Evening Must-Read: Gregory Clark: Social Mobility Barely Exists, But Let’s Not Give Up on Equality
I keep on thinking that we are going to uncover some subtle and accidental bias in the construction of the data that Greg Clark uses. Thus, I keep on thinking, we are eventually going to conclude his results are overstated. But there is no doubt that social mobility across generations is extraordinarily low–much slower than any reasonable assessment of the obvious channels for the intergenerational transmission of status advantage would lead one to expect. This suggests to me, and to Greg, that the “right to rise” in the form of formal meritocratic equality of opportunity is worth remarkably little to all except the children of immigrants. I therefore share Greg’s conclusion that compression rather than churning should be our goal to maximize any utilitarian conception of societal welfare:
…The Conservative reaction, personified by David Cameron, is to promote social mobility and meritocracy. History shows… that social mobility rates are immutable, [thus] it is better to reduce the gains people make from having high status, and the penalties from low status. The Swedish model of compressed inequality is a realistic option, the American dream of rapid mobility an illusion…. An illustration of the power of lineage even in modern England comes even from the first names children receive at birth. Naming your daughter Jade means she has one hundredth the chance of attending Oxford as a girl whose parents chose for her Eleanor. Similarly for Bradley versus Peter. Is this just the survival of sclerotic olde England, where the dead hand of the past exercises an especially powerful grip? No….
Why is social mobility so resistant to change? The reason is the strong transmission within families of the attributes that lead to social success… policy can do no more than nibble at the fringes of status persistence. Marriage is highly assortative…. Create labour market institutions that compress wages and salaries…. Structure educational systems to narrow the social rewards to those at the top…. We cannot change the winners in the social lottery, but we can change the value of their prizes.