Scratch Beginnings: Me, $25, and the Search for the American Dream

by Adam Shepard

Is the American Dream still alive or has it, in fact, been drowned out by a clashing of the classes? Is the upper class destined to rule forever while the lower classes are forced to live in the same cyclical misery? Millions of Americans fight for the answers to these questions every day, and here, in Scratch Beginnings, one man makes the attempt at discovering the answers for himself. Carrying only a sleeping bag, $25, and the clothes on his back, and restricted from using his contacts or his education, Adam Shepard sets out for a randomly selected city with one goal on his work his way out of the realities of homelessness and into a life that will offer him the opportunity for success. Scratch Beginnings is Shepard's response to the now-famous books Nickel and Dimed and Bait and Switch, where Barbara Ehrenreich has written on the hopeless pursuit of the American Dream. This book offers his observation of what it is like for so many people on the lower end of the spectrum, the blunt end of the stick. In this poignant account, Shepard goes on a search for the vitality of the American Dream, and, in turn, discovers so much more. Scratch Beginnings is unquestionably one of the most engaging works of the social science genre. No matter your reading interest, Shepard's facile writing style is sure to keep you turning the pages.

Genres: Nonfiction, Memoir, Biography, Sociology, Economics, Biography Memoir, Poverty

240 pages, Paperback

First published November 30, 2007

Reviews

[Mer · Rating 1 out of 5]

Pretend you never went to school
But still you'll never get it right
'cos when you're laid in bed at night
watching roaches climb the wall
if you called your dad he could stop it all yeah
You'll never live like common people
You'll never do whatever common people do
You'll never fail like common people
You'll never watch your life slide out of view
and then dance and drink and screw
because there's nothing else to do

~Common People
PULP


I'll preface my opinions by stating that I believe wholeheartedly in the power of self-perpetuating positivity, of elbow grease over idle hope. Self-pity is certainly one of the more corrosive emotions in the human canon, and I have to think that even in the most dire circumstances, one can improve a bad situation by somehow preserving their sense of self-worth. (Easier said than done, of course.) That being stated, Scratch Beginnings is a self-aggrandizing, dishonest account. It does not deserve the hype.

A fresh-faced, educated young man in excellent mental and physical health who keeps an emergency credit card tucked into his back pocket isn't starting from scratch. He's starting from privilege. Shepard has had a lifetime of parental "you can be anything you want to be, sweetie" hand-holding to bolster him. It shows in every page of his solipsistic account.

Shepard took on his ambitious pet project after reading (and disagreeing with) Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America, in which undercover journalist Barbara Ehrenreich investigates how the 1996 welfare reform impacted the working poor in America. I actually share Shepard's skepticism. (Ehrenreich never fully submerged herself in the conditions faced by her coworkers or deeply bonded with them; she lived in hotels and ate/ordered out while they all went home to a far more harsh and complex reality. Nickel and Dimed focuses in on her own tales of woe while the more profound stories of those she encountered fade into the background.) That doesn't mean I can stomach the "yep, can-do" simplifications of Scratch Beginnings, either. Despite their concerted efforts at immersion, both the keyed up Marxist and the lobotomized Objectivist fail to convince.

An astounding excerpt from Shepard's recent ABC news interview:

ABC: Would your project have changed if you'd had child-care payments or been required to report to a probation officer? Wouldn't that have made it much harder?

Shepard: The question isn't whether I would have been able to succeed. I think it's the attitude that I take in: "I've got child care. I've got a probation officer. I've got all these bills. Now what am I going to do? Am I going to continue to go out to eat and put rims on my Cadillac? Or am I going to make some things happen in my life?"

Hang on. You're telling me the state of South Carolina unknowingly squandered their depleted resources to help feed, clothe, house and employ Shepard for several months while he lied to everyone's face about his circumstances, ostensibly slumming it for political science? This chucklehead gets notable mainstream media air time? Really? Is his perky "I beat poverty, and so can you!" infomercial tone truly relevant? Edifying? Constructive?

Shepard knew he could escape any time he chose, and in fact, he bowed out early. The minute the reality of a serious family illness lessened the novelty of his little game, he dove into a waiting safety net. He's been patting himself on the back ever since:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=yC88zQs...

"It's a grrrrreat book. My mom and dad love it!" Awesome. Glad they enjoyed it. Personally, I'd lost all patience with its condescending tone by page 200 and merely skimmed the rest.

If Shepard had hired a mop handle-wielding professional dom to abuse and belittle him for several years prior to picking a ghetto randomly out of a hat, I might've found his bootstrapping story more compelling. Had he pulled a few teeth out of that gleaming white smile, been charged with a couple of misdemeanors and undergone voluntary trepanation before embarking on his incredible journey, or habitually dropped acid during it, I'd be impressed! As it is, I'm left with a sour taste in my mouth and an urge to point anyone interested in reading truly constructive, thought-provoking accounts of destitution, hope and struggle towards the following literature:

* The Working Poor by David K. Shipler
* The Pursuit of Happyness by Chris Gardner and Quincy Troupe
* Poor People by William T. Vollmann
* Member of the Club by Lawrence Otis Graham
* Finding Fish by Antwone Q. Fisher
* A New Introduction to Poverty by Louis Kuchnik and James Jennings

[C · Rating 1 out of 5]

Right upfront, this book is poorly written by an arrogant young white male just barely out of college. As a "rebuttal" (and I use that loosely, considering the authors lack of writing skills) to Nickel and Dimed, the book fails miserably.

The author starts out with $25 and proceeds to milk the system for a year until he "pulls himself up by the bootstraps" and ends up with $2,500, an apartment, and a run-down truck. Along the way he remarks that all the other poor slubs he meets should be able to do the same thing, if only they weren't so lazy and drug addicted.

I have huge problems with this "experiment" in going native. For one, he was lucky: he's young, healthy and has no dependents. When he gets injured on the job, his boss picks up the health care and his job is waiting for him. Not to mention that he can leave at any time and go back home.

The book is interesting only in getting to understand the mentality of young white men from privilege. It was a slog to get through, the introduction and ending are terrible, and the author is obnoxious to the point that I couldn't root for him.

[C · Rating 1 out of 5]

Pretentious drivvel. Making your way through life, starting from 'nothing' might be an interesting excercise, but not legit when you start with an ivy league education, excellent health care your entire life, and an escape to mommy with a quick phone call.

This guy is a joke and only slaps himself on the back and reinforces the idea that anyone in any situation and background can get ahead. - I'm not convinced that's so.

[Петър Стойков · Rating 5 out of 5]

Една книга много ме издразни: Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting by in America

И авторът на настоятаща го е издразнила, затова в неин отговор прави собствен експеримент - опитва се да види дали ако почне от нулата, ще успее да се оправи с нормална работа, кола и апартамент за 1 година. И успява, за разлика от дебелата, богата лелка от предишната книга, която се отказва от експеримента си и решава че не, никой не може да успее да се издигне сам с много работа в САЩ.

За да е истински експеримента, авторът заминава в случайно избран град с 25 долара в джоба, без да познава никой, без телефон, само с дрехите на гърба си и малка чанта. Спи първоначално в приют за бездомни, мъчи се, работи смотани и зле заплатени работи, но постепенно си намира стабилна работа като хамалин, спеставя пари, наема апартамент, купува си кола (25 годишен пикап, но все пак...) и разбира, че ако човек е склонен да изтърпи лишения и да работи здраво, може да успее в Америка.

Когато започвах книгата, разказвах за нея на двама приятели (момче и момиче), ходили заедно на бригада в САЩ и им обяснявам, че целта на автора е била след 1 година да има стабилна работа, 1000 долара в банката и кола на старо, те и двамата се захилиха и единия каза пренебрежително "Пфффф тва в Америка за 3 месеца може да го направи."

Оказаха се прави :) Авторът се оправи горе долу за толкова.

[Erica · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book resonated with me as my family firmly believes in the "American Dream". To start out with nothing, then work your way up to a house, car, to be able to afford children then ultimately the ability to give them opportunities that you never had yourself.

After reading other peoples reviews I had to say, at least Adam Shepard had the guts to go out and live in homeless shelters and to experience poverty on the ground level. All the personal criticisms that other reviewers gave (too white, too arrogant, too privileged etc), are you honestly any better? Because you sit around and do yoga while listening to bjork?

I did think that the writing could have been better, but the story made me think and reassess my own choices in life. Isn't that more than enough?

[April Hedges · Rating 1 out of 5]

"Gee whiz everybody! If I just try my hardest, and never give up, I can be anything! All I need is a can-do attitude!"

That's the tone of this entire book.

I read this book after reading Nickel and Dimed, since it is supposedly a rebuttal to that book, and Ehrenrich even mentions it in her afterword. It is not, in any way, a rebuttal to Nickel and Dimed. There is nothing in Scratch Beginnings that resembles journalism, sociology, research, or anything of the sort. It is a memoir of a naive, conceited, and sexist young man, who decided he believed something and then set out to make sure that everything that happened to him during a so-called "experiment" supported the conclusion he made going in.

A side-by-side comparison of this book to Nickel and Dimed isn't even necessary to show the weaknesses in Scratch Beginnings - even if you've never read Nickel and Dimed and don't care about that book, this book still fails.

The tone has a lot to do with this failure. I'm not going to hate on anyone for being an optimist, but the spin here is so obvious that it is insulting. Shepard spends months living in a homeless shelter for men, which he describes as just a shade away from a frat house. Every now and then he throws in a line (once or twice a whole paragraph) about the facilities being "disgusting," but far and away most of what happens in the homeless shelter is jovial shared dinners, surrounding a TV to watch bootlegged DVDs of current movies, lively debates about current events, and exchanging of "war stories." Shepard even describes his first experience using the shelter's door-less bathroom stalls as nothing short of a life-changing epiphany about the true meaning of freedom. There is even a house-mother type who works there, making sure the homeless men are cleaning up after themselves and getting out the door on time, because she really wants to see them succeed.

Again, I'm not going to hate on anyone for being an optimist. I'm glad Shepard looks on the bright side. But this kind of approach leads to the second biggest weakness of this book, which is Shepard's naivete. Actually, I don't know that he is naive, as much as he is so committed to proving his point that he willfully avoids analysis, introspection, or any kind of thoughtful examination of people and situations. The best example of this is his time at Fast Company, a moving outfit where he works after leaving the shelter. Shepard's descriptions of this environment are nearly identical to those of the shelter - in short, everything is awesome, and that is what Shepard sticks to. He finds a "hero" in one of his co-workers, Derrick. He finds fulfillment in becoming a mediocre mover. (He started out as a crappy mover, so this modest improvement in his skills represents victory with a capital V.) But some facts about Fast Company sneak into all of the awesomeness - almost everyone Shepard works with is an ex-convict (and not petty crimes, either - one guy, Shaun, who he rides with for a few months was convicted of stabbing another man; Derrick did two-years hard time), the company does not require drug tests or background checks, the workers get paid daily in cash, there are numerous workplace issues like drinking on the job, theft, not showing up on time, etc. that go un-addressed. If Shepard were really trying to do what Nickel and Dimed did, he would have taken this occasion to analyze what kind of company he was really working for, and what kind of opportunities are available to ex-cons in this country. If he were doing anything other than trying to stick by his original idea, he would have at least questioned the wisdom of being a driver for Shaun, who drinks on the job daily (a fact which is apparently known to the company) and the danger he was putting himself in, but instead he makes a stand with Shaun about not throwing the empty beer cans out of the window because he hates littering. But his point in describing his experience at Fast Company is to show that a can-do attitude is all it takes, so he separates the guys with the "right" outlooks from those with the "wrong" - which basically amounts to people who complain and people who don't - and calls it a day. Those he judges "right" and "wrong" have a whole lot in common though.

Shepard declares himself successful about halfway through the proposed length of time for the experiment. His aims were, I think, low - he wants to have a vehicle, and apartment, and $2500 in the bank. But that's not really the problem. The problem is that when he declares success, he attributes it to his ability to stay disciplined, maintain focus on his goal, and make good decisions. He completely ignores how dependent he has been. He lived in a homeless shelter for two months, never paying a dime for lodgings and eating for free, though he did work for most of that time. Had he started paying his own way immediately, he could not have saved what he did, if anything at all, and he wouldn't have eaten as well as he did. He gets his first place to live out of the shelter (which is an attic apartment in someone's house) through the recommendation from someone he does odd jobs for - no housing search, no landlords, no real neighbors (he never mentions interaction with the homeowner), no deposits or first-and-next month's rent. His next apartment he gets through a recommendation from Derrick, and it comes with Derrick's cousin as a roommate. To furnish that apartment? Clients of the moving company give him stuff they don't want anymore. The only thing he actually buys is the truck. Had Shepard had to buy everything he got through charity, he would never have been in the position he was in halfway through his experiment. I think Shepard is probably aware of that, which is why he provides numbers on his earning so infrequently - if we could do the math along with him, it would be hard to attribute all this success to his motivation. Also, in another example of his lack of analysis, Shepard doesn't seem to realize that he hasn't really moved up the employment chain. He declares Fast Company a move up into a job that can lead him to greater things after working for day-laborer company Easy Labor. He doesn't seem to see that the companies are incredibly similar - no drug tests, no background checks, no contracts, no benefits, daily cash pay, show up in the office and get your assignment in the morning. If you don't show up one day, you don't show up. You can still work the next day. The only difference is that Easy Labor has a van that picks people up from the shelter, and workers have to get to the Fast Company office on their own. But to Shepard, his hero Derrick works at Fast Company, and Derrick was able to buy a house after three years of working there (with assistance from a government program). Basically, as Shepard himself does admit, he has worked up to poverty, but he declares himself a success nonetheless. He writes that he is on the road to more education or owning a business. I'm not sure how.

And the sexism. I was not expecting it, considering the subject matter, but it is there. It isn't really well disguised either. The only time Shepard complains about a job is when he is working for a female client. The first one, which is the most blatant, is a client he works for through Easy Labor - he is sent on a job to help set up an infant clothing store in a mini-mall. He complains that the women who own the store are late in the morning and make the laborers wait, and they direct the workers about where and how to set up the displays. I mean, how dare they! And then they want to search the giant bags the homeless men have brought with them. But then comes the worst of it - the owner of the store says she wants the work done by lunch, and Shepard assumes this means that she will be feeding the work crew. But then she doesn't! They finish, she dismisses them, and they wait outside the store for the van to come pick them up (it will pick them up and bring them back to the shelter for a free meal, so Shepard isn't in danger of missing a meal here). The bus is running late, and Shepard returns to the shop to ask to use the phone, and discovers (gasp!) the store employees are eating lunch. Shepard proceeds to insult, berate, and otherwise yell at the shop owner for the way the workers have been treated during their few hours of work and her refusal to feed them. She threatens to call security and he storms out. The scene is juxtaposed with what Shepard considers a good job. George, a man Shepard met on a construction job for Easy Labor, has hired him to do odd jobs around his house. So on Sunday morning, Shepard goes to George's house and shovels dog crap out of the backyard for a few hours, hoses down the dog's patio, and then George comes out and asks him if he would like to go pull some weeds for a while. Sometime during the afternoon, George tells him he can stop for the day and packs him a sandwich since he missed the meal at the shelter. George is a great guy, and Shepard returns to work for him every Sunday for months. The bags of dog crap Shepard shovels for him are emblematic of Shepard being on a path to success. (I am not kidding about that - Shepard uses that metaphor himself.) The other women in the book Shepard works for? One moving client is a recent divorcee who caught her husband cheating - she tells the movers about everything she had to go to catch her husband, after which Shepard comments "so that explains the cheating." One moving client has not pre-packed items Shepard feels she should have, and another just keeps more stuff that he thinks she should. A real estate agent whose home they are moving has the nerve to ask for an estimated time that they will finish, because she has a meeting to get to, and spends the time they are there conducting business on the phone. This isn't a sign of her dedication to her career, or her discipline, to Shepard - this makes her a bad client.

I could go on, but I won't. Like I said earlier, if anyone were to really take this as a rebuttal to Nickel and Dimed, there wouldn't be enough words to show point-by-point how Shepard fails at that. In fact, if anything, Shepard proves just how right that book was. If everybody stopped and declared success where Shepard did, no one would ever get out of poverty. A good attitude is important, but it can only take you so far, and Shepard's judgment of those who don't share his attitude is unfair.

[Wendy Holliday · Rating 5 out of 5]

I'm giving this book a 5 star rating not because it's elegantly written, or that the story is so gripping I couldn't put it down. On the contrary, I read it piece-meal over the course of 3 weeks.

This book deserves a 5 because I REALLY liked the guts and determination this guy showed.

I scoff at you Goodreads reviewers that gave him a 1 star because of gems like this: "Thank you for telling me that a single, white, college educated (even if you don't put it on your resume) male, who is heterosexual, and healthy, finds it pretty easy to get a job, apartment, and generally succeed." or people admitting that they didn't read all of the book but just couldn't 'slog' through it.

Yes, he's a white, college educated, single, healthy young man. But he used determination and tenacity to get a job and succeed. He used a positive mental attitude. He took advantage of the resources offered to him, that were offered to EVERYONE at the same homeless shelter. He didn't quit. In short, he worked REALLY hard at succeeding and set goals to do so.

As much as I want to go into the realities and hardships that face those with drug problems, abuse and family hardships, I won't. He acknowledges those that he runs across that just can't get their act together because of hardships like that. I don't think he was necessarily trying to accomplish that. Coupled with the fact that some people enjoy the freedom that homelessness provides. I've talked with men who like that they don't have bills, no taxes, no nagging family to worry about and the fact that there is always someone to give a few bucks and a free meal somewhere. Obviously, not all homelessness is that easy.

Being white, heterosexual and college educated does NOT guarantee success.

There are so many more points I could expand upon, but time and space do not permit.

[Denise · Rating 2 out of 5]

Not the Nickel & Dimed rebuttal I was hoping for. This young man is a go-getter, but his book, his approach and his viewpoints are so much of what is expected from a young, healthy white male, fresh out of college with a loving, supportive family at home. He has concern for those in more dire situations, but his expectations of them to just pull themselves up by their bootstraps is not realistic. Also his expectation of those more fortunate to make sacrifices for those less fortunate so that everything will be all right with the world is not very realistic in our greedy, 'me' society.

[Beth · Rating 1 out of 5]

I don't recommend this. It's a quick read, but the author didn't put a lot of thought into his experiment (and I disagree that this makes him "unbiased," as he claims). He is described on the back as "earnest," and I think that's a nice way of explaining that he seriously overuses the exclamation point. Every chapter ends with basically the same thing: Now I'm on the road to success, because I have the right attitude (unlike the working poor)! Not a fan.

[Jim · Rating 2 out of 5]

The best part about this book was its premise . . . what if all you had to your name was $25.00 and the clothes on your back? Could you survive? Thrive? Work your way up and achieve the American Dream? Adam Shepard decided to try it and wrote this book about his experiences.

Unfortunately, his experiences just weren't all that interesting. He does a good job describing what life was like in a homeless shelter, and starting at the very bottom of the workforce as a day laborer. He takes you with him as he crawls up the ladder to self-sufficiency. But, by the time he got there, I was more exited to be reaching the end of this read than I was for Shepard's success.

And then it got worse.

Scratch Beginnings' Epilogue consists of the author's conclusions after completion of his project. And Shepard comes across - instead of a kid with some interesting life experience - as a simple know-it-all. The kind of kid who just took a semester long course in an interesting field from a dynamic professor and now believes that he (or she) has ALL the answers in any field even tangentially related to the course.

My advice is this . . . enjoy the premise - maybe even think about it or discuss it with your friends; read this book if you want to know one kid's experience trying to make a living from almost nothing - but stop when you start to get bored, it isn't going to get better; and skip the Epilogue completely - take the course or ask that dynamic professor if you want an expert opinion, don't ask the enthusiastic student.

[Daniel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Some of the negative reviews for this book are mystifying to me, particularly those loaded with vitriol and contempt. The author is by my lights a well-meaning, well-intentioned young man who is conducting a simple experiment in order to refute the main contention of Nickel and Dimed, namely that it's not really possible to get by on low wages and work your way up. Many who write reviews are pointing out that our hero lacks other obstacles, such as chronic health problems, stupidity, bad education, and, of course, dark skin; except for the last one, however, those criticisms are all missing his point. He is simply trying to show that an able-bodied young man in good health with a decent attitude can make it in America by starting with $25. Viewed through this modest goal, the book is a success.
In his prefatory remarks he claims not to be a very able writer, but I think the prose is well-crafted and entertaining. (The editor should be disciplined, however, for not catching a number of common errors among the young; if I have to read "between Shaun and I" one more time I'm going to scream.) This young man does not appear to have a right-wing (or a left-wing) agenda; he is just doing something I thought of trying years ago: starting from scratch and seeing if you can really work your way up. Those who are dumping on him should spend just one night in a homeless shelter on the floor; until you've done that, I really don't think you have a right to be so hard on him.

[Elliot Ratzman · Rating 1 out of 5]

This is the douchebag’s Nickel and Dimed. Recent college grad—who completely missed the lessons of Ehrenreich’s experiment in low wage work—decides he’s going to “prove” the “American dream” is still possible by starting with $25 and pulling himself up by his bootstaps in Charleston, SC. He lives in a homeless shelter for a few months while taking some hard, dirty jobs. Soon, he’s employed—with interesting tidbits about the daily lives of movers—and has settled into an apartment, bought a truck and saved some money. Shepard’s assessment is that the line between poverty and success is about “attitude”—a word he repeats endlessly and lectures his (black) co-workers with. In an effort to remain color-blind and “objective”, the dynamics of race and power—in Charleston, SC!—are skipped over, recoded as “culture.” The homeless, the poor and the low-waged are overwhelmingly black; he’s a chipper white dude. His mildly liberal suggestions at the end are cribbed from a friend. Shamefully naïve!

[Daniel]

Adam Shepard is, in my opinion, not too different from what I call “Nomadic Trustafarians.” Picture this, young rich brats, usually just out of college (as Shepard) from areas of socio-economic deprivation like Lincoln and Duxbury, MA; most of Fairfield County, CT; Scarsdale and Great Neck, NY; Alpine and Summit, NJ; the “Main Line” near Philly, etc.

These rich, college educated, but very naive people temporarily “go native” in many third world countries, notably Costa Rica, Ecuador, and Thailand. After spending 6-12 months “keeping it real” and eschewing western culture (except for the things these people “need,” such as a multi-band cell phone and an internet connection), they return to the Larchmonts and Marbleheads of America and act if they have been “transformed” by the experience.

Here is an anecdotal account of “Muffie” calling her friend “Leesa” (notice the affectated spellings?). Muffie is just about to return to West Moneybucks, CT from 10 months in Costa Rica. Leesa returned from Nepal a week earlier. Of course, Leesa and Muffie want to get together to discuss how “fabulous” their slumming-it-with-the-natives experiences were.

Leesa offers to pick up Muffie at JFK. Leesa told Muffie she will be driving “dad’s car.” “Oh, which one?,” Muffie asked. Leesa replied, without any tint of irony in her voice, “I’m not sure if I want to take the 2005 Jag, the 2003 BMW Convertible, or mom’s 2007 Acura MDX.” Muffie asked Leesa to take the Acura, since she thinks her backpack will fit best in the SUV.

Just as most of his trustafarian brethren return “close to home” after about 10 months or so, Adam Shepard returned back to his wealthy North Carolina family, ostensibly due to “family problems.” HELLO? Poor people have family problems, also. However, the REAL poor cannot escape the “Trustafarian Disneyland” when there are family issues.

These people must continue to WORK and SCRAPE BY in spite of whatever life throws at them. If these people are lucky enough to even have a car, it is likely out of warranty and prone to mechanical breakdowns.

I would recommend this book to: People who drive around Wellesley, MA or Hewlett Neck, NY with a "Live Simply So Others May Simply Live" bumper sticker on the back of a two-year old Jaguar or Mercedes!

[Julie · Rating 3 out of 5]

College-educated, middle class, ablebodied, heterosexual white guy proves to himself that he can start with nothing and end up with something in contemporary America.

Which as you may have guessed, does not mean to me that EVERYONE could, or even MOST PEOPLE could.

He picks a random city in the south, puts 25$ in his pocket, and decides to challenge himself. In a year, can he have his own place to live, a car, and something like 2K in his bank account. He says he won't rely on his family and other contacts. And he won't use his education to get a job.

Except that it's one thing to not put your education on a job application. To go for generally unskilled labor. It's another thing to not actually HAVE the education.

He does mention now and then that he realizes it would be much harder if he was a single mother, or this and that. But while he intellectually might understand that, I don't feel that he gets it. I don't think he realizes how privileged he is as this homeless-by-choice man he's made himself into.

Still and all, it's an interesting look into the lives and culture of homeless people in the US. (Well, homeless men in this one city in America.) I can't say I didn't learn a few things. I can't say I won't look at the world a little different after having read it.

But I don't think anyone should take it as proof that the American Dream is alive and well for everyone. Even if it does work for young, fit white guys. Or at least this one white guy.

[Mike Tuttle · Rating 2 out of 5]

Kudos to the guy for setting a goal, intentionally strapping on ankle weights, and learning something. But where did he get? Still out there hustling with his hand out for a job from someone else.

Even within the premise of the book, I would have liked to have heard more about his inventive budgeting. All we got was 1) don't spend more than 30% of your take-home on housing; 2) eat cheap, unhealthy food; 3) get the transmission checked.

All he really had to do was work, eat and sleep. A couple of downtime injuries or brief illness aside, he had an unimpeded march to his goal. He is a healthy, white, male (just like me), and we have it oh so easy. Plus he was unmarried, childless, and educated. If he hadn't been able to add 2 zeroes to the end of his $25 in one year with the benefit of handouts galore, I would have been disappointed.

He learned how to take handouts from charities and be exploited by temp agencies until he found a backbreaking job with no benefits. How is this noteworthy? And how does it prove that the American Dream is anything like it used to be?

Finally, where is the math on his wave-of-the-hand dismissal of raising the Minimum Wage? This Dave Ramsey-esque hubris of thinking one understands the macroeconomics of governments just because one can handle a home budget is rank silliness.

The further I got in this book, the more I wanted to put it down. I powered on, just to say I gave it a fair shot (and it was a quick read). It is not something I would pick up twice or gift to someone else. Perhaps it was simply misaimed or mis-marketed, but its promise of being a rebuttal to anything did not come through.

[Terrie · Rating 4 out of 5]

In the interests of full disclosure, Adam sent me a copy of his book when he saw it was on my to read/wishlist. I really enjoyed it. The pacing and style were good, and he has a real ear for dialogue. Definitely laugh-out-loud funny in a few places. All but the last chapter is a straight up narrative of his experience, so it's engrossing. It's pitched as a contrast to Nickel and Dimed, which I read several years ago and was interesting in terms of her experience but not so much the conclusions, which consisted of a lot of whining. Shephard's take is that if you're motivated, you can lift yourself out of poverty, and demonstrates this himself as well as through examples of friends and acquaintences. My only criticism is the last chapter, where he discusses some conclusions/proposals, feels a bit rushed.

[six · Rating 2 out of 5]

There are plenty of criticisms that you can heap on this book. If a young, single, well-educated, healthy, white male with no evident mental illnesses or substance abuse problems can't make his way out of poverty, yes, there is something seriously wrong. However, his privilege has no doubt been addressed elsewhere, and anyway he addresses it in the book. I do think that he would have found things harder had he gone to Philadelphia or New York or Los Angeles--even allowing for several years of inflation, some of the prices he mentioned seemed incredibly low, while his wages were probably comparable to or only a little bit less than what you could earn in a more expensive city.

The prose, meanwhile, is solidly workhorse. Not good, but saved from being bad by its being simple and straightforward.

Still, I don't really hold any of that stuff against him. After all, this is a memoir/rebuttal/inspirational book, not a how-to manual on escaping poverty, though he does come across a bit heavy-handed with the advice at times.

My problem with this book is that the author is too concerned with money as a measure of success. For him, the "American Dream" is a fat bank account and home ownership with equity accrued and a cushy retirement account. And those things are nice, no doubt, but there are many, many reasons why people choose to check out of that system and not all of them have to do with being lazy or not being able to make a budget.

Also, I found the preoccupation with the "American Dream" to be annoying. Yes, it would be a whole lot harder to get out of poverty in Guatemala, but that doesn't make American the best country on Earth. The resources and power of a country says nothing about the intelligence, drive, or integrity of the people who live there.

So. That was annoying.

It's still an interesting book, however. First off, he makes a lot of good points. Suck it up and deal the hand you've been dealt. Stop moping about the past and worry about the future. Work hard and then work harder. No matter what you're doing, do it well. Sometimes you (or at least I) need to hear these things.

And, as a memoir, there was a lot here, although you have to dig a bit. Life in the shelter is dramatic enough to move despite the less than sparkling writing, but stories about being a professional mover need a bit more help. I'm not saying that there wasn't something there, but the reader has to infuse life into it.

I've had this book on my wish list on a book swap site for a long, long time. I think it was worth reading once, but I suspect that I'm going to send it off to the next person on the wish list rather than making a home for it on my shelves.

[Felicia · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read "Nickel and Dimed" while in college and, like the author of "Scratch Beginnings," found it to be very disheartening. This author does one better by starting out in a homeless shelter and trying to work his way to independence. The home point is that the American dream is still possible, but it depends on the determination and initiative of the person seeking it. An interesting read.

[C · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book is okay. There are some interesting ideas but it gets boring after a while when the author is just talking about the people he met rather than sharing exactly how he was saving and spending money. Also I didn't like the misguided rant at the end about people showing initiative.

[Shayla · Rating 3 out of 5]

I had a mixed reaction to this book. The premise is interesting, and it gets bonus points for taking place in Charleston, since I’m still homesick four years after moving away. Unfortunately, i was pretty irritated while reading this book because the author is infuriating. If you’re looking for a privileged 23 year old to tell you how everyone should be living life- Adam Shepherd is your guy.

It’s like he didn’t really learn anything over the course of the book. There’s a reason people are homeless, and it isn’t just laziness. 45% of all homeless people are mentally ill, and the rest deal with the trauma of actually being homeless. Those with serious mental illnesses like schizophrenia aren’t going to be able to pull themselves up by the by the bootstraps. And those dealing with trauma don’t get to tell themselves that they are done in a year and on their way back to Raleigh. They don’t get to quit if it gets too hard: an option Adam always had. Adam knew there was an end to his struggle; we can’t ignore the impact that optimism had on his mental health and his success.

Adam also brushes over the importance social programs play in overcoming homelessness. Sure, he tells us that we need better social infrastructure, but then still assumes everyone can do what he did without that infrastructure. I’m sorry, but a homeless woman with kids can’t go be a mover the way he did. She’ll be lucky to find any job that pays anywhere near what Adam’s did, and she’s going to have to deal with the trauma of losing her kids to foster care. She isn’t going to be as successful as he was without the programs that Shepherd himself acknowledges she needs: so I don’t think he needs to speak towards the struggles that she faces. I don’t think he needs to speak towards the struggles ANYONE faces.

Moreover, Adam doesn’t seem to realize the serious privilege he has, even if he only starts with 25 dollars. First of all, he can walk down the street for hours at night without being attacked, and that’s because he’s a man. He isn’t harassed by the police officers and government officials he encounters, and that’s because he’s white. He knows his social security number, so he’s able to get an ID and a bank account. He saw his parents working and saving, so he knew to do those things. He didn’t have a substance abuse problem, unlike the people he judges for wasting money on beer and cigarettes. Obviously he has some credit, if he’s able to rent a duplex to live in. How many of the people living in the shelter had those things? Why is Adam so quick to judge them, even when he doesn’t know their lives?

Of course, if you ask him, he will say he doesn’t judge them. That his story is only his— although he peppers those judgements throughout his “story” whenever he meets someone who isn’t living the way he thinks they should. That’s because Adam has already decided how everyone should live, and you’re wrong if you don’t live like him.

He’s just so blind to his own advantages. I don’t think he’s wrong about everything: people should strive to be fiscally responsibility, the government should do
more to help people, and there are a lot of people who make poor choices. But when we don’t look at the whole picture and place all of the blame on the homeless without recognizing the root causes and psychological effects of homelessness, we don’t solve anything.

[Bo Witcher · Rating 3 out of 5]

This novel is based off of the true story of Adam Shepard finding a way to survive the concrete jungle of Charleston, South Carolina. This all begins with Adam abandoning his drug addicted mother and alcoholic father after realizing that he needs a new way of living and to live alone. With only a start of $25 to his name, he decides to stay at Crisis Ministries, a homeless shelter that gave troubled people aid to live and help get them off their feet as they try to get their lives together. With Shepard motivated to continue getting his life ahead of him, he tries to find him a steady job throughout the city while he is getting minimal pay at Easy Labor to barely get him by. Shepard searched for what it seems like forever, yet found a job as a mover for Fast Company as he showed the manager, Curtis, that he was the best for the job and that he was motivated to do anything. This comes to show and furthermore advance his life as he officially received the job after facing Curtis’ test to keep the job and later on earns respect to receive a raise for his hard work. Shepard’s goal is finally fulfilled has he financially finds a way to move out of the shelter, pay rent, buy a car and car insurance, and always keep his gas tank filled up. Near the end of the novel, his parents come down with cancer and Adam has to come back and live with his brother in a apartment nearby to provide for his family with his job at a different location and receive education at the local college.
This novel made me keep turning the pages as the motivation of Adam Shepard to find a way out financial struggles gave a sense of hope as I read. Something that I loved about the book was the positive and optimistic tone of the novel as the times were not the best, but he knew that things could be worse and he can make things better. This novel shows a great message to never give up on your dreams and to keep fighting no matter what the circumstances are.
Somethings I didn’t really enjoy about this novel is how wordy and sometimes mature language occurred during the novel. Sometimes things that were said during the novel were a little uncalled for and should’ve been modified or not put in as people try to read. Another thing that I wasn’t too pleased about was how there was much of a explained or detailed backstory. If this was added to the novel, I would feel like I would feel more interested or appealed to the novel.
Overall, I rate this book a 3 out of 5 stars. I feel like this is a good novel to read, but there are parts that can be better. The books had a lot of positives, but the small negatives brought down the rating personally.I enjoyed the book for the most part, but things could’ve been written or said better. I would personally recommend this to older adults or maybe older teens, if mature enough.

[Ursula Pierce · Rating 4 out of 5]

Scratch Beginnings: Me, $25, and the search for the American Dream

Scratch Beginnings follows the adventures of the author, Adam Shepard as he starts from the bottom of the social ladder. Straight out of college, he has his family drop him off at the train station where he rides into the neighboring state. The motivation behind his journey is to see if it really is true that “the people who start at the bottom, stay at the bottom”. He takes only $25 dollars, and the clothes off his back, leaving his college education and resolving to not use it as means to get employment. When he arrives, he takes up residence in the homeless shelter. Adam must jump numerous hurdles to get a job that will take him to the next level. Adam essentially figures it out as he goes, and ends up taking inspiration from the impoverished people all around.

My favorite character in the novel was Derrick, the man that Adam relied upon for support and friendship during his escalation up the ladder of his career. Derrick had real strength, and goals, and above all, a family to provide for. There is no question whether the characters felt real or not, due to the fact they are real people, it makes me wonder where they all are now. The way the book is so true to life keeps you full of questions. The scenes where the Author describes specific moments are so vivid they leap off the page, you can feel his struggle and success in a way you wouldn’t be able to if it were just a story. The memoir gives you a sense of possibility and perseverance.

There are few downsides to this book. I feel as if the author’s attitude is negative at times, a little impatient. Also, The pace of the novel is the same throughout, and some parts are dull and could be left out. The only action and conflict in the book is limited and not enticing. I feel as though sometimes the author spends too long rambling about his difficulty starting from the bottom. The biggest issue I have with this book is the ending, it’s too abrupt and it does not explain what happened to some of the big supporting characters. However, overall, it is very good.

I gave this book a 4-star rating because although the concept was interesting and the story was full of vibrant characters, I feel as if the writer’s abilities were lacking in areas that weren’t influenced by his experience. I enjoyed the concept of the book more so than the delivery. Overall, it is a good book to draw inspiration from, but personally, I didn’t really connect with the main character. I would recommend this book to people who sometimes are cynical about the cliche of the “American Dream”, or people who feel stuck at a certain level in life and want to succeed.

[Tyrel Skeets · Rating 4 out of 5]

I give this book a 4 star, started off the way I didn't expect it to be. The story started off as a guy that moved out of his parents home, wanted to start off on his own with $25 dollars and see what he can do. Derrick had the mindset it's possible to come from nothing, taking step by step, in life. I think it's really interesting to have someone go out into the world and become someone willing to put up with the consequences, the challenges, the hard work, dedication, the commitment you have to get a good life in the end. It's a mindset everyone should have. That's what I really enjoy reading about this book, I enjoy learning about how life ain't all about sunshine and rainbows, its about trying to make and living, surviving, taking the hits of life and deciding to get back up or not. It's definitely one to add to your "want to read" maybe you'll enjoy learning about the author's life and what kind of person he is.

[Bailey G · Rating 3 out of 5]

Soooooo much better than Nickel and Dimed. This was also a class book from AP Lang. Shepard’s writing was much more enjoyable and it was way easier for me to get through this book.

[Madison Coleman · Rating 1 out of 5]

Wouldn’t have finished it if it hadn’t been an assignment for a class. Poorly written and crazy biased. Learned more about movers than I ever needed to.

[Madison J · Rating 4 out of 5]

Scratch Beginnings
Adam Shepard

Scratch Beginnings was a very easy read and a very eye-opening novel. This novel is the story of a young, college graduate who gives up his privileged lifestyle to prove a fellow author’s theory on life wrong. Barbara Ehrenreich’s books Nickel and Dimed and Bait and Switch are both two novels that give society no hope or courage of changing their societal situation, and Adam Shepard wanted to to prove her beliefs false. Adam Shepard started with basically the clothes on his back and $25 in his pocket in hopes to have a car, a steady income coming in, and somewhere to live within a year. In doing this, he strived to show people that it was possible to make your way up the social ladder, however, it did require thick skin and hard work. Through this novel, I do believe Adam achieved his goal. He tells the brutal truths of climbing the social ladder, but also emphasizes the rewards and the good feeling you get when you work hard and achieve your goal. By doing this, he doesn’t hide or shield people from reality, but the progress he makes shows people it’s worth it to struggle in order to make a better life for yourself. The fact that he didn’t have to go through those hardships makes it even more inspiring because if he could stick it out, then you could to.
With all this said, the book did lack excitement and action that I’m used to with other books. The author just told of his day to day routine for much of the book and it got kind of monotonous after awhile. I’m also used to detailed explanations, with literary terms such as metaphors, similes, imagery, etc. which weren’t frequently used throughout this novel. However, I guess I can expect this from a non-fiction, autobiography-type book where it’s also the author’s first time writing a book. All together, this book was very inspiring but did take some encouragement to pick up and read. I believe that it is a great book to suggest to someone who’s struggling financially and is on the brink of giving up!

[Heather · Rating 2 out of 5]

I was interested by this book because of the concept, but not necessarily because I thought it an accurate representation of "starting from nothing". There is no way to undo all the experiences of your life, including education (even if you don't state it on your resume). It still, I guess, makes for an interesting "thought exercise".

Except that it wasn't merely a thought exercise. I couldn't help wondering the whole time how the case workers and what not felt after they knew it was all just an experiment for the author? He mentioned a little toward the end about telling some of his friends the real story later - but that part just seemed so odd for me. If I were his case worker and one of the shelter workers, I might really not appreciate his essentially lying.

Mostly I couldn't deal with the author's attitude and perspective. It seems like he had never met a poor person in his life - he was "amazed" by just about anything. It was a book of "poor people as other", and his conclusion was a little along the lines of "but I found out poor people are just like anyone else." Maybe that's not entirely fair, but except for the very end, that was what I was taking away.

My son who is thirteen listened to a bit of it in the car with me, and remarked something to the effect of, "he's really annoying - his confidence seems irritating and somehow out of place in the whole thing." It's not confidence so much - it feels like full on arrogance, and it's sort of impossible to ignore and essentially ruins the whole thing for me.

I don't feel like the conclusions were all that worthwhile after all, and generally I felt it was a pointless exercise. Perhaps it's a generational thing - perhaps he's trying to speak to and represent his generation as something other than spoiled, live-with-your-parents types. I don't know. Just not a great read overall.

And also, I despised the reader.

[Steph Patt · Rating 2 out of 5]

I read this book as an assignment for a diversity and tolerance class I am taking. It was not my first choice in the line of allowable readings, but my second pick. It is a true story of a man, Adam, who decides to prove to the world that with a little hard work you can achieve the American dream. Adam sets off on a bus to Charlotte, NC and begins his journey. Right away he finds room at a homeless shelter and begins working his way up through the chains of poverty. He makes up a false story to tell people that ask about his background and up until the last chapter of the book keeps his false persona. We get to see Adam struggle with his decision to achieve his goal, but more importantly we get a front row view of what it is like for a homeless person and some of the struggles and discrimination that the homeless face.

Having said that, I thought this book was a little judgmental and ridiculous. The point Adam was trying to get across was that if he, a spoiled recent college graduate, could work his way out of poverty and homelessness that anyone could. Never mind that he could just call his mom at any minute and she’d bail him out, or he wasn’t faced with the emotional destruction of losing your entire life. Adam even says that he hates people that beg for money, which to his credit he doesn’t do once in this book, but he gives no consideration that all people have different circumstances and seemingly forgets that the majority of the homeless population in this country is struggling with mental health issues.

Overall, the writing of this book was good. The story was good. The characters were amazing. The high handed I’m better than the homeless people attitude was not.

[Elizabeth · Rating 3 out of 5]

Kent let me borrow his copy of this book. I have good and bad things to say about it. Shepard read Nickel and Dimed and Bait and Switch by Barbara Ehrenreich, didn't like it and didn't agree, and set out with nothing but $25, the clothes he was wearing, and a goal. He wanted to have a car and a set amount of money in a set amount of time. He does it. And in way under the time limit. He definitely showed it is possible. I applaud him for that.

What kept me from liking it more has little or nothing to do with his actually project. I think I just didn't like the author. I couldn't get past his bias against the homeless and poor. He refers to women as chicks and assumes his reader is male. He views people without his goals as being without goals. And his 100% blame on the pregnant girl - zero blame on the impregnating boy - is down right offensive. Especially the way he words it.

He has a solid plan outlined - at least to the point of having a car and apartment and money in the bank. He recognizes the plan is not without flaw. Any fault I can identify is minor and justified. A follow up from the moving job to a salaried position with benefits and a house in his name would be interesting.

Thank you, Dad!

[Annie · Rating 2 out of 5]

Shepard says he did this experiment and wrote the book as a counterpoint to Barbara Ehrenreich's books about the failure of the American Dream. Well, he did it -- started with $25 and the clothes he was wearing, ended a year later with a pick-up truck, living in a furnished apartment, and having saved over $5,000. It was a brave experiment, and he contends that with the right attitude anyone can do it. Luckily, he acknowledges that many people live without achieving even the basics of the Dream because of life circumstances, and that family and other resources may be necessary in "making it." I don't think he ends up proving Ehrenreich wrong, though. His main objection to her work is that she doesn't believe in hope. Well, when you're young, strong, basically savvy, and can go home to your middle class family after your one-year experiment, sure you have hope! The book was engaging enough, and I may use the last chapter in my class (where we explore the "myth" of the American Dream), but too much of the book centered around his job as a mover and the dynamics between him and the people he met along the way. I think he downplayed some of the difficulties, which might be enough to stall or discourage others trying to achieve the good life.