Quote:
Originally Posted by RightinNYC  One point that hasn't been addressed here - why do you assume that changes in intergenerational social strata are automatically good? What you term social mobility could also be termed social instability.
Situation 1:
A1 is a brilliant wealthy physician who raises his son A2 to be a brilliant wealthy physician. B1 is a scumbag poor drug dealer who raises his son B2 to be a scumbag poor drug dealer.
Situation 2:
A1 is a brilliant wealthy physician who raises his son A2 to be a brilliant wealthy physician. Unfortunately, A2 loses his practice and goes bankrupt when some idiot jury returns a massive malpractice reward against him in a situation that wasn't really his fault. B1 is a scumbag poor drug dealer who raises his son B2 to be a scumbag poor drug dealer. B2 then gets shot 45 times, writes a rap album about it, and becomes a billionaire. |
Another exampel is that you A1 a brilliant wealthy physician who raises his son
to believe in himself and find his own path in life. So instead of forcing the son and using his contacts to get his son to also be a physician, he instead let the son choose himself. So the son instead becomes a highly decorate police officer with a job much more suitable for his abilities and interest. That yes he doesn't earn that much and have a lower social status but he really loves his job and have found his role in society.
While B2 his a son of B1 a scumbag poor drug dealer that left the family before B2 even was born. And B2 believe his only choice in life is also to join a gang and become a drug dealer. But thankfully he ends up with a really great teacher, that not only teach him subjects like math, science, english but that life have so many other choices and opportunities. So he realise that he actually can gain something from studing hard and also realise that he actually is a very smart kid. So after graudates he get's a scholarship and ends up as a brilliant wealthy physician.