Since a certain presidential hopeful has brought it up, let’s ask: Is U.S. the land of opportunity? This is a tricky question because it depends not only upon how one measures “opportunity” and the cultural trends that affect that subtle sociological measure, but also upon our changing conception of opportunity.

Sociologists track “opportunity” in terms of social mobility, or the extent to which people move between social or economic strata. One of the simplest measures of mobility is whether children occupy the same occupation as their parents. By this measure, opportunity in U.S. has fluctuated historically. For instance, in the 1700s, most of our citizens were farmers and their children followed them into the fields, so social mobility was low. By the latter half of the 1800s, social mobility increased dramatically in the U.S. because people left the farms and took up jobs in the cities, where wages were higher. A similar period of high social mobility followed WWII when — with much of the rest of the world’s industries destroyed — the U.S. represented 50% of world’s total industrial capacity. In recent years, social mobility in U.S. has fallen, just as other nations, such as China, have had a spurt of social mobility as their citizens have left farms to work in factories. So, what affects social mobility in one era may have little influence on social mobility in another.

Thus, for our purposes, it might be more useful to ask, What leads to social mobility in a modern society? Primarily, education and equality. First, in order for people to move up the social ladder, they need a good education. Without the ability to improve one’s own personal capital by acquiring knowledge and skills, people find it difficult to break out of the economic strata they are born into. Oh, sure, there are meritorious counter-examples where education appears to have played a minor role; Bill Gates and Woody Allen come to mind — but they are the exceptions. Income levels in The U.S. are highly correlated with education levels — those with more education make more money.

Next, economic inequality also makes social mobility more difficult for many. For instance, the poor and increasingly the middle classes are finding their children’s futures limited by not having access to an affordable, quality education. The wealthy can always afford to send their children to quality schools even when their children’s abilities may not warrant it. While those with greater ability and motivation, but who are not so fortunate financially, may find themselves denied an adequate education.

But, just as we recognize these basic facts about social mobility, so have we, as a nation, neglected our public education system. As an industrialized nation, we rank low on educational expenditures as a percentage of median family income. Let’s face the fact that education has become a relatively low national priority — and it shows. Time and again, in measures of educational achievement, U.S. school children fall below those of other industrialized nations.

And how does this affect our social mobility? Just as one might expect, the U.S. now ranks below most other industrialized nations in social mobility. Compared with us, Europe and Canada are the lands of opportunity. Our only rivals for the bottom rung are Italy and England. And don’t imagine that Europe is worse off economically for it.

 True, there are some nations in Europe that are having economic troubles, but those that are the most economically egalitarian also have lower rates of unemployment than we do, and run a trade surplus—while we continue to run the largest trade deficit in human history. Think of Germany and the countries of Scandinavia as successful, highly mobile societies.

I can hear some exclaim, What is wrong with wealth having its privilege? After all, what is the purpose of wealth if not to help your kids get ahead in this life? But when some are denied the opportunity to improve their lot by, for instance, not having access to quality education, then their personal capital and effort goes unrewarded, and opportunity is no longer based on merit, but upon whatever economic strata one is born into. When that happens, then we are only a land of opportunity for an ossifying plutocracy.

Readers can e-mail the author at: jm.horner@yahoo.com

Manitou Springs guard Amelia Schofield scores two of her 34 points against Florence’s Britney Warren and the Lady Huskies Tuesday, Jan. 24, 2012, at Manitou Springs High School. Manitou Springs won 48-41. Photo by CHRISTIAN MURDOCK, THE GAZETTE