5 ms·
Let’s say for argument sake alone as this obviously isn’t true, say we’d reached the point that everyone was paid according to their ability, and every student
by donatj 3y ago
Let’s say for argument sake alone as this obviously isn’t true, say we’d reached the point that everyone was paid according to their ability, and every student received about the same education as their parents, wouldn’t the number be right around 50%? Half of kids more adept than parents, half less?
I’m just making the argument here that 50% seems like the ultimate goal. You can’t go up forever.
- spywaregorilla 3y agoIn a growing economy, people ought to be making things of increasing value. You probably cannot go up forever, but we're not at forever.
- scotty79 3y agoMaybe for median income and static economy. You should see regression to mean away from the median. And in growing economy you should see kids surpass their parents because their lifespans cover more prosperous times than their parents.
- mil22 3y agoYes, unless inflation-adjusted incomes increase each decade, as they did for much of the 20th century: in that scenario a child's peak earning years will tend to happen when incomes are higher than the peak earning years of the parents. Whether incomes should increase forever, and why they did for so long and no longer do, is a separate question.