Do you live in a bubble? NPR quiz

Hebegebe, the risk is trying to impose our values on others. Ironically, this thread is about bubbles and I don’t think our bubbles are necessarily superior- and not just because, by the standards “we” use to judge, ours rate better. We have much we can learn from each other. This has been a running theme in the social sciences for at least 40 years.

You may think, eg, that a college degree offers more than not. You can cite various studies you find worthy. And yet the reality remains, different strokes for different folks. You could cite reports on 2-parent families- and yet, there are examples galore of successful people emerging from single parent families.

And another bubble might emphasize the value of religious beliefs, regular attendance, and decry the loss of ethics among those who don’t share their practices, cite some survey stats or other.

Ironically, some of those listed values were likely the very ones which prompted that Salon writer who felt her rejection of those values common in the Midwest town she left to leave.

When I saw that post, that prompted many memories of college classmates, post-college colleagues/friends, and a few relatives from deeply conservative and religious parts of the rural Midwest/South to permanently move away once they completed HS/college for the same reasons. Especially those from marginalized groups who tend to be disdained or ostracized by virtue of their LGBTQ sexual orientation, race, or different religious/non-religious affinities*.

  • One friend whose family spent all of his childhood up until college in a deeply conservative part of the south where fundamentalist evangelical Christianity was overbearingly dominant felt the need to relocate himself to the NE while his family moved to one of the few relatively "liberal" areas of the state because of the increasing overbearing attitudes of their neighbors over their being non-religious.

I agree with @lookingforward. My guess is if you held certain variables like income, IQ, and education level constant, as well as a myriad of other factors, the differences between single parent and 2 parent households would be minimal.

@hebegebe How do you envision this passing along of info from the more successful to those less successful (wondering how that is defined anyway?) is going to happen? In what fashion?

I would guess that the different meaning of “dumplings” in different parts of the country are an example of food bubbles.
http://www.seriouseats.com/2015/03/best-frozen-pork-dumplings-taste-test.html

The class bubble is the one I really notice. I feel like I can go anywhere in the country (actually in the world) and if I’m around teachers, professors, engineers, computer scientists (though not necessarily IT guys), skilled nurses, journalists, many types of freelancers, and some doctors and lawyers, I feel pretty much at ‘at home’. We might not agree on all aspects politically or religiously and we might have different ethnicities—but we have fairly similar world views. Our family trajectories have many similarities. Hit hard by the Great Depression, possibly grandparents or parents immigrated, multiple migrations, living away from family, marrying people from different parts of the country though within the same professional class.

Also in my extended family, it feels like there is a fairly big divide between those who stayed put (in the part of the country where the family was since the 1820s) and those that migrated out. In the urban neighborhood I live in now, I’d guess few were born in the state. Back in my grandparent’s area (rural south), most were born in the state.

And I will add that even low income single mothers with minimal education can be outstanding parents to their children. The bottom line with many, many of these women is that they wanted these children. While they struggle economically they are quite capable of transferring solid values to their offspring.

These women had other choices but had these children despite the absence of the biological father. I respect them for that and am certainly not going to second guess or judge those decisions.

@doschicos,

We can all help in different ways. One thing that I have been involved with off and on is in teaching inner city kids the skills they need to be successful in an entry level corporate position. When we start out, the kids are often unable to even look me in the eye. I start with the basics such as how to introduce yourself, a firm handshake, the importance of being on time and dressing as well as you can. Other lessons involve table etiquette and how present your self during an interview. Other parts of the organization actually teach the technical skills of how to work with computers.

People in my bubble just pick up these skills from osmosis, but they are very much learned skills.

But Murray appears to be advocating teaching “values” not the social skills needed to succeed in the corporate world. I think there is a difference.

@hebegebe I agree that the skills you point out are instrumental to being successful in a business context and I think it’s great you volunteer your time in this fashion.

However, I don’t necessarily see that as part of a single parent/two parent divide. I’m also not sure table manners are even something that can be ascribed to socio-economic success. My family and I have discussed how some of the worst table manners we’ve seen have been from wealthy young people we would have guessed “should know better”. Truly bad and you don’t want to sit across from them at the dinner table despite their intelligence, high levels of education, and the high net worth of their parents. It was pretty eye opening to discover this many times because it was not what we would have expected. Perhaps due to absentee parents and lack of family dinners? Not really sure.

  1. Middle class from working class family. I've taken this before and it's always about the same.

@doschicos:
I agree with you, one of the problems with Murray’s assesment with single parent households is he doesn’t look at the income disparity, he assumes the problem is cultural. Murray can claim all he wants that the ills of rural/blue collar america (blossoming drug use, kids born outside marriage, etc) that it is because people don’t go to church any more, don’t have the ‘old values’, which basically is blaming ‘moral turpitude’ rather than the very real difference in economic circumstances that lead to these ills. I hate to tell Murray, but that 50 something year old person who loses their factory job who has grown children who face economic deprivation, likely had all the lessons their parents and churches and schools gave, they likely were told to work hard, to dedicate themselves, to get married and work towards the American dream, and they probably tried to give that to their own kids, but when you lose hope, as many people have, because of the economic dislocation, no matter of preaching is going to change that. The African American community, for example, is often described as having a very strong influence of churches, of religious belief, and they are generally pretty conservative, and yet despite that it didn’t help with the ills facing the community, it didn’t stave off epidemics of kids born out of wedlock, drug use, issues with decent jobs…the blue collar communities Murray is talking about, especially down south and in the midwest, are communities where churchgoing, especially evangelical Christianity, has a strong influence, yet look at the slide in those communities, it says that this isn’t about the culture it is about people facing economic dislocation.

For all the myths I read about the Great Depression, probably the last time so many lost hope, all the stories about how families pulled together, how the hard times brought people together, the real history of the depression shows many of the same ills we see today affecting more and more; it may have been buried, but it was there, rampant alcoholism (drugs were a lot more rare back then), families where the father walked away, crime, spousal abuse, you name it, were at high levels (not surprising) during a period a lot of people thought might be the end of things…one of the ironies of Murray and others who promote this idea of a ‘moral’ culture being the difference, kind of have things brass-ackwards IMO, that the relative economic boom of the post war period, where the blue collar workers actually had the ability to live a ‘middle class lifestyle’ also brought the ‘moral uprightness’ or whatever you want to call it, too, and if you look at communities that did not benefit from the post war boom, African Americans, Hispanics, people living in rural areas that didn’t share the economic boom, you would see the ills we are talking about, despite it being a ‘moral times’

The expansion of drug use to include more remote communities may be newer, but it doesn’t mean the white middle and upper classes haven’t been seeing the same, for some time. Despite so called values and a better economic position.

I think you have to have more visibility into rural/blue collar America before judging it. And I really want to add, “Period!” Nor is economic dislocation the only issue. Our entire social structure has changed over several generations and that reaches into mighty far corners.

44Could be higher if it asked my parents income when I grew up (< $70 /month)

Well, I guess that depends upon whether you look at income more as a dependent variable or an independent variable. The answer to that colors your entire outlook on the rest of the analysis.

I also think people forget what it meant to be middle class a generation or two ago. People didn’t have all kinds of electronics - computers, smart phones, multiple tvs, often a family had one car, houses were smaller, going out to eat as a family was a very special treat reserved to a few times a year at most, even fast food was a rare treat. Perhaps others didn’t live this way but this was what it was like if you were middle class in my town. Life has changed and costs in some areas have increased (higher ed, healthcare) but I feel like expectations have changed a lot as well.

Rural and working class Americans live in a bubble as well. One of many problems with this quiz is that it presumes coastal elite status and doesn’t reflect the fact that there are multiple bubbles.

Then again, owning a decent home in a nice neighborhood with a decent-sized yard was a reasonable expectation for average middle class (and I believe many working class) families back in the day – often on one income. That is no longer the expectation in most of Southern California or the Bay Area.

I didn’t really understand what he was trying to show by the quiz. I lived in a small(er) town growing up, but it had a university. I don’t think half the adults had degrees. I couldn’t think of a time I ‘walked’ (and couldn’t figure out if he meant ‘worked’) on a factory floor so I answered no, but I did work on a potato farm on a conveyor belt loading potatoes into sheds. It was outside not in a factory.

But what does that mean and how could it matter if I watch Criminal Minds or not? I watch a lot of other cop/solving crime shows, just not Criminal minds.

The real issue is that the multiple bubbles don’t particularly like each other! Each wants to “pop” the other.

As long as you’re not racist, not sexist, not discriminatory against sexual preference, open to accepting how people choose to pray or that they choose not to, don’t spew hate, accept a live and let live mentality, don’t tell me how to live my personal life because it doesn’t mesh with your beliefs, don’t think climate change is a hoax, you’re welcome at my dinner table anytime. Oh, yeah, and be willing to eat what I’m serving without complaining, but I’ll accommodate for your allergies and restrictions if you let me know ahead of time. I won’t pop your bubble. :smiley: