Posted on 03/04/2013 1:15:39 PM PST by jazusamo
Most people are not even surprised any more when they hear about someone who came here from Korea or Vietnam with very little money, and very little knowledge of English, who nevertheless persevered and rose in American society. Nor are we surprised when their children excel in school and go on to professional careers.
Yet, in utter disregard of such plain facts, so-called "social scientists" do studies which conclude that America is no longer a land of opportunity, and that upward mobility is a "myth." Even when these studies have lots of numbers in tables and equations that mimic the appearance of science, too often their conclusions depend on wholly arbitrary assumptions.
Even people regarded as serious academic scholars often measure social mobility by how many people from families in the lower part of the income distribution end up in higher income brackets. But social mobility — the opportunity to move up — cannot be measured solely by how much movement takes place.
Opportunity is just one factor in economic advancement. How well a given individual or group takes advantage of existing opportunities is another. Only by implicitly (and arbitrarily) assuming that a failure to rise must be due to society's barriers can we say that American society no longer has opportunity for upward social mobility.
The very same attitudes and behavior that landed a father in a lower income bracket can land the son in that same bracket. But someone with a different set of attitudes and behavior may rise dramatically in the same society. Sometimes even a member of the same family may rise while a sibling stagnates or falls by the wayside.
(Excerpt) Read more at creators.com ...
LOL! Good one, maybe Dr. Sowell saw it too.
I saw an article here (maybe) yesterday bemoaning the fact that median incomes are stagnating. My first thought was, "time for Dr. Sowell to post his annual 'income mobility' piece." LOLMost of the media publicize what is happening to the statistical brackets — especially that "top one percent" — rather than what is happening to individual people.We should be concerned with the economic fate of flesh-and-blood human beings, not waxing indignant over the fate of abstract statistical brackets. Unless, of course, we are hustling for an expansion of the welfare state.
I consider the analysis which says that income percentile is correlated with age to be signature Thomas Sowell pointing out of the blindingly obvious (after he has said it) insight. Another way of putting it is that
"The bottom income quintile is loaded with young people just starting out.”
The leftist elites’ denial of upward mobility only thinly veils their outright hostility towards upward mobility.
The nomenklatura have deemed everyone below incapable of thinking for themselves, therefore, incapable of advancing. So the peons are supposed to “be happy where they are at”, or even better, join the “vunnables”.
Ergo, to a demagogue, median incomes remain "stagnant."
The narrative of all leftist “journalists” and media members is that capitalism is awful and leads to miserable lives for those who believe in it. How many Hollyweird movies have been made depicting the horrors of suburbia and living that terrible middle-class life? That’s the worst thing in the world to a lib/leftist. They’d rather focus on the small percentage of Americans who fail rather than the many more who succeed.
Couldn't begin to guess but a bunch and it's probably the main reason the wife and I seldom watch a movie. An exception are the Hallmark Channel movies.
Exactly. Once again, the good doctor says it so well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.