Actually the upper middle class and above are disportionally represented in the military… in a positive manner http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2008/08/who-serves-in-the-us-military-the-demographics-of-enlisted-troops-and-officers
Complete BS study. Why did they cherry-pick two years, 2006 and 2007, instead of using the far broader available data the census and military records going back decades, and going forward from 2007? Anytime you see studies like this, where sweeping conclusions are drawn from one or two year’s worth of data, despite decades of data being available, it is a red flag indicating the researchers probably didn’t like what the broader dataset told them.
The study also conveniently ignores the disproportionate number of people from the lowest economic brackets who are incarcerated and, as such, cannot enlist for the military.
The division of household income levels into quintiles also ignores that many people in the lowest income categories are retired/old and aren’t producing new 18-year-old military recruits, and a number are mentally ill or homeless.
The inclusion of an income range of $65,000-$246,333 for the top quintile is laughable. Why not see how enlistment breaks down across that range before declaring upper-middle and upper-class people are enlisting at higher rates than poorer people? A household income of $65,000 in the United States does not make you rich. You’re squarely middle-class. To credit people from households making $200,000+ with the same rate of military enlistment as people from households making $65,000 is idiotic. Also, what about all the people from households making more than $246,333? Why the cutoff when the lower range goes to $0?
Make these adjustments and get the real data, and you will see this so-called study for the brazen propaganda it is. Standard statistical deception.