Socioeconomic Mobility And Social Mobility

In the United States, high standard of living is not equally shared with in the Americans. The 1970s and 1990s was period where economic inequality began to grow. Emmanuel Saez, an economics professor at UC Berkeley has been doing a research for the U.S. income inequality. He states that there has been an increase since the 1970s, and has reached levels that have not been seen since 1928. “In 1928, the top 1% of families received 23.9% of all pretax income, while the bottom 90% received 50.7%. But the Depression and World War II dramatically reshaped the nation’s income distribution, by 1944 the top 1%’s share was down to 11.3%, while the bottom 90% were receiving 67.5%, levels that would remain more or less constant for the next three decades. But starting in the mid- to late 1970s, the uppermost percent income share began rising dramatically, while that of the bottom 90% started to fall.”(DeSilver) Ever since then, economic inequality continues to increase, especially in the last three decades.

In late eighteenth and early nineteenth century England there was a sort of moral ‘code’ of behavior and standards that are to be maintained by the middle and upper classes of society. Austen realistically mirrors this ‘code’ through the characters and plots of her novels while showing that social flexibility was narrow and class boundaries were strict. The topics of class stringency and social mobility are important areas in Jane Austen’s literature. We begin to see that Austen is not a revolutionary as she supports and preserves the morals and customs of societies hierarchy. However she often encourages and backs the emergence of new wealth permitting greater social mobility. In Austen’s world the naval and ‘tradesmen’ professions

Although most American views prosperity as an individual effort, still the society is stratified and there is no way to ignore the class factors on individuals. The educational and economical life of a child still depends on the educational level of their parents and the wealth they inherit from their parents.

societal ladder Times have changed since then, but social class is still a major factor to people’s success.

To achieve the American Dream, one must work hard and have the dedication to be successful. There are myths relating to this dream leaving lower class members to wonder if the dream exists for them. People in lower class are told if they want to be successful they must put in hard work and true effort. Once they do, they see that they are remaining in the same position they started in. In “Class of America-2012,” Gregory Mantsios states the ideas of class in the US and explains them. One myth addressed in this selection is, “Everyone has an equal chance to succeed. Success in the United States requires no more than hard work, sacrifice, and perseverance: ‘In America, anyone can become a billionaire; it’s just a matter of being in the right

In today’s capitalist economy, where economic transactions and business in general is centered on self-interest, there is a natural tendency for some people to make more than others. That is the basis for the “American Dream,” where people, if they worked hard, could make money proportional to their effort. However, what happens when this natural occurrence grows disproportional in its allocation of wealth within a society? The resulting issue becomes income inequality. Where a small portion of the population, own the majority of the wealth and the majority of the population own only a fraction of what the rich own. This prominent issue has always been the subject of social tension

Majority thinks that America is the land of opportunity, where the lower class has the ability to succeed and prosper; statistically the truth is less expectant. According to facts presently, the smallest percentage of Americans earns over $1,000,000. The next smallest percentage of Americans earn over $125,000. Meanwhile, the median income that Americans earn is $41,000. Any American can succeed with the right mind set. Facts also show that more Americans considered to be wealthy have earned it rather than inherited it. I come from a family that is considered to be working class. My parents didn’t own their first home until I was 15, and I am the youngest of four children. Hard work does pay off, and I have seen it.

Furthermore, when analyzing the different classes, and the distributions of wealth and income in the United Sates; for instance, the upper, middle, and lower classes – it is an astronomical amount of wealth that the top 1 percent acquire. It is also noted by Johnson & Rhodes (2015), “that income and wage inequality have risen sharply over the last thirty years” (pg. 228). Equally important to this, is how the average change in income is divided in Americas quintiles and the widening gaps. For example, in Table 5.2, while the lowest fifth quintile increased from $11,128 to $11,361 – a difference of $233.00 from years 2006 to 2012; the highest quintile increased from $289,446 to $319,918 – an exponential increase of $30,472 (pg. 229). With income inequalities at this rate, it is difficult for the majority of the United States to experience upward social mobility. Pursuing this further, in a line stated by Johnson and Rhodes (2015), “The wealthiest Americans can live on the dividends from their investments without having to touch the principle or work for a salary” (pg. 230). From this, it is visible to see how society has compartmentalized different levels of functions to keep a so called balance for the greater

The United Sates, whose national dogma emphasizes equity and stresses that hard work leads to success, has one of the poorest social mobility ratings in the developed world (Deparle). This means that if you were born towards the bottom of the socioeconomic spectrum, you would have a better chance of ascending to a higher class if you were born in several Western European countries as oppose to if you were born in the United States. As Richard Wilkonson bluntly put it in his TED Talk, “If Americans want to live the American dream, they should go to Denmark” (Wilkonson). How did we arrive at a point where the difference between being rich and poor is so drastic and where social mobility is so difficult? Educational inequalities, failure of government policy and a social separation between the classes has resulted in an unjust system that prevents the nation from maximizing its potential.

Here, in the United States, the “American Dream,” is a popular belief. There is a strong relationship between hard work and success. In this perfect scenario, those who put in multiple hours are on the road to success and can move up the social ladder. Thus stating, one could be thrust into the lowest of the social status, and with some hard work, one can elevate into the world of the social elite. As a demonstration to this global view of the United States, immigrants from all over the globe have made the excursion to the “land of opportunity” in beliefs of better education, employment, government, communities, religious freedom, and lives for not only themselves but the generations that come pursuing behind them. All of this survives based on a game of social stratification – a diagram on how to successfully obtain the American dream. This observation of social class is based on many mechanisms, some of which is bestowed to people at birth, and not rewarded for hard work and dedication. The class system at play in the United States has become incredibly complex – it no longer has the fundamental class values of our forefathers. Those trying to move up in the social ladder of America are often caught replication the actions of the rich and famous, but this alone cannot make them part of the higher social class. Some think that there are simple rules to follow to climb higher into another social class ladder, but there is more to being upper class than just talking the talk or having the right identity.One way to look at class is the model developed by Janny Scott and David Leonhardt's article, “Shadowy Lines That Still Divide,” in The New York Times. They assert that “one way to think of a person’s position in society is to imagine a hand of cards. Everyone is dealt four cards, one from each suit: education, income, occupation and wealth, the four commonly used criteria for gauging class” (Scott and Leonhardt 27). While being sure on these four criteria, a basic understanding of a person’s predicted class can be made. While this model works fine for providing an elementary level of perception, it must be recognized that a person could rate well on this scale and still be in a different class than those

The highest earning fifth of U.S. families earned 59.1% of all income, while the richest earned 88.9% of all wealth. A big gap between the rich and poor is often associated with low social mobility, which contradicts the American ideal of equal opportunity. Levels of income inequality are higher than they have been in almost a century, the top one percent has a share of the national income of over 20 percent (Wilhelm). There are a variety of factors that influence income inequality, a few of which will be discussed in this paper. Rising income inequality is caused by differences in life expectancy, rapidly increases in the incomes of the top 5 percent, social trends, and shifts in the global economy.

Capitalism has been the central force behind the growth of the United States’ progressive economy. Within such advanced economic system the chances of economic disparity are significantly high. In fact, over the past three decades there has being a steady increase in unequal wealth distribution among the economic classes. To sustain the current unequal wealth distribution among the classes of the American population, there are numerous factors that influence and shape this trend. For some members of the population it is alarmingly disturbing to know that recent statistics have shown that, “In the US [alone] the wealthiest 1% of its population owns more than the bottom 95 %” (Gutman). As for the difference in economic wealth, it resulted

One of the social issues concerning power, status, and class in American society today is income inequality. The income gap between the social classes has increased drastically throughout the last few decades, creating a significant gap between the wealthy and the poor. This gap has become so large that the middle class has nearly diminished, creating a social class comprised of the rich and the poor. The significant gap between the two social classes is unhealthy for the economy because it provides too much power in the hands of those with high social status.

Saez presents his credible data through the use of ethos. Saez is a well-known economics professor who devotes time to publish reports about the income inequality in America. Although his reports are strictly opinion, he uses enough historical statistics and actual facts to make his writing credible. Many historical theories lay a foundation that helps prove income inequality is necessary. Social Darwinism is a collection of theories that explain why the rich get richer, while the poor become poorer. Social Darwinists generally claim that the strong and successful people should see their wealth and power increase while the weak and unmotivated should see their wealth and power decrease. This is an excellent explanation for the cause of income inequality and why it shouldn’t be stopped. Wealth can sometimes be a direct result of the hard work and dedication of a person that is motivated to become successful in life. While most people may work as hard as they can and only make an average income, there are the few exceptional cases where people can prosper and rise to great economic stability. For all other citizens, the reality is they may be motivated and driven to become successful just like everyone else, but can only manage a low or middle class job. This reality

The four dimensions of inequality include wealth, income, education, and occupation. In the United States people are ranked differently from everyone based on these four dimensions. A person’s economic circumstance is governed by wealth and income. Wealth is a personal net worth and income is the amount of money earned. Income is annual and wealth is generational. Both are distributed unequally in society, while wealth is of more importance. Only some are able to achieve wealth while 19 million Americans are living below half of the government’s line. The contribution of wealth is unequal, for example, the richest 1% in 2004 had 190 times the wealth of the median household. Or also, the top 1 percent of wealth holders control 34% of total household wealth, which is more than the combined wealth of the bottom 90%. Income inequality is increasing in the U.S society. There is in an increasing gap in the difference of earnings between the heads of corporations and the workers in those corporations. In 1980, the average CEO of a corporation was paid forty-two more times than the average worker. Education: the amount of formal education an individual achieves is determinant of their occupation, income, and prestige. There is a similarity between being inadequately educated and receiving little or no income. Evidence shows that in 2008, the annual earnings of college graduates are more than double non-high