Inequality much worse than most think

[BadJuju]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

I am sure that is true in many instances, but far from all. I know many people who have done well even though they came from meager beginning. For example my wife (we have been married for 7 years after both our spouses went Home to the Lord) was a single mom working more than one job, including paper routes, part time mail carrier, etc.). All 4 of her children have done very well, including one who is the CEO of a medium size chemical company. They all did it by hard work, absolutely nothing was handed to them.

Sorry, Jim, but somehow, someway it was handed to them. They may not have inherited the fortune directly, but they inherited the ability from genetics to be able to accomplish it. We are all victims of circumstance. Some are born to be winners, others to be losers, and there's no choice involved. You are who you are because of your environment and genetics. At no point do we ever do anything individually. The interaction of sub-atomic particles acting mechanically determines everything we do. We are all just automatons that are sadly aware of the fact.

[dcarrigg]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

I am sure that is true in many instances, but far from all. I know many people who have done well even though they came from meager beginning. For example my wife (we have been married for 7 years after both our spouses went Home to the Lord) was a single mom working more than one job, including paper routes, part time mail carrier, etc.). All 4 of her children have done very well, including one who is the CEO of a medium size chemical company. They all did it by hard work, absolutely nothing was handed to them.

I was talking about the top. And up there, sometimes it's hand-downs. Sometimes it's luck.

I'd never disparage hard work. I'm pretty certain it is indeed a virtue. But the Davos crowd didn't get there by hard work. You're born a Walton or a Mars or a Koch. Even Gates was a millionaire's son Harvard boy, and Bezos inherited one of the biggest ranches in the country along with 7 or 8 figures in cash if I'm not mistaken. There are a couple of real Horitio Alger stories out there. But not many. And they're very much the exception, not the rule.

Anyways, I was talking about real players, Jim. Having a million in 2013 dollars floating around in assets isn't the type of thing I have in mind (although I'm not sure what the CEO of a mid-size chem company drags home these days). Hard work and a good bit of luck might even get you there. Solidly upper-middle class with a fancy house and a low-mid end German car (and usually some debt to match). But moving up into the stratosphere requires birthright and more luck than that. There are worlds between a 3 series and a Maybach.

Féadfaidh an luck na hÉireann a bheith in éineacht leat - May the luck of the Irish be with you.

Like all good Irish proverbs, I was never sure if that was supposed to be a blessing or a curse...

Either way, there's one thing I do know:

[vinoveri]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

Sorry, Jim, but somehow, someway it was handed to them. They may not have inherited the fortune directly, but they inherited the ability from genetics to be able to accomplish it. We are all victims of circumstance. Some are born to be winners, others to be losers, and there's no choice involved. You are who you are because of your environment and genetics. At no point do we ever do anything individually. The interaction of sub-atomic particles acting mechanically determines everything we do. We are all just automatons that are sadly aware of the fact.

No, in fact we are all beneficiaries of this think called existence: yes, we come in and we go out and the cirumstances of our entry and early days are surely not of our own choosing, but Existence is better than Non-Existence. And yes, we do have choices; it's called free will, and even though external pressures, genetics and environmental development may reduce our effective freedom of volition, everyone who has ever lived any duration of a mature life and reflelcted on same would confirm the existence of consience and the difficulties involved in the free choicees made in their own lives (even though some of them will read the latest pop philosophy and psychology and parrot back in their own minds "their is no free will").

If one is not grateful for the gift of existence and considers oneself a victim, one is free to relieve oneself of the burden at any time.

[dcarrigg]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

I think you could have ended that with a bit more compassion. But largely, I think you're right. I am no Calvinist. Choices matter. And life is a gift. Equality of opportunity, especially early on in life, is an important aim to strive for as a people. Well said.

[BadJuju]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

No, in fact we are all beneficiaries of this think called existence: yes, we come in and we go out and the cirumstances of our entry and early days are surely not of our own choosing, but Existence is better than Non-Existence. And yes, we do have choices; it's called free will, and even though external pressures, genetics and environmental development may reduce our effective freedom of volition, everyone who has ever lived any duration of a mature life and reflelcted on same would confirm the existence of consience and the difficulties involved in the free choicees made in their own lives (even though some of them will read the latest pop philosophy and psychology and parrot back in their own minds "their is no free will").

If one is not grateful for the gift of existence and considers oneself a victim, one is free to relieve oneself of the burden at any time.

I wouldn't describe us as beneficiaries. Maybe in a better life with a better world in a better universe, I would, but not this life nor this world or the universe it resides in. I do not think we have free will. A completely material existence that operates mechanically precludes it. I do not dispute consciousness; however, it is only awareness. Awareness is not agency. We are trapped in these bodies and minds and we exert no control over them.

[jiimbergin]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

Sorry, Jim, but somehow, someway it was handed to them. They may not have inherited the fortune directly, but they inherited the ability from genetics to be able to accomplish it. We are all victims of circumstance. Some are born to be winners, others to be losers, and there's no choice involved. You are who you are because of your environment and genetics. At no point do we ever do anything individually. The interaction of sub-atomic particles acting mechanically determines everything we do. We are all just automatons that are sadly aware of the fact.

BAdJuju, since I have great faith in God and you have none, I doubt that this is a subject we can ever agree on.

[lektrode]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

BAdJuju, since I have great faith in God and you have none, I doubt that this is a subject we can ever agree on.

+1 jb
methinks thats the biggest diff tween those who 'make it' (regardless of how thats measured) and those who DONT.

not necessarily faith in the supreme being as much as faith in oneself and ones ability to overcome adversity.

and the childrens fable of 'the little train that could' is the best example of why.

[lektrode]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

.... inherited the ability from genetics to be able to accomplish it. We are all victims of circumstance. Some are born to be winners, others to be losers, and there's no choice involved. You are who you are because of your environment and genetics. At no point do we ever do anything individually. The interaction of sub-atomic particles acting mechanically determines everything we do. We are all just automatons that are sadly aware of the fact.

with all due respect, mr juju - thatspure unmitigated BS.

from your erudition, i'd have to guess that you've been to/thru some sort of liberal arts indoctrination... uhhh... i mean
'education'

winners are NOT born, duude - they are MADE - and like Mr J himself has said - it happens thru HARD WORK - and while certainly 'luck' has something to do with it - with my fave definition of luck going something like this....

luck is where preparation meets opportunity.

and as jb has illustrated in his story - necessity IS The Mother of MOTIVATION

[lektrode]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

again dc... all this = spot on
+1
esp the 'blessing or curse' part... with that CCR number exactly The Truth.

;)

I was talking about the top. And up there, sometimes it's hand-downs. Sometimes it's luck.

I'd never disparage hard work. I'm pretty certain it is indeed a virtue. But the Davos crowd didn't get there by hard work. You're born a Walton or a Mars or a Koch. Even Gates was a millionaire's son Harvard boy, and Bezos inherited one of the biggest ranches in the country along with 7 or 8 figures in cash if I'm not mistaken. There are a couple of real Horitio Alger stories out there. But not many. And they're very much the exception, not the rule.

Anyways, I was talking about real players, Jim. Having a million in 2013 dollars floating around in assets isn't the type of thing I have in mind (although I'm not sure what the CEO of a mid-size chem company drags home these days). Hard work and a good bit of luck might even get you there. Solidly upper-middle class with a fancy house and a low-mid end German car (and usually some debt to match). But moving up into the stratosphere requires birthright and more luck than that. There are worlds between a 3 series and a Maybach.

Féadfaidh an luck na hÉireann a bheith in éineacht leat - May the luck of the Irish be with you.

Like all good Irish proverbs, I was never sure if that was supposed to be a blessing or a curse...

Either way, there's one thing I do know:

[jiimbergin]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

I was talking about the top. And up there, sometimes it's hand-downs. Sometimes it's luck.

I'd never disparage hard work. I'm pretty certain it is indeed a virtue. But the Davos crowd didn't get there by hard work. You're born a Walton or a Mars or a Koch. Even Gates was a millionaire's son Harvard boy, and Bezos inherited one of the biggest ranches in the country along with 7 or 8 figures in cash if I'm not mistaken. There are a couple of real Horitio Alger stories out there. But not many. And they're very much the exception, not the rule.

Anyways, I was talking about real players, Jim. Having a million in 2013 dollars floating around in assets isn't the type of thing I have in mind (although I'm not sure what the CEO of a mid-size chem company drags home these days). Hard work and a good bit of luck might even get you there. Solidly upper-middle class with a fancy house and a low-mid end German car (and usually some debt to match). But moving up into the stratosphere requires birthright and more luck than that. There are worlds between a 3 series and a Maybach.

Féadfaidh an luck na hÉireann a bheith in éineacht leat - May the luck of the Irish be with you.

Like all good Irish proverbs, I was never sure if that was supposed to be a blessing or a curse...

Either way, there's one thing I do know:

Well then we are pretty much in agreement. Unfortunately the great wealth does not continue throughout the generations. I am related to King Edward III and also to a couple kings of France (back in the 1300s) and to some very wealthy Englishman which continued into the Colony days and early days of the Republic. I am not sure what exactly happened after that, but we sure did not end of with any of that wealth!!!

[dcarrigg]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

Well then we are pretty much in agreement. Unfortunately the great wealth does not continue throughout the generations. I am related to King Edward III and also to a couple kings of France (back in the 1300s) and to some very wealthy Englishman which continued into the Colony days and early days of the Republic. I am not sure what exactly happened after that, but we sure did not end of with any of that wealth!!!

Primogeniture. The wealth goes generation to generation. But only to the first born son. That's how they don't dilute it.

There are old yankee families up here, a couple of which I am friendly with, who have original granted land in New England still to this day. It's the same model. If not the first born, give it to one and only one with the instruction not to split the holding up.

[jiimbergin]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

Primogeniture. The wealth goes generation to generation. But only to the first born. That's how they don't dilute it.

Ahha! I will have to go back and track the first born and see I can my my rich relatives!!

[dcarrigg]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

Ahha! I will have to go back and track the first born and see I can my my rich relatives!!

It's entirely possible they're out there. First mention of my family seems to go back to the late 1200s. An in-castle servant girl in Cumbria who was never allowed to leave. She died not long after Eddie 3 was born. The decedent of her master still holds land, the castle, and a seat in the House of Lords. In some ways, it's easier to understand things in Blighty. They don't sugarcoat things the same way we do here.

[llanlad2]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

It's entirely possible they're out there. First mention of my family seems to go back to the late 1200s. An in-castle servant girl in Cumbria who was never allowed to leave. She died not long after Eddie 3 was born. The decedent of her master still holds land, the castle, and a seat in the House of Lords. In some ways, it's easier to understand things in Blighty. They don't sugarcoat things the same way we do here.

Research into just this topic(how long wealth passes down) has been carried out in the UK by comparing Norman names (who became the ruling class of England in 1066) and traditional Saxon names. The article is from here.

So much for social mobility… 1,000 years after William the Conquerer invaded, you still need a Norman name like Darcy or Percy to get ahead

• Prestige of Norman surnames has been unbroken for 27 generations
• Poorer names like Defoe, Ledwell and Rowthorne remained less fortunate
  
• Findings were revealed by researchers at London School of Economics
• The researchers from the London School of Economics, Dr Neil Cummins and Professor Gregory Clark, said the name checks showed that social mobility in England is hardly greater than in medieval times, and that people inherited their social status even more than they inherit their height.The researchers from the London School of Economics used 800 years of history to compile their top and bottom ten, above
  
  Dr Cummins said: ‘Just take the names of the Normans who conquered England nearly 1,000 years ago. Surnames such as Baskerville, Darcy, Mandeville and Montgomery are still over-represented at Oxbridge and also among elite occupations such as medicine, law and politics.
  
  ‘What is surprising is that between 1800 and 2011 there have been substantial institutional changes in England but no gain in rates of social mobility for society as a whole.’
  
  The study comes at a time of widespread concern about social mobility as large-scale research suggests that those born to less well-off families have had less chance of success since the 1970s.
  Much of the blame has been pinned on the education system, with left-wingers attacking universities for failing to admit students from poor backgrounds, while right-wingers say the abolition of the grammar schools cut off the way up for working class children.
  
  The LSE research said that the spread of mass education over the past 150 years has done nothing to break the grip of the longstanding elite on positions of power, and that the same families have been on top despite centuries of religious reformation, civil war, industrial revolution, the growth of democracy and education, and the birth of the welfare state.
  
  Conventional estimates say it takes three to five generations for a wealthy family to fall to the middle ground and a poor family to rise to the same level.
  
  The researchers tested the idea by examining student rolls for Oxford and Cambridge universities going back to 1170, four years after the Norman Conquest.
  
  The two institutions were the only universities in England until 1832 and continue to accept only the best-qualified students.
  
  'There has been modest improvement in social mobility rates between the medieval era and the modern world, with that change occurring around 1800,' the researchers said.
  
  But they added: 'The remarkable status persistence found using Oxbridge attendance as the status measure is found just as strongly with a more general and democratic measure of status such as asset ownership.
  
  'Over the generations there were substantial increases in the rate of taxation of wealth and income, especially after 1910. Yet this did nothing to increase rates of wealth mobility.'
  
  
  Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz2mARKI1N4
  Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[Rajiv]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

You might also find "Born on Third Base" to be interesting reading.

United for a Fair Economy's latest report, Born on Third Base: What the Forbes 400 Really Says About Economic Equality & Opportunity in America, looks at what's missing from the annual Forbes 400 list. Learn how Forbes spins a misleading tale of what it takes to become wealthy in America.

This is the 2012 version