Actually, acting like you are not rich and limiting one’s spending is a good way to build wealth.
https://www.amazon.com/Millionaire-Next-Door-Surprising-Americas/dp/1589795474
[quote]
The question I have is whether money and class are synonyms. I don’t actually think they are.[\quote{
I think they are highly correlated. No one is saying the measure of mobility is going from bottom to top.
I would agree with one thing in the article…there was never a scenario in my mind where my two children would not go to college…I mean, not even a 5 minute pause…our only decision has been “can we afford private or should we turn to public?” and that is likely the mindset of a “rich” person.
My dad’s family was so poor that they didn’t have electricity in their house in southwest Texas until he was 9 or so. My mom’s dad got hs master’s degree in 1917 but had to sell eggs door-to-door during the Depression to make ends meet (barely). Dad was the first in his family to go to college. He did so well that UT-Austin paid for him to get his PhD at Colorado and hired him as an assistant professor at 26. He is wealthy but it took a LOT of hard work on his part. Nobody handed him anything on a silver platter. Like @HRSMom, he EARNED every penny.
Our D didn’t even know until HS that not all people attend college. She thought it was compulsory because she had never thought or heard otherwise.
@mom2and – there is never going to be equal opportunity or circumstances for everyone. What happens to your hypothetical very smart kid in a terrible school if they get into college? Well, that kid will leave the terrible area and that area stays in the bottom 10%.
The only thing that lifts everyone up is a thriving physical/manufacturing economy.
Certainly they are. But they are not the same, particularly at the $200,000 range.
Manufacturing in the US is doing very well. Second only to China in terms of dollar output (and China only passed us up within the last decade). Third place isn’t close. Though as a result of automation, we do it with a lot fewer people than we could have decades ago. Should we limit tech?
Being from UK the author has a different perspective. But what he missed is that people born privileged often take that for granted and demand more. We in the States may think people should have livable wages and universal healthcare. But many people in other countries think we all are privileged already. This article is trying to shift our focus from that the top <1% get increasingly more.
This article has some interesting facts regarding mobility and income.
I personally consider my D to be quite privileged. But neither of my parents has a college degree, and neither ever worked a white collar job. I was eligible for free lunches in elementary/high school. I was beyond fortunate that my parents were able to help with my college education, but I did graduate with debt. So definitely there’s been upward mobility in my family.
- 61 out of 100 U.S. households will break into the top 20% of incomes (roughly $111,000*) for at least 2 consecutive years.
- 39 out of 100 U.S. households will break into the top 10% of incomes (roughly $153,000*) for at least 2 consecutive years.
- 5 out of 100 U.S. households will break into the top 1% of incomes (roughly $360,000*) for at least 2 consecutive years.
- 20 out of 100 U.S. households will fall into poverty (roughly $23,850 for a family of 4*) for at least 2 consecutive years.
The folks in the U.K. And most of the developed world HAVE some form of medical insurance for all via national plan and/or some private insurance. In the US, there really is no equivalent.
I think the point of the article is that Americans who are financially secure (safe neighborhood, some savings, can affort food and housing and transportation to work and medical care) look rich to those in the bottom 20%. And that those top quintilers 1) don’t appreciate what they have, since others have more, and 2) think that since they got there through hard work and saving, that people in the bottom 20% must not work hard or save.
Ok, fair points, it’s easy to take your situation for granted, and to credit your successes to hard work and your failures to bad luck.
So what? If the purpose of the article is to point fingers and call names, it’s no better than idle gossip. Did he propose a solution?
And @Chedva, I don’t pay but was able to read it. Private browsing and cache clearing, maybe.
Many in the top quintile know they got there by a combination of luck and hard work. But they also know that There But For the Grace of God Go I, and they can very quickly be at the bottom 20% if a catastrophic incident or illness, or loss of a job wipes them out financially. Many at the top do not feel superior to those at the bottom, and vote to have more money and services provided to help lift them up. Many do resent paying taxes, but many also don’t. It’s a mixed bag.
@saillakeerie – you picked up on my hint with the “physical” manufacturing. I don’t have a good answer.
Maybe we in the US should compare ourselves to the rest of the world. Based on that standard, just about everyone is rich. 
@droppedit I don’t either. Resolving that will be a major task in the next several decades. If our political process wasn’t such a mess, I would have more confidence it finding a solution. Though it will be a challenging one even with a political process that is working. George Jetson worked something like an hour a day and two days a week I think.
@HRSMom – who is asking you to apologize?
@Emsmom1 – no one denies that there will always be a bottom 20%. At issue is just how poor and just how hopeless that 20% will have it. Will they have food to eat? Will their children go to public schools that are more than just holding pens from 8-3? Will they be able to go to a doctor when they’re sick? Will there be any real opportunities for advancement for this population? THAT’s the issue.
There’s a lot of posters who would argue earning $100k/year, which is about where the top 20% starts, doesn’t make you privileged. In a high cost of living area, some posters would argue $100k/year to support a family of four might be closer to lower middle class or lower class. There’s even a few posters who claim $2 million/year is middle class. There’s a lot of debate on where the middle class begins and ends and those upper echelons start.
Yes, but this isn’t what this thread is about. Nor is it what the article is about.
End of the article notes that he wrote a book that further expands on the problem and says what to do about it. So the article is just an ad for a book. Like the Ovaltine decoder ring in Christmas Story.
Then, we read the article differently. I read the article as saying the top 20% need to admit how privileged they are instead of pretending that only the top 1% are privileged.