FC,
Trump is no different than any other rich kid certainly in the USA, and probably in the world. This is well known in Economic theory that a child's success in America has extremely high correlation (on average) to one thing and mostly one thing: Their parents own well being, which is then through tax breaks on inheritance taxes, access to networks, specialized education etc, all those colossal advantages is passed on to the children. This creates a system where most of these rich kids are born on third base, and the rest of us at the bottom of the ninth with two outs down 10 runs to 1.
I call it Generational Eugenics. As long as immigrant keep buying into the propaganda of the "American Dream", it will continue since there is an infinite supply of suckers willing to grease these people's innate hierarchical generational advantage.
KEY FINDINGS
- When compared to 24 middle-income and high income countries, the U.S. ranks 16th in the amount of intergenerational earnings mobility.
- The relatively low level of mobility in the U.S. may arise in part because low-income children in the U.S. tend to have less stable and lower income families, less secure families, and parents who have less time to devote to their children.
It is often claimed that there is much tolerance in the U.S. for high levels of inequality, as long as that inequality arises from a fair contest in which all children, no matter how poor or rich their parents, have the same opportunities to get ahead. This formula, insofar as it properly describes U.S. sensibilities, puts a premium on assessing whether indeed opportunities to get ahead in the U.S. depend much on one’s starting point.
The standard way to assess whether the U.S. is living up to its high-mobility commitment is to compare rates of mobility across countries. This exercise, when carried out with the best available data, suggests that in fact the United States is a rather low-ranking country when it comes to intergenerational economic mobility.
The purpose of this report is to examine and re-examine this international evidence. It will be useful to first examine mobility rates within a broad swath of 24 middle-income and high-income countries. This is an important exercise; however, insofar as one wishes to draw conclusions that are relevant to the U.S. context, it is arguably even more instructive to focus the comparison on countries that share key features with the U.S. The balance of this article thus compares the U.S. to the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia.
The Big Picture
...
http://inequality.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/Pathways-SOTU-2016-Economic-Mobility-3.pdf
Last edited:
