Society Life has got better over the last 50 years in many countries, but not in the Americas

[Ygorcs]

At any rate, people, men and women both, who once made a middle class income, can only approach it now by working two or three jobs, not one. The size of the middle class in the U.S. is shrinking..

Wow, Angela, I was aware of the growing problems of the working and middle classes in the US, but not that it was THAT serious. Two or three jobs to make a middle class income? Yesterday I read a BBC report (its Brazilian offshoot, BBC Brazil) called "The American Shame", which demonstrates 6 important social data (e.g. infant mortality, maternal mortality, life expectancy) where the US is not only now behind all the developed countries, but also behind some emerging countries, like Chile and even Mexico and Cuba! It seems like, despite still preserving its head above others (except small countries) in terms of GDP (absolute and per capita), and certainly in terms of luxury and high comforts, the most progressive emerging countries, like Uruguay and Chile, are closing the gap with the US in terms of basic quality of life. It almost feels like the US is, in relative terms, becoming more "Latin American", not more "Scandinavian". :-(

 

[Ygorcs]

Angela has nicely explained why poorer US citizens are worse off now than a few decades ago. But that does not apply to Latin America, and I am really wondering why Latin Americans believe that life is worse today. Violence is a major concern in many countries like Mexico, Colombia and Brazil, but it's been a problem for a very long time. The highest homicide rates in the world are found among native Amazon tribes of hunter-gatherers, and the Aztecs were known for their cult of violence in pre-Columbian times. The colonisation period was even worse, as Spaniards and Portuguese raped and massacred a big part of the indigenous populations in many places like the Caribbean and coastal Brazil. The 1950's and 60's were marked by repressive dictatorships in most Latin American countries. Most countries are now more democratic, wealthier and healthier. Why is the majority of population in those countries so pessimistic about the present and nostalgic about the past? Am I missing something important?

Very interesting observation. As a Brazilian living in a state that only recently experienced a boom of crime rates - but one which was dramatically rapid and intense - after the 1990s, I'd say that the main explanation is really urban, criminal violence. Violence, as you correctly point out, has always been an ordinary part of Latin American life, but it was mostly concentrated, difuse or sporadic, in times of rebellion, warfare, land disputes and so on. On the whole, it was very much an awful but occasional part of social life. To give you all some perspective of it: the homicide rate when I was born here in my home state (Ceará) was about 10 per 100,000, already a bit high, but not uncontrolled; 29 years later, it's increased to a shocking 45 per 100,000.

Some conservative Brazilians (in my opinion, totally selfishly and absurdly) usually say something of this sort: "in the past, during the dictatorships, there was violence, but only if you 'asked for it' by being a revolutionary, a subversive or a criminal. Now violence can reach you at any time, anywhere, no matter who you are and what you do". That's an absurd statement, because state and elite violence actually took the lives of thousands of people who simply had "inconvenient" thoughts and practices for the business and political elites. But it has a hint of truth there: violence in Brazil, Mexico or, in tragically higher proportions, Honduras and Venezuela are absurdly widespread and unavoidable for the working and lower-middle class. They can be victims of violent crimes even inside their own homes. That's fundamentally different and more threatening than previous, political or rural violence in Latin America.

 

[Ygorcs]

I wonder with whom South Americans identify themselves.
They are not European, they are not indogenous, they are not slaves from the other side of the Ocean.
They are a mixture.
Who are they? Are they South Americans, or is this different for each one or each group personally?

There is a group identity in many places, especially among little admixed Native Americans and descendants of recent European and Asian immigrants, but this ethnic identity is in general much, much weaker than the national and/or regional identities. In most South American countries, the main identity people have is associated with their city, region and country, with relatively little relevance (except for, well, racist purposes) given to skin color or long-gone origin. That's especially true, of course, of countries where interracial admixture was much more intense, like Brazil and Colombia, and I'm not sure, but I'd bet that ethnic/phenotype identity is a bit stronger in less admixed countries like Peru and Argentina, where, at least in my experience, tend to have a much more striking divergence in the looks of people, because they mixed and "diluted" less than Brazilians or Venezuelans. As a whole, though, South Americans do not identify with the ancient immigrant ancestors, with the natives, and much, much less with an "international" identity like Latin American, Latino or Hispanic. They may define themselves as such abroad, especially in the US, but back home you're not Hispanic nor Latino, you're Argentine, Chilean, Peruvian. If necessary, they can get more specific and say their identity is Porteño (Buenos Aires in Argentina), Gaúcho (Rio Grande do Sul in Brazil), and so on.

 

[Ygorcs]

Many Brazilians consider themselves white, even if they have some Amerindian in them. There was a study out there using what people identify as and what those conducting the studies identified them as. And it was quite different.

In Brazil, people identify their "race" by phenotype alone. Given the extensive and 500-year-old process of still ongoing admixture, it's very difficult to know the ethnic/racial roots of one's ancestors. As you correctly reminded, some studies comparing the genetics and the self-declared phenotypes of Brazilians showed very surprising results. Some visibly black individuals, with mostly African features, came up as mostly European, and some white people came up with a lot of African and Amerindian ancestry. So, Brazilians make it easier and simply declare that they have such and such skin color, implying that this doesn't necessarily mean their main origins are this or that.

Actress Ildi Silva: 70% European.

Gymnast Daiane dos Santos: 41% European and 20% Amerindian.

 

[Ygorcs]

This varies a lot between countries. In Chile, Argentina, Uruguay and southern Brazil a big part of the population is of almost purely European descent. In contrast in Bolivia, Peru, Honduras, Guatemala or El Salvador, over half of the people are Amerindians with little or no European or African admixture

Some genetic studies and also individually made genetic analysis seem to indicate more and more clearly that this is actually a partial myth. Yes, thevast majority of the DNA of average Southern Brazilians and Argentinians is European, but the notion that they had managed, perhaps due to their later immigration to South America, to remain almost unadmixed, is not corroborated by the DNA results. In fact, the difference in relation to other regions of Brazil is much less pronounced than previously thought. Northern and Northeastern Brazilians show an average 50% to 60% of European DNA, while Southern Brazilians have some 75% to 80% of European DNA. I'm not totally sure about the results for Argentinians, but if I'm not mistaken the genetic study I'd read months ago showed them to be ~75% European, too. That means that, despite the different (and more recent) demographic history, the people of those regions still had a significant (1/5 or 1/4) contribution from Native Americans and Africans (mostly Amerindians, I think).

 

[nordicwarrior]

I voted for Trump because he wants to dismantle the ACA. The ACA has a mandate that violates our First Ammendment, until this mandate is removed I will continue to be solidly pro-Trump.

My European friends, please do not be confused by our media outlets... Trump is very popular here.

And Angela, I too am glad Roy Moore was defeated in Alabama.

 

[Angela]

Wow, Angela, I was aware of the growing problems of the working and middle classes in the US, but not that it was THAT serious. Two or three jobs to make a middle class income? Yesterday I read a BBC report (its Brazilian offshoot, BBC Brazil) called "The American Shame", which demonstrates 6 important social data (e.g. infant mortality, maternal mortality, life expectancy) where the US is not only now behind all the developed countries, but also behind some emerging countries, like Chile and even Mexico and Cuba! It seems like, despite still preserving its head above others (except small countries) in terms of GDP (absolute and per capita), and certainly in terms of luxury and high comforts, the most progressive emerging countries, like Uruguay and Chile, are closing the gap with the US in terms of basic quality of life. It almost feels like the US is, in relative terms, becoming more "Latin American", not more "Scandinavian". :-(

That's what worries me, and should worry American political and media elites. Our statistics were always behind that of countries like Sweden, let's say, but that's because more than 20% of our population is black and Hispanic (Puerto Rican and other Caribbean Islanders, Mexicans etc.) and they have such high rates of alcohol and drug addiction, nicotine use, unemployment, and on and on, and until very recently most of Europe did not have these issues. A crack addicted pregnant woman is not going to have a healthy baby. So many young people dying is going to affect longevity rates. It's extremely different for college educated whites.

That's why I'm always so suspicious of statistics that look at things from a country wide perspective. It's like data that shows how well off some European countries are compared to the U.S. It's a distortion of the reality, imo. We, as in the upper middle or even middle class, throw away more than people from similar classes in the rest of the world consume. It drives me crazy. Just think about electricity costs, which we were discussing on another thread. Even most working class Americans of the older generation, people who are unhappy because they are comparing themselves to their parents and grandparents and worried about the lives of their children in the future, have central heating, leave the lights on all the time, and have electric washers and dryers, often dishwashers, air-conditioning at least through a room unit, a car, even if it's older, and cheap gas, and on and on. That's one of the biggest gripes from American ex-pats in Europe. They can't believe that so many people don't have central air, or dryers and dishwashers. Of course, most of them aren't working class.

I guess what I'm saying is that even our slums, much less our working class communities, aren't favelas.

The Watts riots, which took place in an inner city, black neighborhood in Los Angeles were a traumatic event. This is what the neighborhood looked like before the riots:

This used to be the South Bronx. It was heavily Italian and Jewish.

This is what happened to it in the 1970s, with crack and heroin, and gangs, and torched cars and buildings. They have to keep rebuilding it.

I think the comparison is more with the ghettos in places like England and Belgium etc., not with Brazil.


In my opinion, disaffection isn't usually based on what people objectively don't have, but on what they can see that other people do have.


What is happening is that this kind of unemployment, or under employment, and despair and substance abuse, is moving up the ladder into the white working class. I don't think a democracy can sustain itself if these kinds of problems reach 50% of the population. The problem is that social life in America is stratified by class, which means by education and income level. The elite media doesn't interact with an ex automotive factory worker from Michigan or Pennsylvania, or an ex miner in Kentucky or Tennessee, or Puerto Ricans living in the South Bronx for that matter. They feel sorry for the latter, but not for the former, and think that more benefits will help the latter when it won't. The number of people in slums who use their food stamps and welfare checks for drugs is staggering.

My neighbors don't interact with these people either btw. Maybe my perspective is different because when my family moved to the U.S. they went to a "rust belt" factory town which fell on hard times. I know these people. Also, for some years my profession brought me into contact with the underbelly of American society, to the detriment of my mental health, probably.

 

[Angela]

I voted for Trump because he wants to dismantle the ACA. The ACA has a mandate that violates our First Ammendment, until this mandate is removed I will continue to be solidly pro-Trump.

My European friends, please do not be confused by our media outlets... Trump is very popular here.

And Angela, I too am glad Roy Moore was defeated in Alabama.

I know, right? If you believed the accusations, and they seem pretty legit, there just was no choice for a lot of people. It was either vote for the radical abortionist (even late term partial birth ones) or stay home. I think probably a lot of white Alabamans just stayed home.

As for the ACA, speaking of abortions, I think it is one, a horrible mess of a law, but I don't see it going anywhere, no matter what Trump or even what someone like Paul Ryan wants.

 

[nordicwarrior]

Maciamo after considering your question further, I've come to a conclusion and it probably won't go over well with many of forum contributors. The reason for the lack of economic prosperity in much of the Americas (and really even into parts of Europe) is a growing distance from The Church.

A specific example would be Mexico. Would you rather have an organized religion calling the shots in your neighborhood, or a merciless drug cartel? I think much of the population is starting to wake up to the fact that without a religious reference point, political systems simply fail.

Trump's success is built on this factor... he pulled more African American voters and Latin voters than Mitt Romney or most any other Republican/Conservative politician.

I think the U.S. and the Americas in general will start heading toward The Church simply because it's the only sensible way.

 

[nordicwarrior]

I disagree Angela. The mandate will have to be removed. One way or another. A person can't force another person to financially contribute to human sacrifice.

 

[bicicleur 2]

I voted for Trump because he wants to dismantle the ACA. The ACA has a mandate that violates our First Ammendment, until this mandate is removed I will continue to be solidly pro-Trump.

My European friends, please do not be confused by our media outlets... Trump is very popular here.

And Angela, I too am glad Roy Moore was defeated in Alabama.

what is ACA?

here it is an IT company, but I guess in America, it is something else..

 

[nordicwarrior]

"Affordable Healthcare Act". The irony is that is not affordable (enormous deductibles, complicated, etc.) and that it has not much to do with healthcare, but with health "insurance".

 

[Northener]

Well, there's a difference between working class and middle class in the U.S., although the working class income used to equal the middle class white collar income, and Americans like to think all Americans, except perhaps the minorities, are "middle class".

At any rate, people, men and women both, who once made a middle class income, can only approach it now by working two or three jobs, not one. The size of the middle class in the U.S. is shrinking.

The health of women from that group is also suffering, not just men.

The phenomenon is also because of increasing rural poverty.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/01/white-working-class-poverty/424341/

Now, obviously, their lives are still better than the lives of a lot of people around the world, but they're not comparing themselves to farm workers in Bangladesh or where ever. They're comparing themselves to their parents and grandparents, and they're doing worse, and they're not happy about it or about the condition of their cities. What's deeply worrying is that imo a democracy is only stable if you have a large middle class.

In the Netherlands the notion is widespread that people opinions about their personal life is pretty prosperous, but the opinion about the "common" or society as a whole is negative.

In the US there is in stead of in the golden years after WW2 no notion about the "common good". May be the idea is still alive. But it looks like if everything is measured by privat succes. A mingling of neoliberalism and meritocracy.

A few weeks ago I saw in documentary that the poor in the US (in the Appalaches) got medical aid by voluntary medical professionals garthered in a tent. Scenes I only know from underdeveloped countries. The abuse of drugs/ incl. medicins is gone partly sky high. Poor country....

 

[firetown]

In Brazil, people identify their "race" by phenotype alone. Given the extensive and 500-year-old process of still ongoing admixture, it's very difficult to know the ethnic/racial roots of one's ancestors. As you correctly reminded, some studies comparing the genetics and the self-declared phenotypes of Brazilians showed very surprising results. Some visibly black individuals, with mostly African features, came up as mostly European, and some white people came up with a lot of African and Amerindian ancestry. So, Brazilians make it easier and simply declare that they have such and such skin color, implying that this doesn't necessarily mean their main origins are this or that.

Actress Ildi Silva: 70% European.

Gymnast Daiane dos Santos: 41% European and 20% Amerindian.

This is a good approach. At least keep it simple. European, Amerindian, African and Asian as groups if people feel the need to label themselves or others. I couldn't imagine Brazilians actually calling themselves Hispanic or Latino.

On a sidenote: There is one study out there on Brazil having 19.5% rh negative people amongst them:

http://www.rhesusnegative.net/themission/bloodtypefrequencies/brazil/

Is there a high Basque population in Brazil? Or any other reason why this might be the case?

 

[bicicleur 2]

"Affordable Healthcare Act". The irony is that is not affordable (enormous deductibles, complicated, etc.) and that it has not much to do with healthcare, but with health "insurance".

IMO America needs some kind of public health care
but Obama made ACA his prestige project, and he was not very hounust forgetting to mention the costs involved
even Trump cannot make ACA undone unless he can come up with a better alternative
it needs serious fixing but it cannot be abolished

 

[Salento]

Health Care in the US is Not a fundamental Human Right.
It’s a For Profit business.
There isn’t Universal Health Care, but the Government does offers Medicare fo people 65 and older, some younger people with Disabilities, and most Kidney Dialysis.

https://www.medicare.gov/sign-up-ch...medicare/whats-medicare/what-is-medicare.html

Medicaid provides health coverage to millions of Americans, including eligible low-income adults, children, pregnant women, elderly adults and people with disabilities. Medicaid is administered by states, according to federal requirements. The program is funded jointly by states and the federal government.

https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/index.html

 

[nordicwarrior]

Bicicleur, I agree that we need some system for all Americans to access better healthcare. However, the ACA's mandate forcing everyone to contribute to abortion violates the Freedom of Religion clause in our founding document.

So the simple answer is to eliminate the mandate penalty. Another answer would be to have those that are pro-abortion set up funding pools where they could send money to pay for these procedures. I think that would make supporters of this choice really think about what they are doing. Reflection in this matter is probably helpful anyway.

I personally would like all woman, all females to have top notch access to reproductive healthcare (cancer screenings, pregnancy consultation, even reasonable fertility treatments). However, I do not and will not fund any abortions.

I have not paid and will not pay the mandate penalty.

 

[Maciamo]

I've met a few South American (Chile, Argentina, Uruguay) bussiness relations and they all looked and behaved European.
But I was not aware they were also genetically so much European. As Angela states, probably more on the Y-DNA then on the mtDNA side.

I also know a Belgian who spent a few years in Argentina trying to set up a new life over there and he came back dissapointed because of high taxes and a government with little vision and little support for enterpreneurs.

Maybe that is why those South Americans who identify themselves with Europeans are not happy.

Chile, Argentina and Uruguay are overwhelmingly European and not just on the paternal side, because there was a lot of recent immigration from countries like Italy and Germany (notably after WWII), but also France, Spain and others.

 

[firetown]

In other parts of South America there are also many Basque communities: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basque_diaspora

 

[Minty]

Pew Research conducted a worldwide survey asking people whether life is better now than it was 50 years ago. The majority of people life in Asia, Australia, Canada and most of Europe (with notable exceptions such as France, Italy and Greece) believed that life has indeed got better. But surprisingly respondents from the USA, Latin America (except Chile) and most African countries surveyed believe that the quality of life has deteriorated over the two last generations, despite all the technological innovations and increased life expectancy. Why could that be?

They survey found that younger and more educated people are more likely to say that life is better now. This is especially true in Europe. Conversely, Europeans voting for populist/extremist parties are more likely to take a dim view of the present and be nostalgic about the past. These are typically older and less educated people, including a lot of laid off factory workers.

The only places where more educated people were much more negative about present life conditions are Turkey and Nigeria. The reason is that these countries have seen a resurgence of Islam and discrimination, imprisonment and killings of intellectuals. Religious Turks and Muslim Nigerians see life now as much better, while secular Turks and Christian Nigerians have more misgivings.

But all this doesn't explain why most Latin Americans and about half of US citizens are so nostalgic about the past. The situation is understandable for the poorer, less educated half of the US population, which has suffered from globalisation and robotisation far more than their European counterparts. A huge underclass is developing in the USA, as the rich keep getting richer and the poor poorer.
But what about Latin America? The economy of most countries has developed dramatically over the last 50 years. What is making them so gloomy?

The level of inequality in countries: in general, the countries with the most equal distribution of wealth are happier than those with a lot of inequality.

Financial satisfaction differs from culture to culture. So, this seemed to be determined not by the amount of money a person had, but instead by their expectations of what that money should mean.

With the exaception of the US, Africa and Latin America have the highest homicide rates in the world.

The 50 Most Dangerous Cities
View information as a: List Chart
Rank City Country Homicide Rate (Per 100,000)
1 Caracas Venezuela 130.35
2 Acapulco Mexico 113.24
3 San Pedro Sula Honduras 112.09
4 Distrito Central Honduras 112.09
5 Victoria Mexico 84.67
6 Maturin Venezuela 82.84
7 San Salvador El Salvador 83.39
8 Ciudad Guayana Venezuela 82.84
9 Valencia Venezuela 72.02
10 Natal Brazil 69.56
11 Belem Brazil 67.41
12 Aracaju Brazil 62.76
13 Cape Town South Africa 60.77
14 St. Louis United States 60.37
15 Feira de Santana Brazil 60.10
16 Barquisimeto Venezuela 59.38
17 Cumana Venezuela 59.31
18 Campos dos Goytacazes Brazil 56.45
19 Salvador Brazil 54.71
20 Cali Colombia 54.00
21 Tijuana Mexico 53.06
22 Guatemala Guatemala 52.73
23 Culiacan Mexico 51.81
24 Maceio Brazil 47.89
25 Baltimore United States 51.14
26 Mazatlan Mexico 48.75
27 Recife Brazil 47.89
28 Joao Pessoa Brazil 47.57
29 Bracelona Venezuela 46.86
30 Palmira Colombia 46.30
31 Kingston Jamaica 45.43
32 Sao Luis Brazil 45.41
33 New Orleans United States 45.17
34 Fortaleza Brazil 44.98
35 Detroit United States 44.60
36 Juarez Mexico 43.63
37 Terresina Brazil 42.84
38 Cuiaba Brazil 42.61
39 Chihuahua Brazil 42.61
40 Obregon Mexico 42.02
41 Aparecida de Goiania Brazil 39.48
42 Nelson Mandela Bay South Africa 39.19
43 Armenia Colombia 38.54
44 Macapa Brazil 38.45
45 Manaus Brazil 38.25
46 Vitoria Brazil 37.54
47 Cucuta Colombia 37.00
48 Curitiba Brazil 34.92
49 Durban South Africa 34.43
Taken from here : https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/most-dangerous-cities-in-the-world.html