You have access to “the top” through resourcefulness and risk taking.
But if one is not inclined to be that type, I’m not sure what ensures them to the rewards of those willing to do so?
But if one is not inclined to be that type, I’m not sure what ensures them to the rewards of those willing to do so?
You forgot generational wealth.
In the U.S. the class into which you are born determines the class you'll reach more than any other factor. Overwhelmingly. It's not even close.
So, it's doubtful that poor people's problem is that they just don't take enough risks.
Who would downvote this, the data isn't even remotely controversial.
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/01/economi...
Interesting...I've always thought of the US as being more of a meritocracy than the UK and Europe in general. I mean that is what the American dream is all about right?
> American Dream
The so-called American Dream of social mobility does not exist anymore. It's a relic from the 50s, where a single income from a modest job could support an entire family, with a summer vacation every year.
The more modern examples of rags-to-riches bootstrapping-my-own-widget business are atypical.
The middle class is disappearing and it's not because they are upward bound.
Not in California. Public schools in CA get an essentially-uniform fee (from the state) based on attendance - about $40/day/child.
This helps make things more equal, and it is laudable.
Richer districts, however, have the ability to raise special property taxes, and use gifts from their wealthy residents, to supply extra services for their schools (like music/arts teachers, equipment, and facilities). So, even with a basically "equal" public system, rich districts end up with more.
The cultural script that the playing field is inherently fairer than anywhere else is what makes them accept bad conditions without question.
https://twitter.com/_cingraham/status/1092536441819648000
http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/AlvaredoGarbintiPiketty2015....