> America’s political climate is changing; among other things, the 2016 presidential election brought up the issue of wealth inequality in this country and made people consider more closely the structural forces that define class here.
What is a structural force that defines class in America?
Inherited wealth, disparities in access to education, racism, and a weak labor movement are a few of the many forces that impede upward social mobility.
Inherited wealth is part of the American dream. Everyone wants to pass on enough wealth to provide for their children - even if their children turn out to be morons. I agree that at a certain amount of wealth, inheritance seems problematic. When those morons inherit enough to shape the world instead of just living comfortably.
Whats wrong with inherited wealth? Literally anyone can pass on wealth to their heirs. It takes no brains, and no special access. Just spending less. People shouldn't be taxed more because they have more foresight or impulse control than others. Yes, maybe it doesn't happen in one or two generations - but it can. Also - lots of people have moved up in the world from nothing - and it wasn't "inherited wealth" keeping them down previously. edit: as minikites mentioned below, it is education that wealth can be transferred is what needs to happen.
Your emotional response to my logical statement doesn't necessitate a downvote.... Edit: it should be inspiring, bc it shows that literally anyone middle class or above can be incredibly wealthy if principles are followed for 3-4 generations.
Wealth inequality has been increasing for 40 years despite worker productivity rising. Nearly every metric shows the rungs to wealth being pulled away, and I'm the non logical one here?
> doesn't necessitate a downvote
You were already downvoted before I commented.
> should be inspiring, bc it shows that literally anyone middle class or above can be incredibly wealthy if principles are followed for 3-4 generations.
You didn't 'show' anything; you simply stated economic religion.
Wealth has nothing at all to do with worker productivity. It has only to do with saving a lot more than one spends by spending less, or generating large value to society with a monetary reward.
The pathway for any middle class family is through inherited wealth and NOT some fantasty of wealth equality achieved in 1 lifetime. We need to stop thinking in small terms of 'years'.
Wealth can be achieved generally in a family over the course of 1.5 centuries. If a family applies good saving practices, and saves over 5-6 generational lifetimes - it is very hard NOT to be wealthy. My parents were a fireman and teacher. My grandfather paid for my college, my parents are paying for my kids college, and I'm paying for my grand kids and great grand kids college - SOLELY bc of saving over extended periods of time. That was our family deal - take care of those after you 2 generations down. Thinking multi-generational is the easiest path to success.
>Wealth inequality has been increasing for 40 years despite worker productivity rising. Nearly every metric shows the rungs to wealth being pulled away, and I'm the non logical one here?
Yes, inequality increasing because the richest aggregate in the US says absolutely nothing about how the quality of life has changed for regular people. It's a red herring.
If a rich person moves into my tiny town, I don't suddenly become worse off, despite inequality increasing drastically.
I'm not claiming to be any sort of expert, but I would guess the tax system (not taxing the ultra-wealthy as much as you could/should, and corporations not carrying as much of the tax burden as they used to, once again arguably not as much as they should).
There is also a lot of structure around consumerism, debt, and the like, though this is split between societal/cultural structures and government/business structures.
What is a structural force that defines class in America?