[torb-xyz]

It's frequently brought up in radical leftist discourse* (marxism, anarchism, etc…) or even center-left discourse (social democracy, social liberalism, etc…).

AFAICT it seems to be taboo outside these circles.

* I should mention that many people make big point that you shouldn't use economic points like this to ignore things like racism, i.e.: while racism intersects with economics you can't treat it like it's the same problem.

[rsynnott]

If you mean the stickiness of the upper-middle-class, then it's a fairly well-known phenomenon, and I don't think it's _taboo_ anywhere. Maybe some upper-middle-class people with upper-middle-class parents might take vague offense (on the basis that they believe they got where they are purely through hard work or whatever) but I can't imagine anyone thinking of it as taboo.

[LatteLazy]

That's exactly how I feel. It's taboo to discuss that our economic system is just as rigged as (say) China's.

I also should have been clearer: racism is definately also a factor. Poor minorities fare so badly because they get both racism AND classism (or whatever the appropriate term is for the natural increase of both wealth and poverty).

I think one of the major upsides of the cold war was that western countries were very eager to show we could do better than those dirty commies. That birthed all sorts of programs to give people a chance of improving their lots. Most of those are dead now.