when did the united states become so class divided?
459286
Capitalism. America will either move towards Socialism or die under the weight of the insane amount of materialism we've created. Rich people want more and more and don't want to share, poor people want what the rich people have, and the middle class are only slaves to materialism. It's been proven the divide between upper and lower classes is quickly increasing. I can walk down any street in my city and see the dirt poor wiping the asses of the wealthy, it's sickening. It can't last much longer though. Just a matter of time before it crumbles.
704965
The middle class is dwindling and the lower class in growing. The rich are getting richer and more powerful and controlling. There are 300 million American's now. The vast majority are white, we have a growing population of Hispanic (that includes those from all Latin America) and that has resulted in people saying we have a "browning of America" taking place. The largest age group is still the Baby Boomer generation, that's mine, who were born in the late 40's through early 60's. We are also the biggest consumers.
84091
As President Grant said in his memoirs, the South stopped working for compromise when they could no longer command political dominance of the country. Back in the early 1980's, the Commerce Department put out a series of books on the economic history of the United States, which brought up many aspects of early US history that are now forgotten.\n\nAfter the revolution, when the country was a bankrupted swath of states along the Atlantic Ocean, there seemed no way the country could survive economically. Then, the industrialization of the American Northeast was financed in large part by hard currency achieved through the export of cotton and tobacco. These were the only resources the US had in large quantities that had a monopoly throughout the world, and this was of course produced exclusively in the South. The grains produced in the Northeast and later in the Midwest were largely barred from European markets because of the British Corn Laws and other agricultural protective measures across the world.\n\nYou must remember, this was before the advent of sectionalism, and many across the country gave their political loyalty to the Whig Party, which represented Business both large and small. As a result, the South would reap huge profits on cotton (which thus became an industry only for those rich and powerful enough to hold large amounts of land and large numbers of slaves) and then invest those profits in the North to build industry. This also gave the South a certain amount of extra influence in how things were done across the country.\n\nAs the North began to also grow rich because of its expanding industrial base, leaders in the North began to also throw their political and economic weight around. In the 1830's, Northern and Midwestern sections brought about a very protective tariff against foreign manufactured goods and European luxuries (hence the name Sectionalism).\n\nAs we have seen all throughout our history, when a domestic industry is protected by increasing the price of foreign competition, rather than using the protection to increase their market share and long term health, American business will simply increase their prices to maximize their short term profits. This was the case here as well. The leaders in the North, because they needed semi-skilled labor which is not condusive to slavery, started to fund the political movement to abolish slavery which, when gold was discovered in California and people had to travel through Missouri and actually see the way slaves were treated, became an uncontrollably emotional issue. The South found themselves now having to pay higher prices for goods they could not produce themselves, even though they had made those goods possible, and found their peculiar institution which was the basis of their own wealth attacked as being immoral.\n\nThe two sections of the country had found themselves growing farther apart, and the differences were becoming too stark for the Southern leaders to deal with. While they defended African slavery as moral and humanitarian, they lived in mortal fear of becoming slaves themselves. The Whig Party began to unravel, with those in the North going to the Republicans and the South going to the Democrats. With the very idea of slavery being called into question, the South demanded a concession in the Compromise of 1850 that they felt would force the whole country to recognize the institution of slavery, the Fugitive Slave Act. This completely backfired on the South, because now to the people in the North, slavery was no longer just some bad thing that was happening far far away that you could pretend was someone else's problem (like Darfur today). The new law now required Northern communities to arrest and hold captive black people in their local jails with their local police for no other reason than because someone in the South said the black person was a runaway slave (there was no hearing, and no evidence allowed other than the statement of
884523
I think today, more than ever before, money determines class--those that have not (like me) would probably make up the laboring class until technology either removes the need for such a class, or society (the socio-economic entity) evolves to the point where the distinctions become irrelevant...
860294
Republicans usually pull for the upperclass and dems pull for lower/middle class
87543
From where I see it most of it has disappeared into one or the other of the two.  We have very little middle ground anymore.  While many people  may be making the trip upward an awlful lot of the middle class has disappeared into the poorer class and have never moved anywhere so they do not even realize that they have done it.  The gap between the Rich and Poor is getting larger and larger with each new day.  Too many people have felt like they are from a throw away economy the way different job's have just disappeared with nothing to replace them with.  We live in a two income economy and wihout two incomes most families are not making it unless they are from the upper half of the scale.  As for me I am retired and have not figured out where I fit in yet.
432456
No, there is still a "middle class" and they are the ones that get the shaft all of the time. We are quickly closing the gap between the poor and middle class though and it WILL become a 2 tier society. I'm not sure the rich are going to like being the ones to have to keep this country afloat when we are reduced to a 2 tier society.\n\nk.m.
572694
You are wise in your history.  YES! English did become the official language of the U.S. of A. by a one vote margin.
1129371
I believe that the term nouveau riche became prevalent in the late 1800s. Used in conjuncrtion with people from the US as the went to France on holiday, as opposed to the older moneyed people from Europe.
246871
1861\nFort Sumpter\nThe less populous south detested the more populous north using its majority position to dictate policies regarding economics and slavery in ways that benefitted the north and appeared to harm the south.
435642
How quickly we forget. Yes, this has happened many times in the last century.\n\nFrom 1993-1995, in President Clinton's first term, Demcrats held a commanding majority in the House and a very slim majority in the Senate. During that Congress, the Republican majority (according to the Wall Street Journal) set a record for the most fillibusters staged in a two-year period.\n\nFrom 1977-1981, during President Carter's entire term, the Democrats held commanding majorities in both houses. Because of in-fighting, the Congress was reduced to ineffectiveness.\n\nFrom 1961-1969, during the shortened term of President Kennedy followed by the full term of President Johnson, Democrats held majorities in both Houses.\n\nFrom 1933-1949, during the terms of President Roosevelt and President Truman, Democrats held majorities in both Houses. In 1949, Republicans took control of the House of Representatives but not the Senate. From 1951-1953, during President Truman's second term, Democrats held majorities in both Houses.\n\nThis is why, when the Gingrich Revolution took control of the Senate and the House in 1995, Conservatives were able to say they were coming back to power in the House for the first time in over forty years.
848038
They were the only graduating class in the history of the united states to have the majority of its members be born in 1989. \n\nThey are the only graduating class in the history of the united states that will have the majority of its members graduate college in 2011.\n\nSorry, that's the best I could do. What are your memories? Seems like a personal opinion question to me.
442159
Yes and no.  What is more happening is the middle class is changing, more people are falling into the lower middle class realm with fewer moving to upper middle class or higher or staying in the 'true' middle class.  It is a defitnate threat that the middle class could end up falling, but it is happening slow enough that most people dont really notice it but also slow enough that the problem can be fixed.
1006480
The US is still very bi-partisan, democrats & republicans. Others are starting to emerge, but are still mainly grassroots.
480654
No other presidency has served to drive a wedge between Americans this badly since the Viet-Nam War; and we were pretty divided before the war (debacle) in Iraq started. The administration has made it so much worse that now people are starting to unite again in their disapproval of Bush and his cronies. The day an angry mob drags that man out of the white house will be one of my happiest. So to sum up I would say that we were divided, but are becoming united once again.
203431
Late 1800's, under McKinely or TRoosevelt, it was when America was expanding for more marketes, especially in South America and the Philipines. Alot of people regard this as America's "Imperialist" stage
38897
The FDR revolution.  Introduced Marxism into American Government. via welfare, graduated tax, confiscation of private gold reserves