Socioeconomic Mobility in America is Passe….

1. 83

   gmwilliamsposted 4 years ago

   
   Socioeconomic mobility in America as we know it is passe.  Socioeconomic class demarcation lines have become more rigid than ever before.  In the 21st century, socioeconomic classes have become more entrenched w/o hardly any chance to advance upward.  There will be an elite class & an ever increasing slave class.   There will be a slave class in 21st century America as never before.  Your thoughts?

   replyreport
   1. 78

      Credence2posted 4 years agoin reply to this

      That means that "America" and what is has been known to represent with an expectation and hope that staves off revolutionary activity from social classes who would be relegated to serfs or slaves is the idea of upward mobility and merit based opportunity.
      
      When that disappears prepare for the rise of digruntled "rabble" and the return of guillotine after the heads of the " nobles", back by popular demand. And they will deserve no less as there are more of us than there are of them.
      
      Don't think that such a disturbance can't happen here. And there will be no peace accepted in exchange for contined subjugation. Better hang on to your hats, better yet, the heads that they cover.
      
      Well, Grace, you asked for my opinion, that is what it is....

      replyreport
      1. 83

         gmwilliamsposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         Credence, socioeconomic mobility is becoming non-existent in the 21st century.  The notion of this premise is slowly disappearing.  There will be an elite with a huge slave class which will be the lower, working, & lower middle class.  The poor will accept, even be consigned to their fate as they will be quite powerless in the 21st century.  The rich are more socioeconomically powerful than ever before & they have all types of arsenal-technological & psychological on their side  They will exert more draconian control over the slave class.  The rich aren't about to lose their power & such a thought is fanciful at best.  The poor don't have the educational nor the socioeconomic wherewithal to rebel against the prevailing socioeconomic system.
         
         The poor were raised by their parents to be slavishly obedient automatons.  Poor children aren't raised to question but to quietly accept their dismal fate. The poor aren't going to rebel but will merely become an enormous slave class.  There will be no proverbial guillotines because there will be no rebellion.  Such a notion is very fantastical. 
         
         Poor people are raised to be slaves & pawns that is why religions appeal to them.   They will be satiated by the usual-drink, sex, religion, & other mind-numbing psychological, even physical opiates.   The poor can easily be pacified.    The future will belong to the upper middle & upper classes- they have society in their corner. They will call the shots & others will have no choice but to follow their lead.  The poor have nothing-they will be just slaves & fodder for 21st century America. They can be manipulated as they are unthinking, illogical, & instinctive as a socioeconomic class.  The poor is & will be America's untermenschen. These are the undeniable facts, Credence.

         replyreport
         1. 78

            Credence2posted 4 years agoin reply to this

            Democracy replaced with oligarchy. Do you want to live in a society like that? I will and must fight that in ANY manner that is required.
            
            There will always be a leader among the poor that will raise the attention of others. What you are proposing is a police state and America as we have known it will simply cease to exist.

            replyreport
            1. 83

               gmwilliamsposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               In the 21st century, the rich are more powerful than ever before.  They have the technology & other psychological devices to obtain & remain powerful.  The poor don't have such things.  Hell, it is difficult enough for poor people to subsist. Leader among the poor?  Really now.  The poor are too weak to gain power.  They don't have the education nor intelligence to acquire power.  They can be easily manipulated w/mere trinkets given by the government.   The rich have the power to suppress any form of rebellion.  Do you believe that the rich are stupid?  They are far from stupid- they have arsenals in place.  The rich didn't get where they are by being stupid.  They are great strategists & rationalists while the poor have a history of being illogically & gullible, oftentimes at a woefully infantile level.

               replyreport
               1. 89

                  MizBejabbersposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  I hope you really don't believe all this bull "hockey" you keep discussing in the forums. I hope this is just throwing out food for thought. I don't mean to offend  when I say that I hope nobody believes you.
                  
                  The U.S. has a history of the poor uneducated class building this country into the greatest country into the world. Even the poor huddled masses had the right to vote, and they sent representatives to Washington. These representatives passed laws that put to rest most of the oppression of the Carnegies, Mellons, Vanderbilts, Rockefellers, et al who were stepping on their heads and holding them down. Intelligent, but poor, people built themselves up into the middle class because in the late 1800s there was very little middle class. They lived through the depression of the 1893, the flu pandemic of 1917, the Great Depression, and two world wars. Growing up I saw poor kids who "would never amount to anything" become community leaders and state and federal officials during my adulthood. They did it then, and they can do it again.
                  
                  There was a push during the 1970s-1990s to take away the trade schools and require college educations for anyone wanting to get ahead. That really was aimed at taking away opportunities for people who were not college material, and it backfired. The young found ways around it, and now the trade schools are coming back. So a tradesman now can establish a business that becomes profitable, and he or she moves out of the lower socioeconomic class.
                  
                  Of course with the coronavirus pandemic, things are changing and there probably will be new opportunities. You see, 130-160 IQs aren't limited to the monied class. You are basing your theory on that. One's birth doesn't limit one's opportunities unless that person's IQ is limited by a lack of common sense. True some people are born without common sense, but I've met as many intellectuals lacking in that quality as I have poor people without it.
                  
                  I do see problems in store for people who take your theory seriously though.  There will always be poor people who don't have the intelligence or the good sense to try to improve themselves. Those are the people who used to be called "no good." I just don't think they are in the majority.

                  replyreport
   2. 61

      CHRIS57posted 4 years agoin reply to this

      I tend to agree, but i think the topic is a little more diverse. It is not only about the elite class and slave class. There is a lot inbetween. The question you raise possibly has to do with what is happening to the "middle" class.
      If middle class (financially, educationally) is marginalized, then there is no intermediate jump board to move upward.
      
      I looked into wikipedia and found this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_mobility.
      Quite interesting, what country comparisons tell (The Great Gatsby Curve...).
      
      Apparently there is a direct correlation between inequality (income, capital) and immobility. If inequality grows (the Gini-Index) then immobility will increase. And higher Gini means less middle class.
      
      As easy as it seems to express this economically, there is also an educational aspect. If people are illiterate, they can´t even read about examples to move upward. Ah - yes, they can watch in on TV..
      
      If wealth can not be inherited, if educational skills can not be inherited (by family promotion) you get a more equal society. Here you may find a correlation: Countries with low heritage taxes have higher inequality. (Italy 2% tax, Gini 32%, Germany 15% tax, Gini 27%, US Gini 45% and 0% below 11 mill. USD).
      
      This 11 mill. unified credit thing keeps economic elites protected.
      Mobility is generational. So it must looked at from the perspective of how families deal with it. In a society with only orphans, you won´t have this issue.

      replyreport