"Why do the poor stay poor and the rich get richer?"

[jacob]

@SW - Read this https://www.amazon.com/Class-Through-Am ... 0671792253 ... it's pretty dated but it should illustrate how classes differ with more detail than a single person can learn in a couple of decades.

I get the impression that you still think of class as some kind of ordinal ranking system with one being above the other, etc. Better to see classes as different kingdoms. Different kingdoms have different values and customs. They have different ways of doing things. They speak different languages. These differences are subtle but it will be apparent to those already living there whether someone recently moved in; is just visiting; or have lived there all their life. Conversely, the differences when coming in from the outside will NOT be readily apparent.

It's very similar to real countries. Different countries will have different habits and customs. Americans don't use knife&fork the same way as Europeans for example. You even find it inside the US---culturally speaking, different areas will have different values and ways of thinking. See https://www.amazon.com/American-Nations ... 143122029/ ... a Californian won't settle [or even see] conflicts the same way as someone from the Appalachian region, for example. It tends to take a few years of full time living in an area before one starts noticing how one is different.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_stages_of_competence ... in terms of class [these kingdoms], most exist is a stage of unconscious incompetence when it comes to classes. Nontourist travel is useful to bring people into a state of conscious incompetence as in "Hey, people in this country consistently act or behave differently than people in my country." Even getting to this stage is a tall order. It's hard to really notice such differences because one doesn't know what one is looking for. Conscious competence takes even longer. I've lived in the US for 12 years now, but correctly performing the "How are you?" greeting still trips me up. You're not fully integrated until reaching the unconscious competence that the "natives" posses. That goes for both nations and classes.

(As for the college example; what someone not from the middle class might notice is that the supreme values are intellectualism and universalism and all that other stuff (loyalty, family, standing up, ...) doesn't matter to the college group---that'd be the professional middle class. Going to college is like traveling to "professional middle class"-land for a few years.)

You can move to another kingdom but that's not immediately going to make fit in and be one of them. You're not going to instantly change someone's cultural makeup by giving them a new passport. You're not going to change someone's class by transferring $50M in or out of their bank account. Someone, say from the underclass, winning the Powerball is not immediately going to start acting or thinking like a wealthy person. They're not going to instantly develop a strong opinion on the capital gains tax. If they're from the middle class they're not instantly going to switch everything out of their Vanguard index religion and into a checking account having suddenly understood that ROI no longer matters for their personal accounts---that money is now a resource like air which will never run out. Rather they're going to act according with their underclass understanding of money and spend the money on luxury cars and bling. Conversely, let Trump go bankrupt for the fifth time. He's not suddenly going to switch to thinking or speaking like a college graduate while deciding that his best strategy will be to apply for a position as a store manager at the local home improvement center in order to "build up his FICO score". In particular, he would not try to regain his wealth like a middle class person tries to become wealthy---by diligently saving in index funds and negotiating better salaries.

Retirement is a good example of how different classes' lenses. Remember much debating there was whether ERE was _real_ retirement back in the "happy" blogging days of 2010? That was mainly the middle class resisting because ERE violated a bunch of their unspoken rules about what proper retirement is. Conversely, when presenting it as FU money, the upper class (1%) immediately grokked the concept. What's notable was that they did not have rules about how old you had to be or how much money you had to have. What counted was the attitude of having enough to fund yourself for life---even if it was only $7000/year. That's two very different lenses. For the underclass, RE or FU doesn't even exist from a money perspective. The underclass is rather oblivious to the very idea that money can be used to make money.

When I submit that ERE is not the middleclass, I'm merely suggesting that it's its own little kingdom. Several of you have made comments about being increasingly unable to relate to other people's problems and interests. That's a sign that you're relocating class-wise. Your lenses are changing.

[7Wannabe5]

Jacob said: and that my Kevin-Bacon numbers both in the direction of the supreme top whether it's politics, finance, academia, not art though, ...

Yeah, you keep forgetting about the Bohemian Class Otherwise, I mostly agree with you. I would note that education, depending on how it is defined, can serve as either the very best lens changing device, or a thorough monocular stabilization system. Some of my personal lens shifting devices were reading widely and voraciously with little filter, exploring the small niches of nature within and the storm drain system underneath the suburban neighborhoods of my youth, hitchhiking across the metropolitan area to associate with sexy boys from the wrong side of the tracks (inclusive of the fact that I am currently dating a Trump supporter, and I was party to an Islamic Marriage contract -lol), and running my own business.

@Spartan Warrior: As I noted previously, I likely have the lowest net financial worth among individuals who regularly contribute to this forum. I am a moderately attractive 51 year old female from a Midwestern Middle-Class background. At this moment in time, one of the men who is very much seeking my social company grew up on a hard-scrabble farm, watches Fox News, and now has a net worth of over $50,000,000, and another grew up on an estate where he could ride his horse wherever he liked in the company of the son of Sir Edmund Hillary, and currently runs a social justice non-profit. One thing the three of us have in common might be that we either don't care about money, or we do care about money in the same way, which is a different way than the way that most people care about money, which is also somewhat like the different way many of the people who participate in this forum do and don't care about money. Money almost certainly has the greatest marginal utility for somebody who is not able to meet basic survival needs, but it also has great marginal utility for anybody seeking mobility from lower middle-class to upper-middle-class. Therefore, individuals who are currently experiencing the same marginal utility from money may have more of a common perspective than individuals who currently have the same net worth. So, a Bohemian artist manically obsessed with completing a sculpture in alignment with his vision, a multi-millionaire who can't possibly spend his interest income as fast as it accumulates, a mother whose child is dying from a disease no amount of money can cure, a monk in solitary meditation at the top of a mountain, the adult child of an extremely wealthy abusive alcoholic, and/or a country doctor who passionately loves her work and has simple tastes, may all have a very low marginal utility for money in the moment, and this may inform perspective more than altitude.

[BRUTE]

Americans don't use knife&fork the same way as Europeans for example.

huh. what's the difference? brute imagines there's not that many ways to use knives and forks.

[7Wannabe5]

@BRUTE: There are many variations. The knife may be used only for cutting, or it may move food across the plate, or it may be used as spear. The fork may be held with tines up or down, in primary hand or secondary, or not used at all. For instance, Iranians only recently adopted the fork, and often only use knife and spoon.

[jacob]

@brute - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lisa-mirz ... 94518.html ... the American transfer of the fork to the right hand being the most obvious difference that holds even for people w/o any table manners.

[FBeyer]

Heh. GF and I were called out immediately by a guy in Phil's Fishmarket who could tell we were Europeans from the way we ate
He literally just walked up to our table, smiled at us and said: so, what part of Europe are you from?

[BRUTE]

wow. brute wasn't aware what a pleb he is at the table

[jacob]

wow. brute wasn't aware what a pleb he is at the table

A deep metaphor for many things pertaining to this thread.

[BRUTE]

not sure if triggered by this thread, but brute just ate some steak and observed himself using the fork with his left hand most of the time. sometimes, he'd switch to the right. usually when he'd cut up a whole bunch of pieces and wasn't going to use the knife for a while. brute's fork & knife tactics are relatively pragmatic, it seems. no sense switching the fork around every 2 seconds.

[enigmaT120]

Yeah. I like to use the knife in my right hand, but if I'm doing that I just eat left handed.

[ThisDinosaur]

Since the central premise was questioned early:

Only 4% of people raised in the bottom quintile move up to the top quintile as adults.
But 8% born in the top fell to the bottom.
37% born in the top quintile will fall below the middle

43% born in the bottom remain there.
40% born in the top quintile remain there.

http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/legacy ... eampdf.pdf

Between 1979 and 2004, the top 1% of earners have had a real after tax growth in income of 180%.
The top 20% have grown by 70%. The bottom 20% have grown their income by about 10%.

https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/up ... morton.pdf

The US also shows less socio economic mobility than (in order) France, Germany, Sweden, Canada, Finland, Norway, and Denmark.
If Jacob had never moved here, he would be wealthier than Hamlet.

[BRUTE]

what about that rising tides stuff? of course the 20% of all humans will always be only 20% of them. if somebody rises, someone else gets kicked down. but the cake might be getting bigger, so that the poor are less poor, and the middle class are less middle. not sure if that's in the original question, but in brute's view that would still be a positive development.

[ThisDinosaur]

There's Absolute Mobility and Relative Mobility. Absolute Mobility relates to the "cake" getting bigger in terms of growing available capital/standard of living. Relative Mobility has to do with changing your rank among the players.

If all the capital, income, or investment returns for a time period are thrown into a pot, and the whole population is playing a game of chance, there will be an "average return" for the whole group. Some will outperform the market, some will underperform. In order for One individual to outperform *a lot*, he effectively has to take some of the returns from Several who end up underperforming.

So, if you are able to lock in the Average return (i.e. index funds) you are actually outperforming MORE than half of the players, but guaranteeing you wont get to the top. I think this is why Jacob says indexing is a tool for the middle class. It only works, though, if the "cake" is getting bigger, not if cake-slices-per-capita are actually falling.

[ajg01]

I think much of it comes down to a number of features an individual may or may not have. The more you have of these the more likely you will be rich and get richer:

- IQ
- EQ
- physical attractiveness
- come from a stable family
- come from a family with capital
- European
- from a western country
- heterosexual
- freedom from physical and mental disabilities

The less you have of the above the more likely you will be poor and stay poor.

My god I realized as I have written the above down how convinced I am of the above and how depressing that is. And how unfair.

Thrifty I disagree with the western country thing. In fact if you are born in Singapore, UAE, or Ireland you are far more likely to be wealthy.

[GandK]

The whole mobility thing is so... ick. I'm glad that "getting ahead" is possible, and would like it to be more possible, but the fact that we even use this terminology is troubling. If I'm getting ahead, someone else by definition is slipping further behind. This makes me feel dirty. I don't want to gain at someone else's expense. I don't know that our resources are explicitly finite like this, but this is how we all think, and therefore act. Rankings, rankings, rankings. (To say nothing of the fact that having more resources doesn't necessarily translate into a better quality of life, as many here can attest.)

It's like the hypocritical discussions that we parents have about equality in education. We say we want all kids to get ahead, in spite of the logical impossibility embedded in that statement. But the reality is that we want our own kids to gain an advantage (implied: over the others).

[bryan]

The whole mobility thing is so... ick. I'm glad that "getting ahead" is possible, and would like it to be more possible, but the fact that we even use this terminology is troubling. If I'm getting ahead, someone else by definition is slipping further behind. This makes me feel dirty. I don't want to gain at someone else's expense. I don't know that our resources are explicitly finite like this, but this is how we all think, and therefore act. Rankings, rankings, rankings. (To say nothing of the fact that having more resources doesn't necessarily translate into a better quality of life, as many here can attest.)

It's like the hypocritical discussions that we parents have about equality in education. We say we want all kids to get ahead, in spite of the logical impossibility embedded in that statement. But the reality is that we want our own kids to gain an advantage (implied: over the others).

This comment reminds me of the rational, soothing speech of Milton Friedman. Pretty sure he has said something like "improving your lot in life" as opposed to "getting ahead." A few related (first three I clicked):
Redistribution of Wealth
Greed
Responsibility to the Poor
Bottom v Top

[The Old Man]

When I submit that ERE is not the middleclass, I'm merely suggesting that it's its own little kingdom. Several of you have made comments about being increasingly unable to relate to other people's problems and interests. That's a sign that you're relocating class-wise. Your lenses are changing.

A Study of Social Class in America by Will Skinner
http://www.willskinner.com/

The essay in the link is perhaps the best discussion I have come across on social class in the USA. In my opinion I also believe the ERE ethos is not the middle class.

"I think the fundamental point of class is that, yes, it comes down to money, but it comes down to how money and its effect on childrearing has formed a person. That is, the money he or she grew up with/in/around. His pecuniary milieu. From money (or a lack of it) springs refinement, education, manners, distinguished speech, wisdom, licentiousness, decay and everything else that is indicated by the word "class" (or a lack of it)."

The ERE mindset with its emphasis on the Renaissance ideal is somewhat outside of the social class system, but I believe is closet in spirit to the upper class.

[jacob]

Nice link. Fussell is also fun if a bit dated.

I'm still trying to find a significantly more granular classification scheme that I saw on a blog some 5-7 years ago. The lists looked at different classes within the media-class, the finance-class, the working-class, ... The enumeration scheme was something like E-1, E-2, ... E-5 (John Stewart), F-3 (financial analyst)... or W-3 (union boss). If anyone has a link, LMK.

[jennypenny]

Do you mean Michael Church's 3 ladder system? We had a thread on it, but the link to the original article is busted. Here's an article with an excerpt ... [deleted]

Sorry, wrong link. Here's the article ... http://www.meetup.com/Philadelphia-Poli ... d/49570124

[BRUTE]

A Study of Social Class in America by Will Skinner
http://www.willskinner.com/

interesting.

brute thinks that ERE is definitely spawned by being middle class, probably even True Middle and not Upper Middle. but obviously one moves away from typical class ideals/goals during ERE, even regular FI.

anyone in upper doesn't need money, hence, ERE is a useless idea to them.

anyone in lower is likely so far removed from money, role models, and inspiration that it's unlikely they'll ever stumble upon ERE, either by accident or explicitly through the website. they may also lack the education. even though, as jacob has shown, it would theoretically be possible to do ERE in 5-10 years on minimum wage, it does seem that almost all individuals in this forum and other FI forums (MMM) are from Lower Middle, or, more commonly, True Middle.

True Middle jobs especially pay well enough, but don't come with the "class" attached to it like Upper Middle jobs: lawyers, doctors, and so on may make more than engineers, but they are expected to be cultured, have fancy dinner parties, wear suits, fine watches, join country clubs, drive an imported luxury vehicle, and so on.

essentially FI is the hack of being a culture-lacking buffoon while making the income of a cultured person. this does require education, though, which makes it hard for members of the lower.

what's interesting is that brute has never, ever, met a human from any of the Uppers in person. the only ones brute can even think of are kings/queens, or in America, maybe oil and cattle money. the Bush family is the first that came to brute's mind, and interestingly, like mentioned in the essay, none of them seemed to brute very cultured. educated, sure, but not cultured.

brute himself is pretty straight True Middle, likely a little low on the money and a little high on the culture (thanks, parental units).

like many here, brute has at one point found himself somewhat outside of the paradigm, unable to really identify with "his" class, but clearly not belonging into one of the others. brute finds it hard to converse with Upper Middles, as he hates poshness. as mentioned, he's never even met a real Upper human. most of brute's friends are other "daywalkers" (=fell out of the class system somehow), and sometimes lower-middle or upper-labor.

brute can understand the desire of Burroughs mentioned in the essay, trying to mingle with labor to experience something. brute also feels like the lack of striving can be a lot more fun to be around than the typical eternal hamster wheel of Middle.