The state of the American Dream

March 23, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

These aren’t chipper times. That’s certainly apparent in John Zogby’s polling on perceptions of the American Dream.

In a poll taken in mid-February, only 57 percent of the people responding said achieving the dream was still possible. The figure was 10 points higher after the 2008 elections that swept Barack Obama into office, and about 20 points higher before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

So, we’re bummed. People with low household incomes, who tend to be most worried about job prospects, lost the most enthusiasm since the elections.

However, Zogby, writing for Forbes.com, said he remains optimistic.

What do you think? Is the American Dream any harder to achieve now? What are your chances in the Indianapolis area? And would Zogby have received a different response had the survey been taken after this week’s passage of health care reform?

ADVERTISEMENT
  • American Dream
    If we are talking about the "2 Story House and White Picket (sp?) Fence", I never had that dream. But if we are talking about the American dream being "Able to obtain a solid job, solid income, a place to be proud of live @, and someone (or a family of someones) to share it with, Yes. It is still in arms reach.

    In Fact, I feel that since the economy hit the bottom on March 9th, 2009, each day, I feel more confident in obtaining my American Dream. I don't want to follow someone else's idea of the American dream, but to create my own American Dream and my own way through this crazy mixed up world.

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. John, unfortunately CTRWD wants to put the tank(s) right next to a nature preserve and at the southern entrance to Carmel off of Keystone. Not exactly the kind of message you want to send to residents and visitors (come see our tanks as you enter our city and we build stuff in nature preserves...

  2. 85 feet for an ambitious project? I could shoot ej*culate farther than that.

  3. I tried, can't take it anymore. Untill Katz is replaced I can't listen anymore.

  4. Perhaps, but they've had a very active program to reduce rainwater/sump pump inflows for a number of years. But you are correct that controlling these peak flows will require spending more money - surge tanks, lines or removing storm water inflow at the source.

  5. All sewage goes to the Carmel treatment plant on the White River at 96th St. Rainfall should not affect sewage flows, but somehow it does - and the increased rate is more than the plant can handle a few times each year. One big source is typically homeowners who have their sump pumps connect into the sanitary sewer line rather than to the storm sewer line or yard. So we (Carmel and Clay Twp) need someway to hold the excess flow for a few days until the plant can process this material. Carmel wants the surge tank located at the treatment plant but than means an expensive underground line has to be installed through residential areas while CTRWD wants the surge tank located further 'upstream' from the treatment plant which costs less. Either solution works from an environmental control perspective. The less expensive solution means some people would likely have an unsightly tank near them. Carmel wants the more expensive solution - surprise!

ADVERTISEMENT