The problem with that bit from the Economist is that it no data were presented to back it up. When it comes to these topics, there&#x27;s pretty sloppy journalism all around, including the original NY Times article.<p>The Atlantic article just quotes the IZA article, which is about wealth transfer in Sweden, not income. Wealth is heavily affected by spending habits; income less so. And t Telegraph and NY Times articles don&#x27;t offer anything concrete on the subject.<p>The Pew source <i>does</i> address the subject. The key part is:<p>&gt; Approximately half of parental income advantages are passed on to children. The IGE [intergenerational elasticity], when averaged across all levels of parental income, is estimated at 0.52 for men and 0.47 for women.<p>(That means that if someone earns $40k above average, their children can be expected to earn $20k above average.)<p>In comparison, IGE in UK is 0.5, France is 0.41, and Denmark is 0.15. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;upload.wikimedia.org&#x2F;wikipedia&#x2F;commons&#x2F;c&#x2F;c7&#x2F;Intergenerational_mobility_graph-1.jpg" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;upload.wikimedia.org&#x2F;wikipedia&#x2F;commons&#x2F;c&#x2F;c7&#x2F;Intergen...</a><p>IGE studies are somewhat scarce, but that&#x27;s no excuse for the original NY Times making a bunch of unsubstantiated implications.