There is plenty of scientific basis. Twin & family studies have long examined the topic of heritability as well as the genetic overlap for traits key to SES. Ho

There is plenty of scientific basis. Twin & family studies have long examined the topic of heritability as well as the genetic overlap for traits key to SES. However, even though they are correct, I know they won't impress anyone, so how about these recent genomics studies which take a more direct brute-force approach to establishing what has long been known: "Molecular genetic contributions to socioeconomic status and intelligence" http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4051988/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4051988/ "Education, socioeconomic status, and intelligence are commonly used as predictors of health outcomes, social environment, and mortality. Education and socioeconomic status are typically viewed as environmental variables although both correlate with intelligence, which has a substantial genetic basis. Using data from 6815 unrelated subjects from the Generation Scotland study, we examined the genetic contributions to these variables and their genetic correlations. Subjects underwent genome-wide testing for common single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). DNA-derived heritability estimates and genetic correlations were calculated using the ‘Genome-wide Complex Trait Analyses’ (GCTA) procedures. 21% of the variation in education, 18% of the variation in socioeconomic status, and 29% of the variation in general cognitive ability was explained by variation in common SNPs (SEs ~ 5%). The SNP-based genetic correlations of education and socioeconomic status with general intelligence were 0.95 (SE 0.13) and 0.26 (0.16), respectively. There are genetic contributions to intelligence and education with near-complete overlap between common additive SNP effects on these traits (genetic correlation ~ 1). Genetic influences on socioeconomic status are also associated with the genetic foundations of intelligence. The results are also compatible with substantial environmental contributions to socioeconomic status." "Molecular genetic contributions to social deprivation and household income in UK Biobank (n = 112,151)" http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/03/09/043000 http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/03/09/043000 "Individuals with lower socio-economic status (SES) are at increased risk of physical and mental illnesses and tend to die at an earlier age [1-3]. Explanations for the association between SES and health typically focus on factors that are environmental in origin [4]. However, common single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) have been found collectively to explain around 18% (SE = 5%) of the phenotypic variance of an area-based social deprivation measure of SES [5]. Molecular genetic studies have also shown that physical and psychiatric diseases are at least partly heritable [6]. It is possible, therefore, that phenotypic associations between SES and health arise partly due to a shared genetic etiology. We conducted a genome-wide association study (GWAS) on social deprivation and on household income using the 112,151 participants of UK Biobank. We find that common SNPs explain 21% (SE = 0.5%) of the variation in social deprivation and 11% (SE = 0.7%) in household income. Two independent SNPs attained genome-wide significance for household income, rs187848990 on chromosome 2, and rs8100891 on chromosome 19. Genes in the regions of these SNPs have been associated with intellectual disabilities, schizophrenia, and synaptic plasticity. Extensive genetic correlations were found between both measures of socioeconomic status and illnesses, anthropometric variables, psychiatric disorders, and cognitive ability. These findings show that some SNPs associated with SES are involved in the brain and central nervous system. The genetic associations with SES are probably mediated via other partly-heritable variables, including cognitive ability, education, personality, and health." Genes don't stop at the neck, nor the pocketbook. The question is not, is any of the persistence documented across so many times and places genetic? Because the answer is yes. The question is, how much is non-genetic?