Capitalism: Failed System?

[-:Undertaker:-]

Well I can only go from experience really.

my great nana worked in a shop, my nana worked in a shop, my mum works in a shop.
my granddad's a painter and decorator (and I think his dad was one too but I'm not sure), my dad's a painter and decorator, my brother was going to be a painter and decorator until oops recession so now he's a 'groundsperson' apprentice.

There are whole cycles of poverty and while there is the opportunity to progress, it is easier for those who were born into a more middle class background. Despite that, I do think that'll be the case for every system: it's not about the money (money money), it's the power that creates that inequality and the powerful and the powerless will occur in every structure.

But there's nothing wrong with those jobs.

Of course a lot can also depend on what areas are included. A young twenty-something year old working in a supermarket in Bradford, Liverpool or Glasgow may earn £5 an hour. In London or in places in the Midlands, that may be £8 or £15 even...... swap both of them around and the one from London may end up shifting into another income bracket if they lived in Liverpool where as in London they'd still be in the bottom income bracket. A lot of it depends in circumstance and indeed - as Sowell makes the argument - age. A painter or a decorator in Middlesborough may start on the very bottom when he begins (living in a low income city with a job that starts as low income) yet at the end of his life he may have risen to the top bracket in that city.

A lot of people make the mistake of assuming that capitalism/the free market must be a win-lose game. It's not, most can & are winners from it.

[Inseriousity.]

I never said there was anything wrong with those jobs, it's an example of how these things can become a cycle.

Top bracket of what exactly? Wait so when this study says "those at the bottom 20% end up in the top 20%" it just means in that job. No **** sherlock, someone gets older, they get more professional, they can charge more or in the case of a shop, the minimum wage goes up, they get more but if that bracket is grossly underpaid then it doesn't make a blind bit of difference! Honestly, how middle class are you.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I never said there was anything wrong with those jobs, it's an example of how these things can become a cycle.

Ah okay, but yes things usually happen in cycles in families/among friends anyway. A lot of people - especially in sectors where their parents are working and own a company or business - will usually take on the family mantle as their father/mother retires. Just human nature.

Top bracket of what exactly? Wait so when this study says "those at the bottom 20% end up in the top 20%" it just means in that job. No **** sherlock, someone gets older, they get more professional, they can charge more or in the case of a shop, the minimum wage goes up, they get more but if that bracket is grossly underpaid then it doesn't make a blind bit of difference! Honestly, how middle class are you.

No, it means the income brackets of the population as a whole not in that particular sector/job.

He's very clear about it - those who start on on the bottom tend to end up at the top. Most of them, anyway.

[Inseriousity.]

Yes I mentioned the cycle cos it'd contradict what that study says. You're right, it is human nature so if someone's parents had a working class occupation it's likely they'd follow. Obviously not always but generally speaking. I'd like to see that study then cos it doesn't really add up tbh.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Yes I mentioned the cycle cos it'd contradict what that study says. You're right, it is human nature so if someone's parents had a working class occupation it's likely they'd follow. Obviously not always but generally speaking. I'd like to see that study then cos it doesn't really add up tbh.

It adds up easily.

That most people who started in the bottom income bracket, by the end of their careers, have moved into the top income bracket - that can take many forms. Through experience and simply moving upwards through a company or taking ownership in a company.

A friend of my mother left school without any decent qualifications yet she's now on a fairly high wage. She's moved up through experience.

Obviously it cannot be true for 100% of all people, no system is. But on the whole? People generally do very well under capitalism.

[Inseriousity.]

And again I'd like to see this study! It makes sense that people will move up but that suggests they're employed in a business where those promotion opportunities are available so if you're working class and working for a small business where those opportunities are not available it is highly likely you will remain where you are. I would just refute whether it's the majority or not so would like to see this study!