Krugman: new study shows Americans think income is much more equal here than in Europe. The opposite
is true.
Inequality Delusions
Via the FT, a new study compares perceptions of inequality across advanced nations. The big takeaway here is that Americans are more likely than Europeans to believe that they live in a middle-class society, even though income is really much less equally distributed here than in Europe. I’ve truncated the table to show the comparison between the U.S. and France: the French think they live in a hierarchical pyramid when they are in reality mostly middle-class, Americans are the opposite.
As the paper says, other evidence also says that Americans vastly underestimate inequality in their own society – and when asked to choose an ideal wealth distribution, say that they like Sweden.
Why the difference? American exceptionalism when it comes to income distribution – our unique suspicion of and hostility to social insurance and anti-poverty programs – is, I and many others would argue, very much tied to our racial history. This does not, however, explain in any direct way why we should misperceive real inequality: people could oppose aid to Those People while understanding how rich the rich are. There may, however, be an indirect effect, because the racial divide empowers right-wing groups of all kinds, which in turn issue a lot of propaganda dismissing and minimizing inequality.
Interesting stuff.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/08/20/inequality-delusions/
At other times, Krugman has said that the US would have to adopt European fiscal, tax, regulatory, labor and social policies in order for us to achieve European levels of income equality. That seems a long way from happening.
It is interesting that Americans say they want a degree of income equality similar to what Sweden actually has, but we are not willing to adopt the taxation, labor and economic policies that Sweden has used to accomplish this.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Yes, there were many English in Dixie, but again, as folks like Joe Beagant could tell you, the vast majority of Dixie, whose descdentants populate the "Red States" were the Scotch-Irish.
http://www.archives.com/experts/garstka-katharine/the-scots-irish-in-the-southern-united-states-an-overview.html
"The Scots-Irish, as well as large numbers of German settlers, followed the Great Wagon Road that traversed the 600 miles from Pennsylvania to Georgia, many settling along that path. While the Germans and the Scots-Irish were not openly hostile to each other, they were separated by culture and religion and thus tended not to intermarry. Gradually the Scots-Irish moved south to the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia, which became a launching point for further migration to the Carolinas, Georgia, Tennessee, and Kentucky. Eventually, with so many Scots-Irish settling in the south, Charleston became the second most important arrival port (after New York) for ships from Ireland."
"The Scots-Irish played a large role in the settlement of America, particularly in the southern United States. Their experiences in settling new lands in Ireland, and then again in the American colonies, helped to develop a hard-working, fearless, and sometimes brash, spirit. Occasionally lawless and violent, the Scots-Irish nevertheless had a big influence on the history of the United States; their descendants populated many frontier areas, and aspects of their culture, customs, and speech are still visible in parts of the south today."
Dixie, aka Red State land, was mostly Scotch irish, and of course, much of the West was also settled by descdenants who came from Dixie.
That article seemed fitting as it reference your reference of David Hackett Fisher. I found it while looking for him online 
The reason I say this is because, again, The Scots-Irish brought along hisotrical baggage. Call it scars, call it prejudice, call it a mix of both, but they were used to the government being the enemy.
http://www.irishgenealogy.com/surnames/migration-scotch-irish.htm
"The first migration, then was touched off by a combination of drought, rack-renting, diminished trade in woolen goods, depression, and also religious discrimination and “persecution.” When the fourth successive year of drought ruined the crops in 1717, serious preparations began to be made for a migration. Ships were chartered, consultations were held, groups were organized, and property was sold. More than five thousand Ulstermen that year made the journey to the American colonies. There were but two real drawbacks--the perils of an ocean crossing and the expense of that passage. The practice of indenture has long been a familiar device."
"In 1717, when the leases on the large estate of the Marquis of Donegal in county Antrim expired, the rents were so greatly advanced that scores of tenants could not comply with the demands, and so were evicted from the farms their families had long occupied. During the next three years nearly a hundred vessels sailed from the ports in the North of Ireland, “carrying as many as 25,000 passengers, all Presbyterian.” Thousands of the Scoth-Irish began their New World careers as servants. In 1728, it was estimated that “above 3,200” persons had come from Ulster to America in the previous three years, and “that only one in ten could pay his own passage.” Going to America came to mean, by the middle of the century, not launching out into a vast unknown, but moving to a country where one’s friends and relatives had a home. It offered the very exciting chance to own one’s own land, instead of holding it on a lease that might end in rack-renting; it meant a heady freedom from religious and political restrictions; it even promised affluence and social prominence to those who were truly ambitious. Every group who went made it easier for others to follow. and so by 1775, probably 200,000 Ulstermen had migrated to America."
Also about the Census, keep in mind, Americans are not always the best judge of their own history, as you often point out. To lay my cards on the Table, I am American, of Puerto Rican descent. That means that when I go to St. Augustine, Florida, founded in 1565, I can laugh at the idea of the Pilgrims and Plymouth Rock. We were here long before the English had to steal food from the Indians in masschusetts, which they were stuck in because their navigator failed to arrive in Jamestown, Virginia. Yet every schoolboy and girl is taught that Plymouth Rock in 1620 was the birth of European settlement, which makes Florida annoyed (and I would assume it also that annoys those Scotch-Irish in Virginia too.)
without realizing that goodies are never free..
They think "their taxes" are too high, but they never truly understand that the many things in their lives are paid for by taxes, and they need them every day.
And when they have deductions from paychecks for health insurance, it's rarely for health CARE (which costs extra).
If people were willing to really pay more to GET more, they would have money left over for spending in "the economy", which would require more jobs created and more money for more people to spend.
The civilized nations have some version of "free health care/education/unemployment/old age pensions" and even though many pay a lot of taxes, they DO see real benefits coming to them and their families.
We just moan & groan and struggle until we die
