New research suggests that social mobility in America may be more limited • Hacker News Board

Re: New research suggests that social mobility in America may be more limited

#21

Post by RodericDay » Sat, Oct 08, 2016, 7:14 PM UTC

jimmywanger wrote: post #8

This is inequality over generations. If you seek to remove this, you remove one of the main reasons to strive for success, the means to pass down success to your children. I don't understand what this study is advocating. Government run orphanages that raise all children so that nobody gets an advantage?

you have to weigh the removal of that incentive against the degree to which the ability to give your offspring a leg up makes the system inefficient and unappealing

see Adam Smith and the Founding Fathers on eg. inheritance taxes:

http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexington/2010/10/estate_tax_...

> "A power to dispose of estates for ever is manifestly absurd. The earth and the fulness of it belongs to every generation, and the preceding one can have no right to bind it up from posterity. Such extension of property is quite unnatural." Smith said: "There is no point more difficult to account for than the right we conceive men to have to dispose of their goods after death."

Re: New research suggests that social mobility in America may be more limited

#22

Post by rileymat2 » Sat, Oct 08, 2016, 7:15 PM UTC

rileymat2 wrote: post #9

>fewer than 10 percent of people in the bottom fifth of the wealth distribution will make it into the top fifth. Things weren't much better for the middle class: Only about 20 percent of people in the middle fifth would rise into the top fifth over the course of their lives. Maybe I am a bit confused, but isn't 20% the exact right amount to move into the top fifth?

Maybe this is not the right amount due to the effect age has on wealth accumulation

Re: New research suggests that social mobility in America may be more limited

#23

Post by jrcii » Sat, Oct 08, 2016, 7:15 PM UTC

glup wrote: post #6

jrcii wrote: post #2

Welcome to planet Earth and the immutable human condition that's persisted in every society since the dawn of civilization. Their findings could have big implications for how the government addresses poverty. This is only of interest to anyone because it's used as ammunition for various political agendas.

I find this perspective frighteningly cynical and self-perpetuating. Government policy is one of the few mechanisms that has the possibility to address (if not fix) systemic inequality. And I think there's broad agreement across the political spectrum that inequality is a problem; rather, there are disagreements about how to best address it (social welfare and regulation vs. efficient markets). This isn't ammunition…

Your perspective is "frighteningly" naïve, and typical of the left which imbues the government with the imaginary omnipotence to fix any and all problems.

  mechanisms that has the possibility to address (if not fix) systemic inequality

What evidence do you have that this possibility exists at all?

Re: New research suggests that social mobility in America may be more limited

#24

Post by whenwillitstop » Sat, Oct 08, 2016, 7:17 PM UTC

jessriedel wrote: post #16

This phenomena (that children are not statistically independent of their grandparents even when controlling for parents) has already been found to be robustly true in Europe and some eastern countries. Gregory Clark wrote a book on it that was widely discussed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Son_Also_Rises_(book) The point is that families transmit something across multiple (> 5 generations) that's responsible for…

It's genetics, why is this such a mystery? The whole point of evolution is that you pass on good traits. When people do well, they pair with other people who are good genetically, and through the generations, their children do well. Why is this such a mystery?

Re: New research suggests that social mobility in America may be more limited

#25

Post by mc32 » Sat, Oct 08, 2016, 7:18 PM UTC

jessriedel wrote: post #16

This phenomena (that children are not statistically independent of their grandparents even when controlling for parents) has already been found to be robustly true in Europe and some eastern countries. Gregory Clark wrote a book on it that was widely discussed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Son_Also_Rises_(book) The point is that families transmit something across multiple (> 5 generations) that's responsible for…

Often times people will compare with Europe when it advances their agenda, or ignore Asia if it advances their pov or just focus on America when it's convenient. Seldom will people do cross country comparisons.

So, whether your issue is guns, drugs, police brutality, censorship, inequality, bias, gender equality, etc. People tend to focus the studies in such a way to make their case and ignore things which would make things more muddled.

Re: New research suggests that social mobility in America may be more limited

#26

Post by nickff » Sat, Oct 08, 2016, 7:21 PM UTC

glup wrote: post #20

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And I think there's broad agreement across the political spectrum that inequality is a problem No, I don't think there is.

Admittedly this might be one of the white lies I tell myself in order to stomach American political discourse. Good catch.

Why must you ignore opposing viewpoints "in order to stomach American political discourse"? I find this point quite dismaying. Speaking as someone who has strong views, I think we should all strive to grant our intellectual opponents the respect we expect from them, and we should endeavor to understand their views. Ideally you would put yourself in the position where you could argue their side of the debate in a manner indistinguishable from them (according to them), only then could you claim to understand them.

Re: New research suggests that social mobility in America may be more limited

#27

Post by jimmywanger » Sat, Oct 08, 2016, 7:22 PM UTC

RodericDay wrote: post #21

jimmywanger wrote: post #8

This is inequality over generations. If you seek to remove this, you remove one of the main reasons to strive for success, the means to pass down success to your children. I don't understand what this study is advocating. Government run orphanages that raise all children so that nobody gets an advantage?

you have to weigh the removal of that incentive against the degree to which the ability to give your offspring a leg up makes the system inefficient and unappealing see Adam Smith and the Founding Fathers on eg. inheritance taxes: http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexington/2010/10/estate_tax_... > "A power to dispose of estates for ever is manifestly absurd. The earth and the fulness of it belongs to every generation,…

We're not even talking about money at this point. The study is talking about educational level of children vs. the education of parents and grandparents.

It stands to reason that highly educated parents produce highly educated children - they've been through college, probably know what to do in college wrt financial aid, and probably have more books in the house and talk about more educated things around the dinner table.

How is that ability to give your offspring a leg up going to be removed?

Re: New research suggests that social mobility in America may be more limited

#28

Post by reqctomaniac » Sat, Oct 08, 2016, 7:23 PM UTC

losteverything wrote: post #4

Anyone have a link to the complete study? I would love to know how they link 3,4 And 5 generations, being an amateur genealogist. Speaking personally, Family pressure to obtain degrees came from gggGF. But "women don't go to college." meant the females went only After their mother paid. (And could). Marrying "up" was the only obvious decision looking back on female members of our tree (from 1853-1946)

There is a link in the article - http://www.nber.org/papers/w22635.pdf

Seems like they used a PIK number created by the census bureau to track individuals and same address to create parent-child link.

Re: New research suggests that social mobility in America may be more limited

#29

Post by noobiemcfoob » Sat, Oct 08, 2016, 7:23 PM UTC

jessriedel wrote: post #16

This phenomena (that children are not statistically independent of their grandparents even when controlling for parents) has already been found to be robustly true in Europe and some eastern countries. Gregory Clark wrote a book on it that was widely discussed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Son_Also_Rises_(book) The point is that families transmit something across multiple (> 5 generations) that's responsible for…

I believe these type of statements beg the question with culture giving rise to monetary success.

Re: New research suggests that social mobility in America may be more limited

#30

Post by thucydides » Sat, Oct 08, 2016, 7:26 PM UTC

Here's a crazy thought that's illegal to think nowadays. If you want to avoid crazy, illegal thoughts, please stop reading.

Maybe - just maybe - we're not all equal cyphers at birth like we learned in school. Maybe genes are part of the reason a successful person's daughter is successful. Maybe important character traits are heritable. Maybe the 20+ years we spend being raised is less consequential to our character and intelligence than who mom and dad chose as partners.

For example: IQ is highly heritable, and IQ is positively correlated with income, employment status, military rank, having a "socially desirable" job, etc. [1] Perhaps other traits are similarly heritable and correlated with the attainment of traditional markers of success.

Studies like this one on inequality are common - and useless. They ignore the genetic confound, the possibility of genetic influence on the object of study. In this case, why not look at identical twins of rich and poor parents who were raised apart in different environments?

My own suspicion is that our social rules play some role in inequality, but genes play a much larger role than is commonly accepted.

[1] http://www.gwern.net/iq