In recent decades the international migration has increased worldwide. The influx of people from different cultures and ethnic groups poses new challenges to the labor market and the welfare state of the host countries and causes changes in the social fabric. In general, immigration benefits the economy of the host country. However, these gains from immigration are unevenly distributed among the native population. Natives who are in direct competition with the new workers expect wage losses and a higher probability of getting unemployed, whereas remaining natives foresee either no feedback effects or even wage gains. On the other hand, the tax and transfer system benefits disproportionally from an influx of highly skilled immigrants. Examinations of 20 European countries in 2010 show that a higher proportion of low-skilled immigrants in the immediate neighborhood of the natives increases the difference in the demand for redistribution between high-skilled and low-skilled natives. Thus, high-skilled natives are more opposed to an expansion of the governmental redistribution. On the one hand, a higher proportion of low-skilled immigrants generates a higher fiscal burden on the welfare state. On the other hand, high-skilled natives' wages increase due to an influx of low-skilled immigrants, since relative supply of high-skilled labor increases. In addition to the economic impact of immigration, the inflow of new citizens is accompanied by natives' fear of changes in the social environment as well as in symbolic values, such as cultural identity or natives' set of values. The latter might generate negative attitudes towards immigrants and increase the demand for a more restrictive immigration policy. On the other hand, more interethnic contact due to a higher ethnic diversity could reduce natives' information gaps, prejudices and stereotypes. This, in turn, could enhance more tolerance and solidarity towards immigrants among natives. Examinations of 18 European countries in 2014 show that more interethnic contact during everyday life reduces both the natives' social distance from immigrants and their fear of social upheaval by the presence of immigrants. However, natives' social distance from immigrants has no effect on their preference for redistribution, but their perceived threat to the national culture and social life by the presence of immigrants has a significantly negative impact on their demand for redistribution. Thus, natives’ concern about the preservation of symbolic norms and values affects the solidarity channel of their redistribution preference. An individual's upward mobility over time or in relation to his or her parents determines his or her attitude towards the welfare state as well as the transfer of his or her opinions to his or her own children. With regard to intergenerational income mobility, Germany shows a value in the international midfield; higher than the United States (lower mobility) and lower than the Scandinavian countries (higher mobility). For example, if a father's lifetime income increases by 10 percent, his son's lifetime income increases by 4.9 percent in the United States and by 3.1 percent in Germany. Additionally, in Germany, fathers' lifetime income tends to show a higher impact on their sons' income if their incomes are higher. In the United States, fathers' lifetime incomes have a stronger influence on their sons' income at the lower and the upper end of the income distribution compared to the middle. Taking a closer look at the intragenerational wage mobility and wage inequality in Germany, the development at the current edge is rather sobering. Since 2000 there is a steady decline in wage mobility. Furthermore, wage mobility in the services sector has been significantly lower than in the manufacturing sector since the beginning of the 2000s. This result is mainly driven by the decrease of wage mobility in the health care and social services sector. Moreover, a worker's unemployment spells and occupation have become more important in the meantime. Since 2006 the increase in the German wage inequality has markedly slowed down and wage growth between 2006 and 2013 has been even polarized, i.e. wages at the lower and at the upper end of the wage distribution have increased more than wages in the middle. However, this development can be partly attributed to the computerization and automation of the production processes. Although, there was substitution of manual routine tasks between 2001 and 2013, cognitive routine tasks are still more pronounced in the middle and at the upper end of the wage distribution. Furthermore, the latter experienced an increase in wage mobility since 2000. On the other hand, manual non-routine tasks are localized disproportionally in the middle and at the lower end of the wage distribution. Thus, the wage gains of these occupations at the lower end were compensated for by the wage losses in the middle.

This dissertation consists of three contributions. Each addresses one specific aspect of intergenerational income mobility and is intended to be a stand-alone analysis. All chapters use comparable data for Germany and the United States to conduct country comparisons. As there are usually a large number of studies available for the United States, this approach is useful for comparing the empirical results to the existing literature. The first part conducts a direct country comparison of the structure and extent of intergenerational income mobility in Germany and the United States. In line with existing results, the estimated intergenerational income mobility of 0.49 in the United States is significantly higher than that of 0.31 in Germany. While the results for the intergenerational rank mobility are relatively similar, the level of intergenerational income share mobility is higher in the United States than in Germany. There are no significant indications of a nonlinear run of intergenerational income elasticity. A final decomposition of intergenerational income inequality shows both greater income mobility and stronger progressive income growth for Germany compared to the United States. Overall, no clear ranking of the two countries can be identified. To conclude, several economic policy recommendations to increase intergenerational income mobility in Germany are discussed. The second part examines the transmission channels of intergenerational income persistence in Germany and the United States. In principle, there are two ways in which well-off families may influence the adult incomes of their children: first through direct investments in their children's human capital (investment effect ), and second through the indirect transmission of human capital from parents to children (endowment effect ). In order to disentangle these two effects, a descriptive as well as a structural decomposition method are utilized. The results suggest that the investment effect and the endowment effect each account for approximately half of the estimated intergenerational income elasticity in Germany, while the investment effect is substantially more influential in the United States with a share of around 70 percent. With regard to economic policy, these results imply that equality of opportunity for children born to poor parents cannot be reached by the supply of financial means alone. Conversely, an efficient policy must additionally substitute for the missing direct transmission of human capital within socio-economically weak families. The third part explicitly focuses on the intergenerational income mobility among daughters. The restriction to men is commonly made in the empirical literature due to women‘s lower labor market participation. While most men work full-time, the majority of (married) women still work only part-time or not at all. Especially with the occurrence of assortative mating, daughters from well-off families are likely to marry rich men and might decide to reduce their labor supply as a result. Thus, the individual labor income of a daughter might not be a good indicator for her actual economic status. The baseline regression analysis shows a higher intergenerational income elasticity in Germany and a lower intergenerational income elasticity in the United States for women as compared to men. However, a separation by marital status reveals that in both countries unmarried women exhibit a higher intergenerational income elasticity than unmarried men, while married women feature a lower intergenerational income elasticity than married men. The reason for the lower mobility of unmarried women turns out to be a stronger human capital transmission from fathers to daughters than to sons. The higher mobility of married women is driven by a weaker human capital transmission and a higher labor supply elasticity with respect to spousal income for women as compared to men. In order to further study the effects of assortative mating, the subsample of married children is analyzed by different types of income. It shows that the estimated intergenerational income elasticity of children's household incomes is even higher than that of their individual incomes. This can be seen as an indication for strong assortative mating. If household income is interpreted as a measure of children‘s actual economic welfare, there are barely any differences between sons and daughters. The intergenerational income elasticity of spousal income with respect to parental income is again relatively high, which in turn supports the hypothesis of strong assortative mating. The elasticity of the sons-in-law with respect to their fathers-in-law in Germany is even higher than that of the sons with respect to their own fathers.