1: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/12/opinion/the-triumph-of-hop...
It turns out that 12 percent of the population will find themselves in the top 1 percent of the income distribution for at least one year. What’s more, 39 percent of Americans will spend a year in the top 5 percent of the income distribution, 56 percent will find themselves in the top 10 percent, and a whopping 73 percent will spend a year in the top 20 percent of the income distribution.
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/20/opinion/sunday/from-rags-...
When you're looking at the "rich," income doesn't tell you very much, since most "rich" peoples' wealth exists in (and continues to accrue via) non-income vehicles.
If you earn a high income for only a few years, you won't have the extensive advantages (tax havens, etc) of the truly wealthy, and you certainly won't have all of the hereditary wealth squirrelled away into offshore accounts and invested into capital that's busy appreciating.
> Although 12 percent of the population will experience a year in which they find themselves in the top 1 percent of the income distribution, a mere 0.6 percent will do so in 10 consecutive years.
When you ask someone whether they will one day be in the top 1%, I don't think they are interpreting that question as "will you be there for a brief moment?" The question implies some level of permanence. So 38.4% are fooling themselves.
Perhaps we should consider that those without means have little expectation that they will be able to successfully extract favor from an organization that doles out trillions for broken fighter jets that are intended to kill people of color in distant lands.
You attribute that to false optimism, but where's the actual evidence?
Here's a more recent article, backed by empirical studies (you can buy the books if you wan't to): https://www.aei.org/publication/evidence-shows-significant-i... .
And the standard point that Thomas Sowell has been making for decades:
An absolute majority of the people who were in the bottom 20 percent in 1975 have also been in the top 20 percent at some time since then.
This fixation/hatred towards the 1% or 0.1% is really not something most people I know care about, at all. They may not articulate it this way, but they don't see the economy as a zero sum game. They don't see Steve Jobs making billions as something that keeps them from making tens or hundreds of thousands, or even millions if they were fortunate.
I dunno, that's pretty sad. Maybe I'm showing my age, but that used to be the expectation, not the dream. The American Dream is (or used to be) extraordinary economic mobility--making it big. How far we've slid where now the American Dream is merely "a decent life".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Dream
>For many in both the working class and the middle class, upward mobility has served as the heart and soul of the American Dream, the prospect of "betterment" and to "improve one's lot" for oneself and one's children much of what this country is all about. "Work hard, save a little, send the kids to college so they can do better than you did, and retire happily to a warmer climate" has been the script we have all been handed.
Essentially, the American Dream is the idea that hard work and dedication will result in a better life for yourself and your children. It has nothing really to do with "making it big."
I lived in soviet block as a kid and everyone had this defeated attitude which is such a contrast to american optimism. Although, things are changing in America now, more and more people feel hopeless and defeated here too.
If you 'make it' (produce something that brings great worth to society) first then you're welcome, IMO, to use a little more than your fair share of resources. You don't get to do it the other way around as the majority of Western society appears to be doing (other regions maybe are too, I don't have an informed view on them).
The problem is that it's not true. A majority will never be rich, and a disappointingly high number of people will only ever barely scrape by.
Do you really think most people are unaware of this basic fact?
If my child wants to be a billionaire, should I say "Sweetie, you probably won't be a billionaire, so don't get your hopes up." Or should I say "it'll be tough, almost impossible, you'll need to work hard, study hard, be smart, etc."? I know which lesson I'd prefer to give.
It's fine to strive to achieve as much as possible and earn a bunch of money, but the core of the issue highlighted by that quote about "temporarily embarrassed millionaires" is a sort of class-affinity with the rich that is unwarranted for most people.
Likewise for the very poor. I hope to never be very poor, but I still wouldn't vote for systems that mistreat or exploit them. This is not because I'm trying to protect myself in the circumstances that I become destitute, but because I think morality requires the consistent application of principles to people regardless of their economic wealth.
― Ronald Wright, A Short History of Progress
Commonly misattributed
The bottom 10% are wealthier than the top 10% were 100 years ago.