Downward mobility is a sociological concept which refers to what happens when someone experiences a notable decline in income, wealth or occupational prestige, either from their previous position (intra-generational mobility) or in comparison with their parents’ status (inter-generational mobility). A good fictional example of intra-generational upward mobility would be Cinderella marrying Prince Charming and moving from low class to royalty. We will, however, focus on inter-generational mobility for today.
Arguably, meritocracy is one of Singapore’s main governing principles and it heavily influences our education system. One of the intended effects of meritocracy is to promote upward social mobility amongst Singaporeans and to help them to have higher incomes, increased wealth and higher social status as compared to the previous generation. However, can the younger generations today claim to do better than their parents did or to assert that they have been upwardly mobile?
The Business Times (Singapore) reports that experts believe that absolute social mobility in Singapore has either fallen, or increased more slowly over time. This means that, as a cohort, those who are new to the working world are either doing more poorly as compared to their parents or that their increase in mobility is moving much slowly as compared to previous generations.
One reason for this is the unique historical circumstances that Singapore finds itself in. The nation has developed from a third world to a first world country within a generation; educational opportunities and income levels have skyrocketed at unprecedented rates. Such a circumstance of rapid growth is unique and is unlikely to be repeated again.
Since the new working adults and the economy are already operating at a much higher base compared to the decade when Singapore first gained its independence, i.e., in the 1960s and 70s, it is only fair to expect that income mobility will improve only by smaller margins.
Watch this YouTube video that provides an introduction into upward and downward mobility, meritocracy and inequality.
Younger Americans will also not live as well as their predecessors
A study on the pre-tax family earnings of children and parents when they were both about 30 years old reveals that the same issue of downward mobility in the younger generation is also prevalent in America.
While 90% of babies born in 1940 exceeded their parents’ income, and 61% of babies born in 1970 earned more than their parents, only 50% of babies born in 1980 did so.
Americans are forced to grapple with the crumbling of their American Dream of being able to live better than the generations that came before them. While future generations continue to believe that new technologies and a positive spirit will lead them towards greater heights, upward mobility is not inevitable. In fact, the reality might be that many young Americans would face downward mobility.
So what accounts for this downward mobility trend in the US, given the different socio-political history in US as compared to Singapore?
One of the explanations is that there is a wide band of middle and upper-middle class which have benefited from past economic booms. The higher the parents’ income, the less likely that their children will be able to match them. For those coming from low income households, the younger generations are able to surpass their parents even with moderate gains. However, for those in the middle and upper-middle class band, it is simply more difficult for the younger generation to acquire the same income level as their parents. This does not mean that they are poor by any means.
With tightened income levels, there are spillover effects on the way the younger generation choose to live: millennials tend to marry later, buy homes later and to live longer with their parents.
What this means for young Singaporeans and Americans is that we need to manage our expectations. Both the US and Singapore have experienced a tremendous upward trajectory of economic growth which has improved living standards. However, we cannot always expect the economy to be so rosy nor expect that upward mobility would be a given with our higher educational levels. We therefore need to take a reality check regarding how much we would like to be paid and how our lives will look like in the future.
Questions for further personal evaluation:
- What are your expectations of your own social mobility? How do you think expectations about social mobility are shaped?
- Do you think Singaporeans still hold onto or seek the Singaporean dream of achieving the ‘5 Cs’ (Cash, condo, credit card, country club and car)? Why or why not? If not, what has changed?
Useful vocabulary:
- ‘trajectory’: a path, progression or line of development resembling a physical trajectory
- ‘unprecedented’: novel; having no precedent
Here are more related articles for further reading:
- The Guardian: Downward mobility does not mean absence of privilege; “we are broke but not poor”
“What feels useful about our experience is the ability to see clearly how success has never been a straight line forward, how plenty of people have never had the sort of privilege and access that we had. How the sense of safety some of us grew up with has never been accessible to a large number of this country’s population. How all of it has always been bolstered by forces other than our own.
I’m a writer and an adjunct and my husband works for a small business. There are two Ivy League degrees between us, as well as some of the debt that comes with that. Neither of us gets benefits from our jobs. I teach at three different places. There are, some years, as few as three or four full-time positions across the country in my field to apply for (70% of all university professors are adjuncts). My husband changed careers when our second daughter was born because his job involved months of travel. For a few years, with sometimes as many as six tutoring and adjunct positions, I provided most of our income; he worked weekends when I could watch the children to make ends meet.
I was raised with enough privilege to see all the ways that, though I love my kids intensely, I have failed to make the resources available to them that were available to me. I don’t know, for instance, how we’ll provide for their educations after high school. There is no extra money for the private physical therapy that was recommended to us after our daughter broke her leg a few years ago, for the tutors I had at various points in high school, for the therapy I needed as an adolescent, for the orthodontia my husband received.”
- VOA News: Plight of young Americans
“Quart and the economists who studied these issues say many things have led to lower incomes and downward mobility.
The economic recession of 2007 to 2009 is partly to blame, they say.
Modern technology also plays a part. Quart says robots threaten to reduce the earnings of health care workers, truckers, reporters, and people who work at supermarkets, drug stores and tax preparation services.
In The Washington Post, Robert Samuelson noted that poor schools, a weak housing industry and too many government rules also are to blame.With all these things – and more – partly responsible, what is the solution? These experts say the answer is complex. But all point to one issue that needs to be examined: economic inequality. Quartz writes that while America is one of the richest countries in the world, it also has one of the biggest divides between the wealthy and the poor.”