阅读理解
Gus Wenner runs Rollingstone.com; his
father gave him the job. But Jann Wenner, the magazine's cofounder and
publisher, was quick to assure critics of the appointment process that his son
is terribly talented and had to prove himself before being given the post.
Apparently Gus worked his way up from more junior positions with the company,
and demonstrated, according to his father, the “drive and discipline and charm,
and all the things that show leadership.” Gus Wenner is 22 years old.
He is certainly not the only kid out of
college, or even out of high school, working at daddy's firm. Family contacts
are a common way of finding both temporary internships and longtime careers.
Opportunities for the children of top 1 percent are not the same as they are
for the 99 percent.
This is hardly a shock, but it is
precisely the type of inequality that reveals the hard to define promise of
the “Just Do It” version of the American dream and deepens our cynicism(愤世嫉俗) about how people get ahead. As a
consequence, it weakens support for public policies that could address the lack
of upward mobility among children born at the bottom, who ought to be given
priority. A strong tie between adult outcomes and family background annoys
Americans. When an organization conducted a nationally representative survey
asking about the meaning of “the American dream”， some typical answers included: “Being
free to say or do what you want” and “Being free to accomplish almost anything
you want with hard work.” but also “Being able to succeed regardless of the
economic circumctances in which you were born.”
This is exactly the reason that “the
American dream” is not only a defining metaphor for the country, but also why
Americans have long been willing to tolerate a good deal more economic
inequality than citizens of many other rich countries. A belief in the
possibility of upward mobility not only morally justifies inequality as the
expression of talents and energies, but also extends a promise to those with
lower incomes. After all, why would you be a strong advocate for reducing
inequality if you believe that you, or eventually your children, were likely to
climb the income ladder?
Hard work and perseverance(毅力) will always be ingredients for
success, but higher inequality has made having successful parents, if not
essential, certainly a central part of the recipe.
The belief that talent is something you
are born with, and that opportunities are open to anyone with ambition and
energy, also has a dangerous consequence. When the public policy is focused on
the difficult situation of the poor, this belief can help the concept resurface
that the poor are “undeserving” and are the authors of their own situation. Yet
we actually know a good deal about why children of the poor have a higher
chance of being stuck on poverty as adults.
The recipes for breaking this
intergenerational trap are clear: a nurturing(培养) environment in the early years
combined with accessible and highquality health care and education promote the
capacities of young children, heighten the development of their skills as they
grow older, and eventually raise their chances of upward mobility.
Talent is nurtured and developed, and
even genes are expressed differently depending upon environmental influences.
The 1 percent are the goal for these
uppermiddleclass families, who after all have also experienced significant
growth in their relative standing. The graduate and other higher degrees that
they hold, for which they put in considerable effort, have put them on the
upside of the wave of globalization and technical change that has transformed
the American job market.
An age of higher inequality gives them
both more resources to promote the capacities of their children, and more
encouragement to make these investments since their children now have all the
more to gain.
For them, an American dream based on
effort and talent still lives, and as a result they are less likely, with their
considerable cultural and political influence, to support the reshaping of
American public policy to meet its most pressing need: the future of those at
the bottom.
