Or rather, the US seems to be on its way to becoming like that. Currently, because of state investment in public infrastructure - civil rights, highways, public schools and universities, regulations etc - over the past century, the middle class enjoyed relative leisure and comfort even as the very rich lived out much more comfortable lives. All that seems to be diminishing because of regulatory capture and the wealth feedback loop created over the last 20-30 years.
Do you truly believe civil rights are worse today than in the past? More people attend university than ever before. The poor manage to survive quite nicely, and most of them don't work at all. Could you please explain how you believe things are diminishing in more detail?
Something I've noticed - when someone says "just like the US" about a nation like India, they've almost certainly never left the US. At most, they've been to the EU, and often think Mexico is the depths of poverty).
Not civil rights in itself, but because of economic issues, e.g. severe cutbacks to state universities, deliberate anti-union policies etc, the economically disadvantaged are impacted much more, which indirectly affects civil rights.
Edit:
The poor manage to survive quite nicely, and most of them don't work at all
How are well paid government workers the "economically disadvantaged"? And for that matter, how does reducing subsidies for a service consumed primarily by wealthier people (a college education) harm the economically disadvantaged?
Smug comics which preach to the choir are great, but I like statistics more. Here are statistics on the work habits of the US poor (about 1 in 4 poor people works): http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpswp2007.pdf
Here are statistics showing that the poor consume about 2-3x what they produce: ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/ce/standard/2009/income.txt
(In India, obviously the stats look nothing like this.)
"How are well paid government workers the "economically disadvantaged"?"
Speaking for myself, most government workers do something that's more valuable to society than what I do for a lot less money. That probably holds true for 90% of the HN readership, although I suppose YMMV for the societal contribution of serving ads and flipping bits vs administrating social security.
The issue is not about state employees at the university, but who can afford the education there. Here in California, the Master Plan for Education (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Master_Plan_for_High...) had the goal of providing education for everyone, and it is not unlikely that that is a significant reason for California's strong economy. But that is being eroded gradually.
