Skylar Schuth 12/11/15

Schuth 1

Section SE
Samantha Futhey
Foroohars Reflections on the Lost American Dream
The gap between the rich and poor rises with every passing day. It has reached the point
in which the gap is no longer feasibly crossable. Rana Foroohar discusses the income gap in her
article for the Times magazine, What Ever Happened to Upward Mobility, published on
November 4 2011. She argues that America is no longer a country where the poor can become
rich. She states that there is a significant disconnect between how fluid Americans believe the
classes are and how fluid they are in reality. She also makes an emotional appeal at the right time
through the faces of people who are suffering through poverty in America. Foroohar successfully
combines statistics, the images of struggling Americans, and an eager audience of middle to
lower class Americans to punch a hole through the American dream.
Foroohar frequently grounds her arguments in statistics. If you were born in 1970 in the
bottom one-fifth of the socioeconomic spectrum in the U.S., you only had about a 17% chance of
making it into the upper two fifths (903). She does this to show that there is a disconnect
between the public perception and the reality of the current economic situation. If she did not use
the facts people would disregard her statements because of their own preconceived notions on
the situation. People tend to believe in assumptions they gathered from personal experiences
rather than researching the facts on issues. So she inserted all of the statistics to prove that this
growing divide is undeniable and is happening here and now. She roots her arguments in fact in
order to give all of her arguments credibility and from the diversity of statistics that she uses she
shows that she is well versed on the subject.

The faces of the Americans also help her connect to her audience, which is middle to
lower class, college educated Americans. It is apparent by the language that she uses. She
frequently uses her large vocabulary as well as make comparisons to lesser known historical
figures like Alexis de Tocqueville. Her references show that she expects her audience to be well
read so they can understand why she brings up the characters that she does. This knowledge is
most likely only gained through higher education which means she assumes her audience has
gone through higher education. It is also shown through the themes of the piece. The
disenfranchisement of the lower class is going to resonate with the lower class more than the
upper class. Although she does add a caveat near the end showing that income inequality hurts
the rich as well through economic consequences such as less stable economies. It would appear
that she doesnt expect her audience to be wealthy because she only had the one brief mentioning
of their problems with income inequality as opposed to the many arguments for the lower class.
When the article was published her audience was definitely looking for this kind of
information. It was published on Nov. 14 2011, just one month after the Occupy Wall Street
protests started up. Back then the nation was still reeling from the Great Recession and people
were angry over the bail outs of the bankers who they saw as the cause of the collapse. By
publishing this article then it addressed the peoples concerns over those problems.
Foroohar also connects with her audience by utilizing images of them affected by income
inequality to stir an emotional response from the audience. It is easy to disassociate the people
from the numbers in a statistically heavy text like hers. So she uses faces and homes of
individual people to show the reader the actual effects on people in America today. That way the
reader learns the true effect that income inequality is having on a personal level. Foroohar also
challenges the American nationalistic pride. Foroohar makes this clear by attempting to disprove

the American dream. Its easier to climb the socioeconomic ladder in many parts of Europe
than it is in the U.S. (904) Americans tend to take pride in American exceptionalism and the
opportunities offered in this country. They believe that America is unique in its ability for social
mobility, but Foroohar argues that thats not an American exclusive trait. By showing that
America is not actually the unique land of opportunity that weve all heard it deals a massive
blow to the idealistic America that we believe is our country. This forces the audience to open up
to the possibilities of what the situation in America could actually look like by disproving their
preconceived bias.
Foroohar addresses the concerns having modern Americans troubles with the growing
income inequality in America. She does this through her flood of facts, a humanized appeal, and
an eager audience. Foroohar wraps this into a compelling argument fort change in our system.

Schuth 4
Works Cited
Foroohar, Rana. What Ever Happened to Upward Mobility. Everythings an Argument.
Ed. Andrea A. Lunsford and John J. Riszkiewicz. 6th ed. Boston: Bedford, 2013, 108-10. Print.
Rpt. of What Ever Happened to Upward Mobility. Times Magazine 4 November 2011