Reflection #11

Despite the progress we made in our discussion of poverty and wealth in class on Thursday, there are a few points that continue to trouble me. One of the topics we examined was the subdued nature of wealth in America; despite the esteem we bestow upon the American Dream and the material affluence it represents, we are not comfortable publicizing or admitting our personal obtainment of that ideal. It seems to me, in the United States at least, that how one behaves following the acquirement of wealth is just as critical as the acquirement itself. For whatever reason, Americans value discretion and modesty based upon the number of figures in one's salary. Billionaires are expected to give back through philanthropic donations and toss around diffident ideas of "getting by," "having enough," and "living comfortably" as euphemisms that diminish their actual prosperity. I have to wonder if our caution regarding personal wealth is a product of our loyalty to democratic principles, such as those of equality. The founding of our nation fostered a nobility-less environment in which every (white, land-owning) man could pursue his own destiny, regardless of the station into which he was born. The contemporary U.S. preserves that notion, thanks to the editing of the above parameters to include minority demographics. However, the concept of wealth or "comfortable living" questions that premise. Do we offer fair opportunity to all? What does it mean when 12 million children risk going hungry in the U.S. every day? What does it mean when working three jobs doesn't guarantee a rent payment? Is the individual at fault, or are their overlaying forces at work? Americans display such timidity in the face of wealth because of the inequality it embodies. Inequality is not something we like to imagine exists in our modern, democratic, politically correct country. Yet it does. And perhaps if we allocated our time by trying to ameliorate that gap, rather than apologize for its existence, we could cause substantial change.