By Staff
The Economic Mobility Project looked at the fortunes of a large group of families over time, comparing their parents' incomes in the late 1960s with that of their children in the late 1990s and early 2000s to take the pulse of the American dream.
When these studies were first released, reporters focused on the finding that African-Americans born to middle-class or upper middle-class families earn slightly less, in inflation-adjusted dollars, than their parents, although two-thirds of blacks earn more than their parents did.
Read a little farther.
A less-publicized finding is that the personal income of American men, including white men, has been flat for three decades. Any financial gains white families made in that time can mostly be attributed to women entering the labor force.
Data doesn't support the notion of America as the land of opportunity.
Four out of 10 children who are born poor remain poor.
Four of out 10 children who are born rich stay rich.
The rich have seen far greater income gains than the poor.
Median income of families in the sample group was $55,000 in the late 1960s; their children's median family income was $71,900.
Quips, quotes and qulunkers: "The 'rags to riches' story is much more common in Hollywood than on Main Street. Only 6 percent of children born to parents with family income at the very bottom move to the very top."
– the Economic Mobility Project, a research initiative led by the Pew Charitable Trusts
"An incredible 42 percent of children born into that lowest quintile are still stuck at the bottom, having been unable to climb a single rung of the income ladder. The study notes that even in Britain – a nation we think of as burdened with a hidebound, anachronistic class system – children who are born poor have a better chance of moving up."
– Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson
"Traditionally, Americans have been ready to accept high levels of inequality because of our belief in the American dream. What happens if we can't believe in the dream any longer?"
– John E. Morton, Pew's managing director for economic policy. Economic inequality seems like a debate our political candidates ought to be having.
"If the Republican Party really wanted to hold on to the White House in 2009, it's pretty clear what it would do. It would grit its teeth, swallow its doubts and nominate a ticket of John McCain for president and Mike Huckabee for vice president … McCain and Huckabee have been notable for their clarity, character and, yes, simple humanity. Huckabee's combination of religious principle, good humor, tolerance and clear passion on education and health care complements McCain's muscular foreign policy and aversion to wasteful domestic spending. The two of them often seem to be operating on a different – and higher – plane than the quarrelsome Giuliani and Romney, whose mutual contempt is as palpable as it is persuasive … McCain is finally running the campaign he should have from the start."
– Washington Post political columnist David Broder
Ted Turner: By grabbing 2 million acres over the past two decades, the CNN founder has become the largest private landowner in the country.
His holdings span 11 states – including New Mexico, Nebraska, Montana and South Dakota.
His ranching spawns conspiracy theories, like that he's trying to corner land over the Ogallala Aquifer, the world's largest underground water system, to cement clout in the water-challenged West.
Paul Allen: The more reclusive Microsoft founder who isn't Bill Gates owns the Portland Trail Blazers and the Seattle Seahawks. He is the only individual to solely own two teams in the U.S.'s big three sports.
His huge rock and roll memorabilia collection includes the Stratocaster another Seattle native, Jimi Hendrix, played at Woodstock. Allen's collection became the $240 million Experience Music Project near the Space Needle.
He built the NBA arena the Rose Garden for $262 million in 1995. Allen has a 413-foot yacht and 38 residences.
According to an eight-page profile in Sports Illustrated Dec. 3, had Allen simply held on to his Microsoft stock without adopting any investment strategy, his net worth would exceed $80 billion.
By 2000, Allen was, according to Forbes, worth $36 billion, making him the third-richest man in the world. He could have invested his fortune in a savings account and, on the interest income alone, made the Forbes list of the world's 400 richest people.
john.eby@leaderpub.com