Well I'm on the other side of the fucken world

So tough luck cunt

Why are you so afraid of having your thoughts recorded down in text?

afraid of it? I think debate over text isn't a thing

which ausy time zone you in?

How could it not be a thing?

TBH this hasn't really been a debate, it's actually been a pretty good discussion

This is true, debates have parameters

Are we debating whether or not this is a debate/

?

I'm about to debate my foot right up your urethra if you don't define some motherfucking TERMS

nah you can debate things in open discussion without parameters I just think text debate is for people who can't remember what people say when talking to them

is that a promise Louis?

It also makes it harder to backtrack and move the goal post.

wtf

can you not pay attention in a conversation?

do you have to ask the person you're talking to usually what you guys were talking about>

True debate requires a moderator

😉

sure someone can moderate

I nominate myth

he is a radical centrist

xD

So the real question is can you prove that this lack of social mobility is not due to individual choices, but rather to societal influences, and can you point to specific societal influences to effectively use policy to change

Because otherwise I'd rather keep my free market, thank you very much

Social mobility is a tool of the bourgeoisie to use hope and prosperity to rob the proletariat of their revolutionary spirit. How shameful!

🤔

I haven't read the study cited but there is another confounding factor (among many) which is the range of affluence in the country. If a country has a very high upper range of wealth (as in, say, the US or UK, where billionaires are a thing), if you divide the socioeconomic classes into the same number of buckets as a country with a much tighter spread, they will be much further apart from each other. In which case, even if the economic mobility is the same in absolute or even relative terms, i.e. a given child in either country has a 50% chance of rising 50% above his parents in income, the apparent mobility in the country with the wider spread will be lower, because that 50% increase in income will be less likely to cross one of the arbitrary borderlines between "classes" even though that person would have experienced the same 50% increase in standard of living as their neighbor in the other country who crossed into a "different" socioeconomic bracket.

The total spread shouldn't affect the correlation since it's scaled to the variance.

Assuming that's how they produced those numbers obviously.

the variance in what measure?

The variance of the income.

As in the expected value of the square of an individual's income minus the square of the expected value of that individual's income.

I'm talking about the size of the categories used to define "low income" and "high income"

Those are usually in terms of national percentile.

exactly

I don't see your point.

Well, in a small african nation if you make eleven dollars a year you're in the top 1%, so it's way easier to get a huge leg up on your parents. In America, it's like 100 grand a year or some shit, so it's significantly more difficult to, say, go from middle to upper class

Depends on the general trend of wealth in the country.

But, uncephalized, unless I read the study wrong, they're actually measuring the absolute amount of money rather than the individual countries subjective class distinctions

The difference in moneys made a year rather than the difference in, say, tax bracket