Hacker News Reader

Comment by samirillian | Hacker News Reader

This. I think it was Chesterton who said that most Americans think of themselves as momentarily embarrassed millionaires.

View on HN

“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”

― Ronald Wright, A Short History of Progress

Commonly misattributed

Incidentally, I recently found a similar sentiment expressed in a book from 1937: http://ask.metafilter.com/314056/Temporarily-Embarrassed-Mil...

Having stayed in the US for a while and returned to my native country(India). I have to say its a little hard to not feel like that, if you had the opportunities, freedom and the overall ecosystem there is in the US.

Isn't that a good thing?

Sounds like overestimating your worth to society; which to me is likely to lead to arrogance and irresponsible financial behaviour, at least.

also could be a sign of drive and passion to make it. I would take that over being defeated and complacent.

I lived in soviet block as a kid and everyone had this defeated attitude which is such a contrast to american optimism. Although, things are changing in America now, more and more people feel hopeless and defeated here too.

It's not defeatist to be realistic about who you are, to make the most of resources you can afford, we need much more of that if we're not going to implode with pressures from overpopulation. Do you know the tale of the Ant & the Grasshopper?

If you 'make it' (produce something that brings great worth to society) first then you're welcome, IMO, to use a little more than your fair share of resources. You don't get to do it the other way around as the majority of Western society appears to be doing (other regions maybe are too, I don't have an informed view on them).

It would be good if it were true. Obviously it would be great if somehow everyone could live as comfortably as the rich (ignoring that it wouldn't be possible for a variety of reasons).

The problem is that it's not true. A majority will never be rich, and a disappointingly high number of people will only ever barely scrape by.

It doens't matter if you become a millionaire or not. Life driven by hope and passion is much more enjoyable than one without one.

Ah yes, we should have people lying to themselves.

> A majority will never be rich

Do you really think most people are unaware of this basic fact?

It looks like at least 39% are.

That's a cynical way to put it. A more positive spin on the same idea would be that we encourage ambition and hope for the future.

If my child wants to be a billionaire, should I say "Sweetie, you probably won't be a billionaire, so don't get your hopes up." Or should I say "it'll be tough, almost impossible, you'll need to work hard, study hard, be smart, etc."? I know which lesson I'd prefer to give.

So a basic problem arises when this belief causes people to vote against their interests for policies that benefit the actually-rich to their own (incorrectly expecting that they will be rich next year) detriment. Tax cuts for the rich and for corporations, dismantling programs that benefit the poor and middle class, defunding various public institutions, etc.

It's fine to strive to achieve as much as possible and earn a bunch of money, but the core of the issue highlighted by that quote about "temporarily embarrassed millionaires" is a sort of class-affinity with the rich that is unwarranted for most people.

I'd say that this is an argument that you should vote for systems that treat people fairly regardless of class. Even if you have no chance of becoming a millionaire or billionaire, it seems to me you should still try to treat such people fairly - according to sound principles that you would be willing to apply to yourself if you were in their position.

Likewise for the very poor. I hope to never be very poor, but I still wouldn't vote for systems that mistreat or exploit them. This is not because I'm trying to protect myself in the circumstances that I become destitute, but because I think morality requires the consistent application of principles to people regardless of their economic wealth.

This sounds like Rawls’ veil of ignorance argument..

The idea that "Hard work" will make you a billionaire is largely a myth, but a nice-sounding one because it implies anyone can do it. Hard work might get you from the bottom 20% to maybe the next 20%, but it's not going to let you crack the 1% club. If my kid tells me she wants to be a billionaire, I'm going to tell her to find the rich kids in school, make friends with them and introduce me to their parents. Entry into the top 1% is a function of the quality of your contacts list, not a function of work.

I never suggested that hard work would be sufficient to make someone a billionaire. I do suspect hard work might be necessary, assuming the "inherit" case is ruled out. Hard work will likely improve the chances of one becoming a billionaire, and therefore it makes sense to advice it to aspiring billionaires.

Well, maybe you could live a life with hope that your government employs competent people who care, and passion to make it happen.

To me, this a common (logical) error: confusing good existential directives with good political programs. As they say, hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com