It has always been insinuated “where we live” determines “consequence of social class”.
It is undeniable that social structures affect social mobility in all individuals of the community.
Statistical data from the textbook and the New York Times compiles this article in a bid to shine
a light on the topic of child social mobility.
An in-depth analysis of Jackson County, Alaska, the county I grew up in shows average
performance for child income mobility in poor families. DeKalb County is strategically optimal
for the study showing high probable results for success, the younger one moves here.
Children spend $110 on average towards their annual household income at 26 years old
which appreciates at a rate of 9 percent toward adulthood. Raising children to higher
stratifications on the income ladder takes average effort in this county.
2 Compared to Jackson County is Arlington County, Virginia, a well-off community in
regard to child mobility. Similarly to Jackson County, children who move to Arlington earlier are
more likely to be successful.
Children, however, spend more; about $260 towards the annual household income at 26
years old with a steeper 20 percent margin toward adulthood. It is, therefore, easier to raise
children through the income ladder in Arlington.
The correlation between social mobility and income mobility has been studied to show a
balanced social stratum in relation to the county’s economic state. Social constraints that limit
social mobility should, therefore, be approached from a local county level.
The social infrastructure established in the given county also determines social mobility.
Socially-economic prosperous areas promote social mobility as perceived by the statistical data.
The current society is made of sub-classifications of social strata. These categories define
our position in society, the opportunities they are potentially exposed to, and, the choices that
influence their day to day lives. Economic mobility, especially the measure of children
household incomes is a statistical approach towards social mobility.
Answer the following questions:
“ Pull yourself from your bootstraps” has been an ideological foundation to socio-economic
growth in the United States. A concept instilled into the minds and hearts of citizens has
encouraged hard work and self-determination in a attempt to ascend social strata.
It is in this relation that poor people; stratified low in the social classes are considered not
hardworking enough to emancipate themselves from the grasps of poverty. Likewise, the rich;
stratified high in the social classes are considered to have “pulled themselves from their
A detailed illustration is the story of Horatio Alger is a clear depiction of the “rags to riches”
American concept. Alger’s illustration is that of impoverished young adults who live exemplary
lives, striving through poverty and humble backgrounds to attain wealth, honor and the
Social mobility is, therefore, a choice to hard work to move up the social ladder. Social and
environmental constraints, however, discourage an upward accent. These factors apply similarly
to all individuals in a society and therefore the field is considered o be of equal opportunity.
The poor are in the same level field as other poor people in a bid to move up the social ladder,
and so are rich people or the disabled. The backward perception that the efficiency of random
acts of kindness, and luck to who we are born to; as the determinants of success is utterly
My view of social mobility emulates the views propagated by Alger. Although the social
constraints to current social mobility have changed, the principles in play are still the same.
Some current factors influencing social mobility have improved while others have deteriorated.
This is in consideration to the fact that Alger’s works were compiled after the Civil War.