Chuck Darwin<p>Americans born to low-income families are faring worse than the last generation in most major U.S. cities, a new analysis finds.</p><p><a href="https://c.im/tags/Intergenerational" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Intergenerational</span></a> <a href="https://c.im/tags/mobility" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>mobility</span></a> <br>— the idea that you'll do better than your parents, your children will do better than you, and so on <br>— is core to the American dream, but is far from a guarantee.</p><p>A new analysis from the Census Bureau and Opportunity Insights, a research group at Harvard University, seeks to measure intergenerational mobility at the county level.</p><p>Researchers compared the average household income at age 27 for Americans born to low-income families in both 1978 and 1992 to get a localized picture of changing opportunities over time.</p><p>What they found: <br>🆘 In 38 of the 50 biggest U.S. metro areas, Americans born to low-income families in 1992 were doing <a href="https://c.im/tags/worse" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>worse</span></a> at age 27 than those born in 1978 at that age.</p><p>✅Brownsville, Texas, had the biggest increase across generations: Those born in 1992 made $33,500 at age 27, compared to $31,400 for those born in 1978 (up 6.7%; adjusted to 2023 dollars). </p><p>❌Philadelphia had the biggest drop, with those born in 1992 making just $27,200 at age 27, compared to $31,200 for those born in 1978 (down 12.8%).</p><p>Between the lines: The geography of mobility has shifted dramatically, especially when breaking down the data by race.</p><p>"By 1992, upward mobility for low-income <a href="https://c.im/tags/white" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>white</span></a> children in the <a href="https://c.im/tags/coasts" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>coasts</span></a> and in the <a href="https://c.im/tags/Southwest" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Southwest</span></a> 💥fell markedly to rates on par with those observed in <a href="https://c.im/tags/Appalachia" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Appalachia</span></a> and other areas that historically offered the lowest chances of upward mobility," the researchers write.</p><p>"Conversely, for <a href="https://c.im/tags/Black" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Black</span></a> children, upward mobility <br>💥increased the most in the <a href="https://c.im/tags/Southeast" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Southeast</span></a> and the <a href="https://c.im/tags/Midwest" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Midwest</span></a> <br>— areas where outcomes had historically been poorest for Black Americans."</p><p>Yes, but: "Black children born in 1992 still had poorer prospects of rising up than white children in virtually every county in America, because initial Black-white disparities were so large."</p><p>The bottom line: <br>👉Changes affecting one generation quickly affect the next, 👈<br>the researchers say, and "thereby generate rapid changes in economic mobility."</p><p> <br>"While this carries hope for how opportunity can improve, it also comes with some caution, as communities can experience declining opportunity in a similar timeframe."</p><p><a href="https://www.axios.com/2024/08/13/upward-intergenerational-mobility-us-cities" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no" target="_blank"><span class="invisible">https://www.</span><span class="ellipsis">axios.com/2024/08/13/upward-in</span><span class="invisible">tergenerational-mobility-us-cities</span></a></p>