There are all sorts of aspects to this. In terms of the bigger, longer term trends, I think the dynamic described by Thomas Picketty is the most important aspect. Long term trends towards increased wealth disparity.
On the other hand, at the micro level people actually experience, I think the cultural dynamic is more important. It determines how people feel about the economy.
The people she talks to believed their educations and backgrounds (most of them grew up in middle-class homes) would guarantee some financial stability
Upward mobility is ideologically important to any major, modern political camp. Few deal with downward mobility in any way. Individuals will have a much tougher time politically tolerating being poorer than their parents (or their cohort) than just being poor. Losing is more emotional than winning and the grudge lasts longer than the opposite.
Ideologically, I think most of us would say that social class should not be inherited. Emotionally, few of us can live with downward moves in the economic hierarchy. It creates an unmistakable feeling of having been robbed of one's birthright.
Nope this guy has a good job. Not about mobility. This is about rentiers. People need to read "Progress and poverty" by Henry George. Land prices are the issue.
Not having a job isn't the only way to move down a tier. I think what a lot of cohorts are feeling (the economy is broken) comes down to (1) middle class upbringing (2) did the things middle class kids are supposed to do, like college, "professional white collar job" (3) results are worse than expected.
People's expectations can be set all sorts of ways, but the most obvious is comparatively to the group they believe they are or shoybe part of. Ie, parents, friends...
This is all at the personal level. There are also macro trends and dynamics in the economy overall. Haven't read George, but Picketty (recent Nobel laureate) has a very good theory for this. I don't know how George uses "rentier" but "returns to capital" probably encompasses.
On the other hand, at the micro level people actually experience, I think the cultural dynamic is more important. It determines how people feel about the economy.
The people she talks to believed their educations and backgrounds (most of them grew up in middle-class homes) would guarantee some financial stability
Upward mobility is ideologically important to any major, modern political camp. Few deal with downward mobility in any way. Individuals will have a much tougher time politically tolerating being poorer than their parents (or their cohort) than just being poor. Losing is more emotional than winning and the grudge lasts longer than the opposite.
Ideologically, I think most of us would say that social class should not be inherited. Emotionally, few of us can live with downward moves in the economic hierarchy. It creates an unmistakable feeling of having been robbed of one's birthright.