Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

The South and the rust belt need to start pulling their own weight.

What is the American Dream these days anyway?

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/newsroom/img ... 3%20PM.png" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

What's the context of the map?

Ibanez wrote:What's the context of the map?

Hit the link. It explains it. I'd post an image but I can't seem to do that from my first gen. resolutionary device.

The race composition of your area seems to matter—not just the race of your family. "Both blacks and whites living in areas with large African-American populations have lower rates of upward income mobility," the researchers write.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/arc ... am/283308/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

kalm wrote:

Ibanez wrote:What's the context of the map?

Hit the link. It explains it. I'd post an image but I can't seem to do that from my first gen. resolutionary device.

The link went to only an image.

Ibanez wrote:

kalm wrote:
Hit the link. It explains it. I'd post an image but I can't seem to do that from my first gen. resolutionary device.

The link went to only an image.

Thanks!

kalm wrote:

Ibanez wrote:
The link went to only an image.

Thanks!

I'm your friend. I'm your helper.

Looks like a map of the effects of Reconstruction and Federalism.

Since there's no real context with the map, I guess we can feel free to make interpretations.

CID1990 wrote:Looks like a map of the effects of Reconstruction and Federalism.

Since there's no real context with the map, I guess we can feel free to make interpretations.

You need to read the article.

Ibanez wrote:

CID1990 wrote:Looks like a map of the effects of Reconstruction and Federalism.

Since there's no real context with the map, I guess we can feel free to make interpretations.

You need to read the article.

The link just goes to the map for me

I will be the first to admit that I am an internets retard, but I should at least be able to click a link and call up more than just a picture when its supposed to be an article

CID1990 wrote:

Ibanez wrote: You need to read the article.

The link just goes to the map for me

I will be the first to admit that I am an internets retard, but I should at least be able to click a link and call up more than just a picture when its supposed to be an article

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/arc ... am/283308/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

CID1990 wrote:

Ibanez wrote: You need to read the article.

The link just goes to the map for me

I will be the first to admit that I am an internets retard, but I should at least be able to click a link and call up more than just a picture when its supposed to be an article

The fourth post is where I Quote and Link the article.

Ibanez wrote:

The race composition of your area seems to matter—not just the race of your family. "Both blacks and whites living in areas with large African-American populations have lower rates of upward income mobility," the researchers write.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/arc ... am/283308/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Here you are Cid, if you need help reading let me know. I'll call you.

I'm sorry...

kalm wrote:I'm sorry...

This is why we can't have nice things.

Grizalltheway wrote:

kalm wrote:I'm sorry...

This is why we can't have nice things.

Damnit, Kenny!

Ibanez wrote:

CID1990 wrote:
The link just goes to the map for me

I will be the first to admit that I am an internets retard, but I should at least be able to click a link and call up more than just a picture when its supposed to be an article

The fourth post is where I Quote and Link the article.

I don't read your posts.


Klam stop fvcking up the links

CID1990 wrote:

Ibanez wrote:
The fourth post is where I Quote and Link the article.

I don't read your posts.


Klam stop fvcking up the links

I hate your face, fuck nut.

Interesting that all the border regions with Mexico have higher upward mobility ratings...

AZGrizFan wrote:Interesting that all the border regions with Mexico have higher upward mobility ratings...

Looks like the trend is more in the middle of the country (read: where no one wants to live).

Skjellyfetti wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:Interesting that all the border regions with Mexico have higher upward mobility ratings...

Looks like the trend is more in the middle of the country (read: where no one wants to live).

But it's purely a measure of income relative to your parents income...moving up the economic ladder...the middle of the country looks to be doing just fine...

Of course, nothing is absolute...but the most important thing in life is to surround yourself with good people.

Your upward mobility is determined by your effort. That effort can be partially influenced by the people around you (most of that opportunity comes from your parents) who consistently provide positive messages and real life examples of potential positive results.

If you are stuck in a house with losers with little ambition and parents who consistently make poor decisions and f*ck around while showing no loyalty to family or friends, or a parent who is not there at all, there is a good chance your future will be dim.

I don't know if I want to read the whole thing to see if they took cost of living into account but if not that's an issue. For example: The abstract contains a comparison involving percents reaching the top quintile of the income distribution from Charlotte, NC, and San Jose, CA. But I just went to a cost of living calculator and got the estimate that an income of $79,477 would be necessary in San Jose in order to maintain the same standard of living as one can maintain with a $50,000 income in Charlotte. A quintile is a fairly broad range. Saying two people start in the same quintile is not saying they start in the same place. And someone from Charlotte can start way lower in the bottom quintile, move up more than someone from San Jose does, and end up lower in the national percentile distribution than someone from San Jose does yet still be better off in terms of standard of living the whole time.

kalm wrote:What is the American Dream these days anyway?

To each his own I guess.

I was an ipad earlier and it was tough to type so now that I'm on a PC I'll elaborate on my last post. One person can be at, say, the 13th percentile and another be at the 19th percentile and they're both in the same quintile (the lowest 20%). Meanwhile the one at the 13th percentile can have a higher standard of living than the one at the 19th percentile because of a difference in cost of living.

Then say the kid of the one at the 13th percentile ends up 66 percentile points higher than his parent and the kid of the person at the 19th percentile ends up 65 percentile points higher than his parent. Now kid 1 is at the 79th percentile while kid 2 is at the 84th percentile. Kid 1 is not in the top quintile (top 20%) while kid 2 IS. Yet kid 1 is actually a little more removed on the high side from where his parent was AND has a better standard of living due to the cost of living difference.

Same thing with the overall presentation. They look at the percentiles at which the kids of parents who were below the median (50th percentile) are. But saying "below the median" can mean anything from 0th to 49th percentile. The presentation doesn't really necessarily tell you about how far kids in various areas advanced relative to where their parents were nor, because of differences in cost of living, does it necessarily tell you how well off they are relative to people in other areas.

Could be that if you real the whole long paper they address that but just looking at the graphic could be deceptive.