.
Ignorant and incurious in matters of industry, trade, and commerce, they are
ever suspicious of the motives and actions of businessmen. The old welfare
states of Europe, such as France, Germany and Italy, are well anchored in the
professions that are fed and fostered by government.
When compared with those welfare states, this country still may offer more
opportunities for economic success and advancement; but the underbrush of laws
and regulations gradually is reducing those opportunities.
|