Income Mobility: Rich or Middle Class?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Dragon, Dec 13, 2011.

  1. Dragon
    Offline

    Dragon Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2011
    Messages:
    5,481
    Thanks Received:
    578
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +578
    Something that people don't really understand (because it's not intuitive) is that moving from a working-class to a middle-class income is a very different process than moving from a middle-class income to a rich one.

    As a working-class person, you work at a lowish-income job. As a middle-class person, you work at a higher-paying job. In both cases, your income is derived from pay for your work.

    As a rich person, in almost every case (pop stars, movie stars, TV stars, and sports stars aside), your income isn't just higher but derived from a different source. Rich people derive most of their income from investments, not from pay for their work. It's either from profits of businesses which they own (outright or, more often, partly own in the form of stock), or from interest and capital gains on financial instruments.

    What this means is that there are two types of income mobility: moving up in job pay, which can turn a working class person into a middle-class person, and moving from paid work to profit income, which can turn a middle-class person into a rich person. These are completely different processes.

    What's more, these two types of income mobility are antithetical. In order to make it easier for people to move up from the working class into the middle class, we need high-paying jobs in abundance, and easily-affordable education so people can prepare themselves to do those jobs. But in order to make it easier for people to move from the middle class to true riches, we need high profits on business and high returns on investments, together with low taxes on upper income levels, all of which are hurt by the exact things that make moving into the middle class easier.

    So in the end, we have to choose which kind of income mobility we want. Do we want to make it so as many people as possible can live a middle-class lifestyle? Or do we want to make it so as many people as possible can become truly rich?

    We can't do both.
     
  2. imbalance
    Offline

    imbalance Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2011
    Messages:
    1,202
    Thanks Received:
    163
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Miami
    Ratings:
    +163
    Income mobility for any 'class' can be accomplished via excercising a degree of impulse control and actually saving money. It may initially suck to spend years limiting your spending to things you need and cut out things you simply want but if it were easy everyone would do it.
     
  3. auditor0007
    Offline

    auditor0007 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    10,687
    Thanks Received:
    1,837
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    Toledo, OH
    Ratings:
    +1,987
    For the most part, people become rich when the middle class is strong and has better upward mobility. If we lose the upward mobility into the middle class, then the truly rich will begin to lose their wealth also.
     
  4. Dragon
    Offline

    Dragon Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2011
    Messages:
    5,481
    Thanks Received:
    578
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +578
    You are talking about the things an individual can do to improve his own circumstances. I am talking about the things that government can do to make it easier or harder for individuals to accomplish this. We are talking past each other.
     
  5. imbalance
    Offline

    imbalance Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2011
    Messages:
    1,202
    Thanks Received:
    163
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Miami
    Ratings:
    +163
    Yeah you're right. I reread the OP after posting and realized my post was neither here nor there lol
     
  6. Skull Pilot
    Offline

    Skull Pilot Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Messages:
    20,721
    Thanks Received:
    2,899
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +3,243
    Over a lifetime even one with a modest income can live off his investments eventually

    Lets say a horribly average guy makes a horribly average income of 45K for his entire life. We'll assume no raises and that he works from age 22 to age 67

    If he saves 20% of his gross income every year and makes an average return of 8% ( not outrageous over a 45 year span) he would have saved 4.375 million dollars

    If he then earns 5% after age 67 and lives on 3% he will have an income of nearly 11K a month and his nest egg will still grow every year by 87,500 dollars.

    And he did it all on 45K a year.

    So you see wealth and multi-generational wealth is not out of the reach of the so called middle class.

    And there are endless possibilities here. Let's say he retired when his nest egg was 2 million. If he withdrew only the 45K a year and still earned our assumed 8% not only would he be living off his investments which would make him rich by your definition but his nest egg would still be growing by about 6% a year.
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2011
  7. Dragon
    Offline

    Dragon Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2011
    Messages:
    5,481
    Thanks Received:
    578
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +578
    No, I don't think that's true; in fact that's what I'm saying here. Because upward mobility into the middle class and upward mobility into true riches (say the infamous 1%) are such different processes, they are not really compatible. Increase one and you decrease the other.

    If we have many jobs at high wages, we will increase labor costs, which will reduce the profit margins of businesses. We will also tie up an increased amount of the nation's income in consumption spending, which means we will have less capital available; contrary to right-wing propaganda that won't hurt investment in job-creating activities, but it will hurt investment in rapid-payoff financial instruments and rent-seeking.

    But lots of high-paying jobs are what we need to increase upward mobility into the middle class. So if we do that, and see a stronger, healthier middle class, we will also see it become harder to enter the ranks of the truly rich. We will have fewer millionaires. In the end, we're going to have to choose between them. We can't have both.
     
  8. The Rabbi
    Offline

    The Rabbi Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2009
    Messages:
    47,850
    Thanks Received:
    4,552
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Nashville
    Ratings:
    +6,202
    You're an idiot.
    People often become wealthy by working at a job, then starting their own business doing the same thing. Then building that business. Eventually they derive income from investments. But for most entrepreneurs, their only investment is their own business. It makes sense: they know their own business better than any other, and they are probably making a better return than they would get from other investments.
     
  9. The T
    Offline

    The T George S. Patton Party Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Messages:
    48,031
    Thanks Received:
    5,464
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Location:
    What USED TO BE A REPUBLIC RUN BY TYRANTS
    Ratings:
    +5,464
    How about government getting the fuck outta the way?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  10. imbalance
    Offline

    imbalance Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2011
    Messages:
    1,202
    Thanks Received:
    163
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Miami
    Ratings:
    +163
    Well that would then make so many in government obsolete and self-preservation is a powerful instinct.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1

Share This Page