[FRIAM] More on social mobility

[Marcus Daniels]

Well I wasn't making a proposal, merely referencing the work mentioned in Edsall's column.   
I haven't thought about how to gather evidence it is true, but I can say personally it takes a certain vigilance not to allow perception define reality.   I know other relatively intelligent people who have really lost it when they felt they had no esteem of their colleagues, but in their mind deserved it.  I recognized before others he was coming unwound, I think.  Managing these real or potential rejection situations sometimes this means controlling perception, other times it means defying it.   Comfort with isolation is not easy for everyone.

In terms of the possibility of social mobility, I think of a visitor a few degrees of separation from my family that simply couldn't conceive of the costs of the bay area.  He acted as if it was a different country that he was visiting, one that he would never even think to be a part of.   I tend to attribute this setting of expectations to local influences.  The group polices its own to encourage the members to maintain the group on whatever features its happens to have:   In effect, "You will fail and be rejected by us and by them."  Even if the group has a light touch, intelligent individuals can be prone to ruminating and depression.  In this way, children of rich or well-off families have a more optimistic view of the future than those of poor ones.    The success of the parents shows the child that trying is worthwhile and they can puncture the membranes of different organizations they encounter.

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> On Behalf Of u?l? ???
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 8:51 AM
To: friam at redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] More on social mobility

Your proposal(s) is (are) too densely formed. Replacing the social status hypothesis with a discontinuous ("fractured") collection of different economies rings true to me. But hybrid (cyber-physical) systems are common, I think. (Common in the Ulam sense of non-elephant animals.) If "economy" already naturally includes mechanisms for the integration of discontinuous sub-economies, then can it explain this political polarization? Maybe it's necessary but insufficient?

On 12/9/20 8:54 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> It could be that the social status hypothesis is just wrong.   To me it is a different kind of hypothesis.
> The play by the rules, do your job, be white and Christian, was enough to get respect.   Clearly there are reasonable bounds on income to achieve this, but if everyone is sort of from the same mold then that's an sustainable economy.    And the growth after WWII was kind of artificial anyway.  Why shouldn't adjusted income be flat?   The factor of 5 or more in the cost of similar properties depending on location in the country says to me the U.S. has fractured into different economies.  I don't see any sign of inequality slowing down.

--
↙↙↙ uǝlƃ

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/