The name is absent

modify the long-run occupationalstructure, the supportofthe long-run
distribution andthe long-run average andaggregate income andwealth.

T hings changes in scenarios I and III. In_hscenario I, the c_ilosed and irre-
dudbesetofpersistentstatesistheinterval (bw;q)* ; (be_;q)*_ax = [2.25; 9.83].
In the long- run all the pecpeare cμali...ed and Cng- run average wealth in-
creases with respect tc the genetic transmissicn hypcthesis. It gces frcm
2.863 tc5.05. M Crecverwealth concentration decreases: theG ini cce¢dent
becomes 0.1759.

T he factthattechnical ine¢ dency is purely stochastic; opens up a way
outofpoverty and non-cuali.cation to the sons ofnon-cuali.ed agents. In
thelong-run thewholepopulation is cuali.edandthegreatmajorityconsists
ofentrepreneurs (73% ofthe population). A nyway entrepreneurs are notal-
ways belongingtothe samedynasties, sincetherealways exists occupational
mobility. T able 7 summarizes the evolution ofthe occupationaldistribution
in this case.

T able 7: evolution of occupational distribution in scenario I (progenitors !long-run)

T herefcre the stochastic transm i ssi on oftechni ca l i ndî ci ency bri ngs about
the possibility of social climbing. In the long-run the whole population is
cμaii...ed

In scenario III the situation is symmetric:  in the long-run the whole

population is trapped in poverty and in non-cuali.cation and distributed
on the support[0.111732;0.50 2 8] . M ostofthe people are workers (76.66%).
Themean wealth is lower(0.156). The long-run occupationaldistribution is
summarized in Table8.

T able 8:evolution of occupational distribution in scenario II I (progenitors !long-run)

24

<<   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   >>

More intriguing information