Quote:
Originally Posted by JPhillips
It doesn't have to work that way. Take three people, 18, 40, and 80. Eighty is in the top quintile, forty is in the fourth, and eighteen is just entering the work force in the third quintile. Eighty year old dies, forty year old gets a promotion and moves up to the top quintile.
Forty year old has moved up, but nobody has dropped, people have exited and entered the workforce. A lot of income mobility is of this type.
|
Why doesn't that happen in the U.S.? When the 80-year old in the first or second quintile dies, who replaces him?
There are certainly factors of people dying and being born, but I think that downward mobility promotes upward mobility. If rich and upper-middle class families and their children retain their wealth relative to others, then it's going to be much harder for people below them to move up, relative to others. I think we'd all agree that someone born lower-middle class has a tougher road to upper-middle class than someone who is born upper-middle class. But if the economy and law and society were such that someone born upper-middle class could more easily fall down relative to others, than it makes it easier for achievers to move up. But economically, and legally, and society-wise we're so trapped into the idea that children are entitled to not only stay in the class they were born into, but to actually exceed their parents.