<p>Education has a 30% income-correlation. </p>
<p>What isn't explained is does it matter where you go to school?</p>
<p>Is this one reason people are fighting to get into prestigious schools?</p>
<p>What happens to those that borrow for a college education compared to those that don't?</p>
<p>If upward mobility is a myth, when will the middle class stop voting for candidates that support policies that favor the rich?</p>
<p>Short, punchy stories like this inflame the senses, but rarely illustrate the reality of American life. I wish the entire study were online, so we could all see the assumptions made, and the entirety of the data. But just for example, I notice that children of the very wealthy have a 78% chance of not being wealthy themselves. Since one essential element for mobility is that the unsuccessful scions of the wealthy need to slip in stature, I think the study could be "spun" in more than one way.</p>
<p>Leaving out the immigrants is a huge mistake: they are a lot of the yeast for upward mobility in our society.</p>
<p>Comparing the differences (not the absolute values) of wealth changes between us and the Danes is a red herring: they have a very socialist state with small wealth differences anyway, so of course the differences show very little. And their socialist model has stultified their society, crimping the American dream of rising standards of living. The Danes are barely holding steady with falling population.</p>
<p>But I share with you the desire to see your questions (from the post above) answered with clarity.</p>
<p>I also think we may be on the verge of understanding that it takes more than one generation of success to enter the top 1% of American society (measured by wealth). With a few exceptions, I think it always has taken a couple of generations. IMHO, it's about the journey, not the destination.</p>
<p>"If upward mobility is a myth, when will the middle class stop voting for candidates that support policies that favor the rich?"</p>
<p>Maybe because the middle class is delusional, thinking it is actually part of the upper class (even though the income/wealth disparity between it and the real upper class makes it glaringly obvious that it is not), so voting against policies favorable to the wealthy would deny that they are "part of" that wealth.</p>
<p>--- the REAL American Dream?</p>
<p>Leanid, I like your answer.</p>
<p><<i also="" think="" we="" may="" be="" on="" the="" verge="" of="" understanding="" that="" it="" takes="" more="" than="" one="" generation="" success="" to="" enter="" top="" 1%="" american="" society="" (measured="" by="" wealth).="">></i></p><i also="" think="" we="" may="" be="" on="" the="" verge="" of="" understanding="" that="" it="" takes="" more="" than="" one="" generation="" success="" to="" enter="" top="" 1%="" american="" society="" (measured="" by="" wealth).="">
<p>reasonabledad, </p>
<p>Could you (or someone here) define what it is to be in the top 1% of American society, as measured by wealth? Is it annual family income or net worth or what? Just curious.</p>
</i>
<p>
[quote]
IMHO, it's about the journey, not the destination.
[/quote]
With this, I could not agree any more than I do now. A big problem exists for many of us who are economically at the beginning of the journey. Many of us fall into despair and never see the big picture. What keeps me going is that I somehow got the notion that my family is gonna crack this nut over many generations. I wont live to see much of it. My role is to position my kids so that they will have everything they need to fulfill their roles. Of course my kids wont live to see the dream I have given to them fully manifested, but they will enjoy fulfilling their roles as I have enjoyed fulfilling mine. Their children will do likewise, getting an increasing part of our dream over many generations. It is fun just being on this journey. So I dont mind being where I am, as long as I am able to do my part and see that we are all working together to make the trip. I just wish I could be around a thousand years from now. Oh well
</p>
<p>Drosselmeier, some people like Ray Kurzweil, the futurist, do think you will be around 1,000 years from now. Of course, you will be in large part mechanical. :)</p>
<p>
[quote]
Of course, you will be in large part mechanical.
[/quote]
Yeah. That "Ghost in the Shell" stuff gives me the Willies. But if it can keep my consciousness around, I'll take it. No problem. :)</p>
<p>dstark - thanks.</p>
<p>Another interesting measure of wealth vs wealth wannabe (or middle- classdom), I am guessing (and I bet that someone can cite facts and figures to back me up), is how much credit card debt (and other forms too, I suppose) the middle class has in relation to its worth. Seems reasonable to assume that the ratio of debt to net worth is much closer than it is for the wealthy. The middle class' efforts to emulate the wealthy (and thereby perpetuate the delusion), by spending more than it has "on hand", as it were, and in the process put itself in a precarious financial position, only amplifies to what extent it will go to latch onto that "dream".</p>
<p>momof2inca:</p>
<p>It doesn't seem easy to put a dollar figure on the upper 1% of wealthy Americans. But it seems I remember reading that if you were to combine all of the wealth of the top 1% of Americans, it would equal total combined wealth of the bottom 95% of all Americans.</p>
<p>I too thought it odd that this study excluded immigrants. I would think that of all groups they would be the ones most motivated to take advantage of the work opportunities available to them and would therefore see the most upward mobility. There will always be segments of the population that will not work to take advantage of the means of advancement that are open to them, no matter how generous, and they frequently pass this attitude on to their children. Therefore, I would expect to see an overall decrease in upward mobility, especially if immigrants are excluded.</p>
<p>Momof2inca ~ In this case I was referring to the study, and I think the study is talking about income, not wealth per se. I have seen (somewhere) a figure that the "dividing line" between the top 1% and the rest of us occurs somewhere around $11 million in net worth. The thing is, some of these "super-rich" are farmers with 800 acres of prime farmland inherited from a parent, or people who have a home in certain parts of California, or New York, or Florida that is worth a lot of money on paper.</p>
<p>I'm always a little worried when I see or hear about studies that purport to tell us that the American dream is dead simply because we can't challenge Donald Trump for a spot at the Club, or tell our bosses to fly a kite. I suspect that most of the people with $11 million can't (or think they can't) do so either.</p>
<p>Excellent point, reasonabledad!</p>