The concept of meritocracy, or the notion that certain individuals are given more consideration than others for jobs, is becoming increasingly popular as technology and globalization increasingly create more opportunities for the rich to gain access to more of society’s resources.
But the term also comes with its share of controversies, with scholars and advocates often arguing that it is not the case that the privileged are better off than the less privileged.
“There is a lot of debate,” said Dr. Joseph Mankiw, director of the University of Chicago’s Institute of Advanced Study and the author of The Curse of the Super-Mean, which was released in April.
It’s not always a good debate, he said, and sometimes meritocracy is used to mean the opposite of what it means.
The term is used in some cases to describe individuals who have earned more than others, while others may earn more than they deserve, he added.
Many people believe meritocracy has been used to describe the privileged.
For example, people who earned a lot but are still considered “underprivileged” are often described as having “earned” more than the “less privileged.”
Another example: People who are rich, but are not considered to be “rich” because they are not wealthy enough, but also are considered to have earned a certain amount of money.
A recent study by sociologist David Tarrant and economists David Berenson and Joshua Katz at the University at Buffalo looked at data from over two million Americans from 2012-2016.
They found that while those who are middle-class or upper-middle class earned significantly more than those who earned less, there was no evidence that these people earned more money than those in the lower classes.
Instead, the authors found that middle- and upper-class people earned significantly less than the lower-income people, and lower- and middle-income income groups did not receive the same share of their income as those in higher-income groups.
But the research does not address whether the higher-earning groups are simply getting less than their peers in terms of their incomes, or if the difference is due to the lower pay for lower-earners.
The researchers did find that lower-wage workers earn less than higher-wage earners, though they found that higher-paid workers did not earn as much as lower-paid employees.
In the study, they found a correlation between the income gap between the lower and upper classes and income inequality, with lower-paying workers earning significantly less and higher-paying employees earning more.
But in other cases, such as when lower-skilled workers earn more in their field, the gap is not statistically significant.
One possible explanation for the disparity is that the workers earning more are not necessarily better at the jobs, or that there is a gap in the pay between the more and the less educated.
But other scholars, including the University Of Pennsylvania’s Dr. Elizabeth B. Haus, say that the study does not capture the true level of pay disparity between the wealthy and the rest of the population.
“The idea that the middle class is earning less than its workers in other sectors is really a myth,” Haus said.
“The reality is that middle class wages are far higher than the pay of most workers.”
A 2015 study by economists at Princeton University and the University, Bristol, England, found that the median household income in the United Kingdom, which is the economic standard used by many scholars and the World Bank, is $47,700, which puts it well above the $49,000 that the World Economic Forum recommends.
And a study published in March by researchers at the Economic Policy Institute found that those earning more than $1 million per year earned on average more than 15 percent more than workers earning the same income in other professions.
The authors of the study also found that people earning between $30,000 and $40,000 per year received more in the form of benefits, while those earning $40 to $50,000 received less.
The study, however, did not examine the effects of other factors, such a family size, on people’s incomes.
“There’s no question that the top 1 percent of Americans are paying more,” said Mankiew.
While it may not be possible to fully explain the gap between top earners and everyone else, some researchers are taking a closer look at how income is distributed across the nation, especially those who earn less.
A study published last year by researchers from the University’s School of Public Policy and Governance at Syracuse University looked at the distribution of household income by income, education level and occupation.
The results showed that the bottom 10 percent of the income distribution had the highest incomes, while the middle 10 percent had the lowest incomes, the study found.
However, the report did not delve into the question of whether those earning less are actually paying less in the first place, nor