[Malarkey73]

It's just really difficult to understand what this means.

The first big caveat is that 1990s to 2010s stops at the financial crisis. Due to austerity the UK has since then seen the greatest period of wage stagnation of all the advanced nations except Greece. But employment has remained high. So whilst the report is a picture of time before the crash its not clear to me what has happened since.

Second - Yes I think I do care more about the overall level of poverty and inequality. I'm not happy if people are moving in and out of destitution.

Third - I really don't understand how to square this analysis with the obvious fact that half as many people own their own home now as in the 80s. For 25-34 year olds its gone from 65% to 27% during the period of this study . What's that downward income mobility? I sthat a good thing? Or does that not count as it's not income?

.. I just don't really know what this is saying..?

[grasshopperpurp]

It looks like countries with greater inequality may provide more motivation for people to move up. Of course, there are countless other factors (regulation, societal norms, etc.), but if I'm a generally content person living in Finland or Sweden, and I'm relatively (but not remarkably) poor and still have what I need, I can focus on self-improvements that make me happy/fullfilled. If I'm in the USA, it'd be hard to divorce the idea of self-improvement from how I can monetize it. In countries where the poor feel more threatened (talking degrees, not absolutes), there's real urgency to distance yourself from that class.

I also wonder if the higher mobility among countries like GB, Japan, the US, and Turkey suggest societies that create more zero-sum scenarios. I'd be interested in other explanations.

[easytiger]

> 25-34 year olds its gone from 65% to 27% during the period of this study

back then people used to be in full time work from 16-21. Education has assumed the role work once had. Most people I know are in Education untill mid to late 20s. 1/15 into their 30ies on and off. further to that 100 years ago home ownership was in the 15% area. Standards of living where "worse" by modern metrics (of course that's not true per se IMHO).

[downrightmike]

The jobs that are available now for 16-21 are subsistence jobs. It makes more economic sense that they spend the time in school and get out of the sub livable wage jobs.

[isostatic]

Old Rich people like to point to income as a definition of "rich". They say "I'm poor", despite someone on £70k/year being unable to afford their lifestyle because of housing

It helps keep the taxation on the workers, not on the leachers