Only because there is a homogeneity in the upper echelons. For now. Soon you will see rich people from immigrant backgrounds and this point does nor hold.
Unless by homogeneity you mean against poor people specifically. But in general we want homogeneity in high living standards as the target, as in no people who are poor not by exclusion, but by lack thereof.
We need then to define "poor" properly, not by what you can afford or other relative wealth measure, but by some threshold where living standards and opportunities are available and good enough.
Any relative measure will be a lie sooner or later.
Suppose we have a "poor" person who does not earn much, but has many important ends met by state, e.g. good education and job opportunities, reasonable housing and health care, nourishment etc. Such a person should not be considered truly poor.
Obviously this is not really compatible with market economy which will increase price for required (income inelastic demand - housing has about 0.2 for renters, health services probably slightly negative, food in general is about 0.5 in US but curve is bathtub for some categories) goods and services until the costs are barely bearable or just beyond bearable.
Comments
Only because there is a homogeneity in the upper echelons. For now. Soon you will see rich people from immigrant backgrounds and this point does nor hold.
Unless by homogeneity you mean against poor people specifically. But in general we want homogeneity in high living standards as the target, as in no people who are poor not by exclusion, but by lack thereof.
We need then to define "poor" properly, not by what you can afford or other relative wealth measure, but by some threshold where living standards and opportunities are available and good enough. Any relative measure will be a lie sooner or later.
Suppose we have a "poor" person who does not earn much, but has many important ends met by state, e.g. good education and job opportunities, reasonable housing and health care, nourishment etc. Such a person should not be considered truly poor.
Obviously this is not really compatible with market economy which will increase price for required (income inelastic demand - housing has about 0.2 for renters, health services probably slightly negative, food in general is about 0.5 in US but curve is bathtub for some categories) goods and services until the costs are barely bearable or just beyond bearable.