On the OOH website, there were some middle-class jobs that did not require even a high school diploma, but I don't want to encourage anyone to drop out of high school. Also, through sheer talent, hard work or luck, some people have successful careers in occupations that typically require more education than they have. But planning to be the exception to a rule is usually not a good move.
Assortative mating is thought to contribute to income inequality when the better educated marry mostly each other and create a privileged class that hoards the best genes, parenting, education, and neighborhoods while the rest of society gets stuck in a socioeconomic rut. That's the theory anyway. What's actually happening on the ground?
The argument in brief: an increase in assortative mating, in which highly educated women are more likely to exercise the near-universal preference of women to marry men of higher education, income, or status (“hypergamy”) has lead to increasing inequality....
A select group of Americans really did see their incomes rise spectacularly and not just on paper. These were executives, managers, financial professionals, and technology professionals - occupations that often come with wealth-based income streams, such as stock options.
Is that it? Is rising inequality mostly an illusion, a matter of how income is being categorized and counted? A shift in accounting practices? No. There's more to the story.
If you don't count the income of the top .1 percent, then the income share of the top 1 percent in the US has actually gone down over the past 30+ years.
We should plan to have mini-mastery experiences every day: something a bit challenging but still doable to gets us closer to our goal. Doesn't mean to avoid the hard stuff, but it's nice to sprinkle the hard with the pretty easy to keep us motivated.
You might have to start with repetition, rote learning, and a lot of falling down flat, but then something clicks, and you're on the road to mastery. You know what to do and if you don't, you know what to do.
The possibility of failure beckons and is transformed into something exhilarating.
... a lot of people want to grow their wealth, especially for retirement. That's where risky assets come in. Risky assets are where the big bucks are made and lost. Risky assets include volatile investments, real estate other than one's own home, or a business. Households heavily invested in risky assets tend to experience big swings in wealth.
...the rich often own businesses or are self-employed professionals, and many grow their money in the stock market - either directly invested or through mutual funds, annuities, trusts, and pension funds...
...something to the effect, “wealth matters much more than income anyway”. And then they point out the super-rich own the lion’s share of wealth in the US and the world...The implication being if we just redistributed a bunch of that wealth, the war on poverty would be over! Is that so?
Tell subjects they scored in the bottom 20% on some performance measure and they'll feel rotten. Expose women to a 15-minute video of gorgeous models and their self-esteem will take a beating. So, sure, you can make experimental subjects feel bad by exposing them to certain conditions in a lab, but do those conditions prevail in everyday life?
Beliefs serve decision-making under conditions of uncertainty. Without uncertainty, we just act. I don't "believe" the ground will stop my foot when I walk....That's just the neural prediction and reward-seeking machinery running smoothly. It's when the machinery gets stuck that the brain shifts into belief mode to help break the logjam.
Jumping the groove from dopamine to self-efficacy: here we go!
What stands out in this map is that Red States are less densely populated than Blue States. They're more rural with plenty of room for people to spread out. Since rural homes are bigger and traveling distances farther, it should come as no surprise that Red States consume more energy per capita than Blue States. This is a function of landscape and livelihood, not politics. If you're a farmer, you don't tootle around in a Prius - you've got a pick-up.
According to the Conference of State Legislatures, net metering policies "have facilitated the expansion of renewable energy through on-site, also known as distributed, generation." Common distributed generation sources include solar panels, natural gas, micro-turbines, methane digesters, and small wind power generators.
The hypothesis: many Republicans would like to see a reduction in Green House Gas (GHG) emissions, whether or not they believe in anthropogenic climate change. Please see Part I of this series for how I arrived at this hypothesis. ... Now, let's test the hypothesis.
According to a recent Pew Research Center report, most Republicans and Republican-leaning Americans (heretofore "Republicans") do not believe in anthropogenic climate change. Does that mean they won't support policies or regulations that reduce green house gas (GHG) emissions?
Here in a glance are the politics of each state, the most popular governors and the best performing states in terms of fiscal health, level of inequality, affordability, poverty rate, and labor market participation.