Gyroscopic Investing

doodle wrote: Does equality of opportunity exist in the united states and if not, what if anything should be done to ensure a more perfect meritocracy?

doodle wrote:Does equality of opportunity exist in the united states

Pink Floyd wrote:And then the one day you find
Ten years have got behind you
No one told you when to run
You missed the starting gun

WildAboutHarry wrote:

doodle wrote:Does equality of opportunity exist in the united states

Absolutely.  Or at least substantially more so than most other places and most other times.

However, individuals differ in their willingness, need, and ability to pursue various opportunities.  And at each stage of life one's choices slowly preclude the ability to pursue some opportunities.  Pursuing one opportunity effectively eliminates other opportunities, etc. (as Yogi says, when you come to a fork in the road, take it).

I am reminded of the line from Pink Floyd's Time

Pink Floyd wrote:And then the one day you find
Ten years have got behind you
No one told you when to run
You missed the starting gun

Several large studies of mobility in developed countries in recent years have found that the US among the lowest in mobility.[4][8] One study (“Do Poor Children Become Poor Adults?")[8][10][13] found that of nine developed countries, the United States and United Kingdom had the lowest intergenerational vertical social mobility with about half of the advantages of having a parent with a high income passed on to the next generation. The four countries with the lowest "intergenerational income elasticity", i.e. the highest social mobility, were Denmark, Norway, Finland, and Canada with less than 20% of advantages of having a high income parent passed on to their children.

At least five large studies in recent years have found the United States to be less mobile than comparable nations. A project led by Markus Jantti, an economist at a Swedish university, found that 42 percent of American men raised in the bottom fifth of incomes stay there as adults. That shows a level of persistent disadvantage much higher than in Denmark (25 percent) and Britain (30 percent) — a country famous for its class constraints.[14] Meanwhile, just 8 percent of American men at the bottom rose to the top fifth. That compares with 12 percent of the British and 14 percent of the Danes. Despite frequent references to the United States as a classless society, about 62 percent of Americans (male and female) raised in the top fifth of incomes stay in the top two-fifths, according to research by the Economic Mobility Project of the Pew Charitable Trusts. Similarly, 65 percent born in the bottom fifth stay in the bottom two-fifths.[

]

Xan wrote: That doesn't necessarily demonstrate lack of mobility; it only (if true) demonstrates lack of motion.

doodle wrote: True, but at the end of the day what seems to be emerging is a wealth based de facto caste system.

Pointedstick wrote:

doodle wrote: True, but at the end of the day what seems to be emerging is a wealth based de facto caste system.

During the time of human civilizations, has this ever not been true? Even if your premise is true, is it possible that this is the default state of affairs in civilization and our current state actually represents a fantastic improvement over the opportunities available to 99.9% of all humans ever to live?

I mean, I'm thinking of things like free libraries, incredibly inexpensive internet access, ridiculously low barriers to entry for starting most businesses… these represent unbelievable opportunities compared to past times when knowledge was hoarded by the elite, when accidents of one's birth order determined what profession one would be forced do follow for one's entire life, or when a king or president could force you off to war or make you a slave.

doodle wrote: Wow! I didn't think a libertarian could write such a glowing review of our oppressive and totalitarian big government system. 

Pointedstick wrote:

doodle wrote: True, but at the end of the day what seems to be emerging is a wealth based de facto caste system.

During the time of human civilizations, has this ever not been true? Even if your premise is true, is it possible that this is the default state of affairs in civilization and our current state actually represents a fantastic improvement over the opportunities available to 99.9% of all humans ever to live?

I mean, I'm thinking of things like free libraries, incredibly inexpensive internet access, ridiculously low barriers to entry for starting most businesses… these represent unbelievable opportunities compared to past times when knowledge was hoarded by the elite, when accidents of one's birth order determined what profession one would be forced do follow for one's entire life, or when a king or president could force you off to war or make you a slave.

Libertarian666 wrote: Yes, it's a good thing that the president can't have people killed on his order, and that 18-year-olds don't have to register for the draft!

Oh, wait...

doodle wrote: True, but at the end of the day what seems to be emerging is a wealth based de facto caste system. Why is there a lack of motion between classes and is this a concern? If we believe that people should win or lose based on their individual merits....is it fair to expect people to start 50 yards behind in a race and really catch up? Does such a state of affairs not lead to increased anti-social behavior and cheating?

Pointedstick wrote:

Libertarian666 wrote: Yes, it's a good thing that the president can't have people killed on his order, and that 18-year-olds don't have to register for the draft!

Oh, wait...

Sure, I could be called up at any time if they reinstated the draft. But they haven't. Similarly, they haven't bulldozed my house, confiscated all my money, kidnapped my child, or tortured me for believing the wrong religion.

Living in fear sucks. We have it pretty good today. Lots of bad things could happen to us, but most of them are easily avoidable and preventable with a modicum of common sense, as Harry Browne teaches.

Libertarian666 wrote: All of those things have happened to people in this "land of the free". Were all of those people careless, including the times when the police have shot people in a house at the wrong address? I think that would be pretty hard to prevent.

Pointedstick wrote:

Libertarian666 wrote: All of those things have happened to people in this "land of the free". Were all of those people careless, including the times when the police have shot people in a house at the wrong address? I think that would be pretty hard to prevent.

Of course they have; I know that. But let's not lose sight of the fact that they're rare events, and it's impossible to live a risk-less life. I worry about this just like you do. Hell, I even have a link I send people whey they react to the possibility with incredulity: http://www.cato.org/raidmap

But the map shows how truly rare these events are: less than 20 per year in a country of 310 million people. If we assume that 10 times as many take place as are reported and collected, then's still less than 200 per year, and in most of those, people are "just" terrorized, not injured or killed.

Does it suck? Yes. Is it worth worrying too much about? Not really, in my opinion.

doodle wrote:Then why this:

Quote
Several large studies of mobility in developed countries in recent years have found that the US among the lowest in mobility.[4][8] One study (“Do Poor Children Become Poor Adults?")[8][10][13] found that of nine developed countries, the United States and United Kingdom had the lowest intergenerational vertical social mobility with about half of the advantages of having a parent with a high income passed on to the next generation. The four countries with the lowest "intergenerational income elasticity", i.e. the highest social mobility, were Denmark, Norway, Finland, and Canada with less than 20% of advantages of having a high income parent passed on to their children.

At least five large studies in recent years have found the United States to be less mobile than comparable nations. A project led by Markus Jantti, an economist at a Swedish university, found that 42 percent of American men raised in the bottom fifth of incomes stay there as adults. That shows a level of persistent disadvantage much higher than in Denmark (25 percent) and Britain (30 percent) — a country famous for its class constraints.[14] Meanwhile, just 8 percent of American men at the bottom rose to the top fifth. That compares with 12 percent of the British and 14 percent of the Danes. Despite frequent references to the United States as a classless society, about 62 percent of Americans (male and female) raised in the top fifth of incomes stay in the top two-fifths, according to research by the Economic Mobility Project of the Pew Charitable Trusts. Similarly, 65 percent born in the bottom fifth stay in the bottom two-fifths.[

]

You don't understand. I coulda had class. I coulda been a contender. I coulda been somebody, instead of a bum, which is what I am