Equality of opportunity does not lead to equality of results

[bump]

@DSeid

What you are labelling as Black culture is not a real thing. A single Black culture is not a real thing.

You cannot (accurately) make broad sweeping statements about that culture based on things like out of wedlock birth rates, teenage pregnancy rates, high school truancy rates, etc.

Middle class Blacks do not have those things. Black professional families do not have those things. OTOH rural whites with intergenerational poverty and who have no family members who are college educated and successful do.

Ok, maybe we can’t say that there’s a “black culture” that’s causing the issues. But there’s something going on- even the black middle class and professional families don’t have remotely similar results as equivalent white families. Meanwhile, Latino middle class families have better results than equivalent black families, but not quite as good as equivalent white families. And equivalent Asian families have better results than the equivalent white families.

Maybe that’s not “culture”, but it’s something that’s going on with respect to the race/ethnic groups. That’s what some of us are trying to get at- statistically, using the standard race/ethnic groups used in our nation, there are clear academic performance gaps that track more with the race/ethnic groups than with the economic groups or family educational attainment. That seems weird, as if it was economic/education based, you’d see groupings there, not based around their race/ethnic background. Instead, what you see is those groupings happening within the race/ethnic groups, but not across them.

[DSeid]

@bump

… But there’s something going on- …

While “outcomes” is something that needs to be defined (middle school test scores, high school test scores, college entry rates, college completion rates??) and actually controlling for those confounding variables of family educational level and family wealth (more than income) is something I’d need to be convinced has been done, it seems pretty clear that yes there is “something going on.”

But here I go back to my first entry in this thread - there are many intersectional somethings going on. Group identity impacts how others view you even when they are not consciously aware of it, it impacts how you view yourself, what is expected of you even by yourself. We are still in many ways very segregated even among the professional class and often tend to live in different neighborhoods with different schools. There are institutional factors with inertia for generations. So on and on. Outcomes shape cultures (and even more so subcultures) and cultures and subcultures shape outcomes.

Using crude and broad stereotypes of cultures is not a useful level of analysis.

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@DSeid

What you are labelling as Black culture is not a real thing. A single Black culture is not a real thing.

OK so you ARE saying that black culture doesn’t exist.

You cannot (accurately) make broad sweeping statements about that culture based on things like out of wedlock birth rates, teenage pregnancy rates, high school truancy rates, etc.

I certainly don’t think it’s because of the melanin content in their skin.

Middle class Blacks do not have those things. Black professional families do not have those things. OTOH rural whites with intergenerational poverty and who have no family members who are college educated and successful do.

Those relationships hold up after correcting for SES and at every SES level blacks have significantly higher rates of all those things.* If it disappeared or even substasntially disappeared after correcting for poverty, it would be a fairly meaningless statistic.

*It should be noted that the gap has been closing (perhaps as black women have been getting more educated and white people have been falling off the wagon).

Intergenerational poverty and intergenerational poor educational opportunities are not features of culture but they do trap people of a variety of superficial features and cultural heritages in recreating it for the generation that follows. Poor uneducated girls who see little positive path by way of education or professional development get pregnant more often be they white, Black, or brown.

Not at the same rate.

You want to compare Hispanic and Vietnamese (and other Asian) immigrants? Let’s!

I’m not sure how this link rebutts what I am saying about Vietnamese vs Hispanic. Once again, the only reason I pick these two is because Vietnamese are a refugee population and not really self selective and they come from a confucian culture while hispanics are a minority in america however they do not have the same history of slavery or genocide that blcks and american indians suffer.

Pay most attention please to the graph on that link and think on it some. (Limited as it may be by being only males.)

OK. What would you like to point out?

One thing I think we can agree on is that having parents who are educated is a big plus to a child becoming educated.

Of course. Being from a culture that values education also helps.
Some nations have higher education levels than others. It should not surprise you that nations with cultures that value education would produce more emigrants that are educated and value education?

Mexicans who immigrate to the United States are the least well educated first generation immigrants on that list, with the average educational level of foreign born (first generation) immigrants averaging grade 9.5. The next generation has the biggest jump, by 3.2 grades to 12.7. Still below the average for non-Hispanic U.S. white males, 13.8.

In comparison first generation Vietnamese come in already at roughly average for the U.S. and only increase by 1.5 grade levels intergenerationally. Above the U.S. average but not by much.

Other Hispanic groups? All make huge intergenerational jumps and most to near or above the U.S. non-Hispanic white level.

Other Asian groups? Those who come in are the highly educated. Next generation Japanese, Koreans, and Indians, all DROP intergenerationally. Yeah you select for the professional class in those immigrant populations, and their cultural values apparently result in their kids dropping DOWN.

And yet they still achieve better results than average. Like I said above, these population begin to revert to the norm within a few generations as they lose those cultural values.

And yes hispaniccs tend to gravitate towards the mean over time. The race blind UC system has been steadily increasing their hispanic population without and help from affirmative action. They are going through the normal immigrant population growth curve.

African immigrants (like Nigerians) start moderately high, 14.1, above the non-Hispanic white U.S. average, and increase slightly to 14.7 between generations.

As do the Chinese who go from 14.9 to 15.4. I can go into why this might be but if we are still looking at broad strokes culture matters.

The article does not give the huge jump between first and second generation its full due but they do put it like this:

So the issue is not what is special about Asian immigrants and their cultural values. They come in highly educated so the news is that their kids end up less so. The sole factor is that Mexican immigrants are the least well educated of all immigrant groups even huge catch-up between first and second generation they are still behind the average non-Hispanic white. Not that “non-Hispanic white” is a culture either.

Yes eventually immigrant populations start to mimic the native population as it adopts the native culture.

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@Cheesesteak

This is a narrow view of equality of opportunity. It places each opportunity a person may be offered in a box, and declares it equal if what happens inside the box is equal.

Outside of the 40 yard track itself, you may have one runner who has been getting expert training for a year and the finest gear to prepare for the test, and another runner whose parents cannot afford expert training, has never run a 40 yard dash before and is running in work boots. Taking a wider view of the opportunity, does the second kid really have a equal opportunity to make the team, or does he have to be far better than the first just to run a similar time?

Liberals are taking a wider view of “does society offer equality of opportunity” rather than the narrower view of “does this test offer equality of opportunity”.
I like using the example of my town, Montclair NJ. It’s a town with a long history of both Caucasian and African American residency. Back in the late 60’s / early 70’s the town was forced by the courts to desegregate their school system, a ruling that remains in place today. We do not have neighborhood elementary schools, all students are provided the opportunity to go to all elementary schools. White students and Black students sit side by side in every classroom, in front of the same teachers, using the same equipment, and being taught the same curriculum. This fits the narrow view of equality of opportunity.

Yet, by 3rd Grade, there is a significant Achievement Gap between these students, a gap that continues to widen rather than shrink through later grades. It’s what is going on outside the school that is driving the Gap. What Liberals are going to ask is whether or not society owes these children an effort to tackle these outside the test impediments to success.

What is it that you think is going on outside of schools?

Liberals like me do indeed try to reduce gross disparities outside the classroom like hunger and homelessness but we cannot give the poor child the same advantages in life as the rich child. The most we can do is force that rich child to run in the same race.

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@DSeid

While “outcomes” is something that needs to be defined (middle school test scores, high school test scores, college entry rates, college completion rates??) and actually controlling for those confounding variables of family educational level and family wealth (more than income) is something I’d need to be convinced has been done, it seems pretty clear that yes there is “something going on.”

But here I go back to my first entry in this thread - there are many intersectional somethings going on. Group identity impacts how others view you even when they are not consciously aware of it, it impacts how you view yourself, what is expected of you even by yourself. We are still in many ways very segregated even among the professional class and often tend to live in different neighborhoods with different schools. There are institutional factors with inertia for generations. So on and on. Outcomes shape cultures (and even more so subcultures) and cultures and subcultures shape outcomes.

Using crude and broad stereotypes of cultures is not a useful level of analysis.

They may be broad, perhaps even crude but why are they not useful for analysis? If in fact the fissure are along racial lines rather than income or wealth, do you think those differences are the result of melanin or the result of culture or something else?

[Miller]

@Damuri_Ajashi

Liberals like me …

Wait, what?

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@Miller

Wait, what?

Yes, by almost any measure, I fall on the liberal side of the spectrum. Of course i may not meet the standards of the echo chamber on this board but outside the echo chamber of the “woke” SJWs I am pretty clearly liberal. Just because i don’t condemn all conservatives as racists and nazis doesn’t mean i am a conservative.

[iiandyiiii]

@Damuri_Ajashi

Yes, by almost any measure, I fall on the liberal side of the spectrum. Of course i may not meet the standards of the echo chamber on this board but outside the echo chamber of the “woke” SJWs I am pretty clearly liberal. Just because i don’t condemn all conservatives as racists and nazis doesn’t mean i am a conservative.

I stand with you against these mostly fictional straw versions of the “woke” SJWs that appear to be so evil and stupid, whoever they are.

[Miller]

@Damuri_Ajashi

Yes, by almost any measure, I fall on the liberal side of the spectrum. Of course i may not meet the standards of the echo chamber on this board but outside the echo chamber of the “woke” SJWs I am pretty clearly liberal. Just because i don’t condemn all conservatives as racists and nazis doesn’t mean i am a conservative.

No, I just assumed you were conservative because I don’t recall you ever taking the traditionally liberal position on any subject. Mostly, I know you as that guy who doesn’t like Affirmative Action, and rrrrrrrrrrrrreally likes guns. I had you pegged as somewhere a bit to the right of someone like John Mace.

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@iiandyiiii

I stand with you against these mostly fictional straw versions of the “woke” SJWs that appear to be so evil and stupid, whoever they are.

Thank you. I don’t necessarily think they are evil.

I assume that by saying “mostly” fictional, you mean they are real.
We just disagree about how much influence they have on the Democratic scene
I would suggest that the AOCs of the world fit this category

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@Miller

No, I just assumed you were conservative because I don’t recall you ever taking the traditionally liberal position on any subject. Mostly, I know you as that guy who doesn’t like Affirmative Action, and rrrrrrrrrrrrreally likes guns. I had you pegged as somewhere a bit to the right of someone like John Mace.

I think that my liberal positions might just fade into background noise. I mean how much would you really notice that I support Roe v Wade. it’s a pretty unremarkable position to hold around here. Same with all my other liberal positions.

It’s the non-conforming views that stick out.

I don’t like guns as much as my posts would indicate. I would give up guns for life to have the 2016 election over again. I would give up the 2nd amendment entirely to redo the 2000 election. I do think that guns are a losing issue electorally.

I think affirmative action AS IT IS PRACTICED TODAY is racist.

[iiandyiiii]

@Damuri_Ajashi

Thank you. I don’t necessarily think they are evil.

I assume that by saying “mostly” fictional, you mean they are real.
We just disagree about how much influence they have on the Democratic scene
I would suggest that the AOCs of the world fit this category

There might be at least one human on Earth who calls all conservatives “racists and Nazis”. AOC, an extremely charismatic, talented, and hard-working progressive (she beat a long-time established Democrat in her 20s with very little resources!) who’s inspiring tons of young people to help others, certainly doesn’t qualify.

[Ruken]

@iiandyiiii

I stand with you against these mostly fictional straw versions of the “woke” SJWs that appear to be so evil and stupid, whoever they are.

In case you don’t want to distract from the stunning discourse here, you can learn more about those woke SJWs and their naughty ways in this thread: https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=21893891&postcount=166

[BigAppleBucky]

Equality of opportunity does not lead to equality of results

• Of course, but that is a trivial observation.

There was a great OpEd in today’s NY Times by Nicholas Kristof and Sheryl WuDunn that essentially says lack of economic opportunity is killing working class people.

Who Killed the Knapp Family?

A few snippets:

We have deep structural problems that have been a half century in the making, under both political parties, and that are often transmitted from generation to generation. Only in America has life expectancy now fallen three years in a row, for the first time in a century, because of “deaths of despair.”

**

The stock market is near record highs, but working-class Americans (often defined as those without college degrees) continue to struggle. If you’re only a high school graduate, or worse, a dropout, work no longer pays. If the federal minimum wage in 1968 had kept up with inflation and productivity, it would now be $22 an hour. Instead, it’s $7.25.

**
A Harvard sociologist, William Julius Wilson, countered that the true underlying problem was lost jobs, and he turned out to be right. When good jobs left white towns like Yamhill a couple of decades later because of globalization and automation, the same pathologies unfolded there. Men in particular felt the loss not only of income but also of dignity that accompanied a good job. Lonely and troubled, they self-medicated with alcohol or drugs, and they accumulated criminal records that left them less employable and less marriageable. Family structure collapsed.

It would be easy but too simplistic to blame just automation and lost jobs: The problems are also rooted in disastrous policy choices over 50 years. The United States wrested power from labor and gave it to business, and it suppressed wages and cut taxes rather than invest in human capital, as our peer countries did. As other countries embraced universal health care, we did not; several counties in the United States have life expectancies shorter than those in Cambodia or Bangladesh.

---

---

Equality exists only in theory. In practice it does not.

Or, as Anatole France Put it:
** The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.**

If America really wanted equality of opportunity, we’d have a 100% estate tax.

[BigAppleBucky]

Too late to edit my last post, but just saw this from Sandra Newman -

THE SEVEN SECRETS OF HIGHLY SUCCESSFUL PEOPLE

1. Private school
2. Legacy Ivy admission
3. Nepotism hire
4. Seed capital from family
5. Club memberships
6. Personal assistant, nanny, ghost writer
7. Journalists who ask, What’s your secret? And uncritically publish the answer.

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@iiandyiiii

There might be at least one human on Earth who calls all conservatives “racists and Nazis”. AOC, an extremely charismatic, talented, and hard-working progressive (she beat a long-time established Democrat in her 20s with very little resources!) who’s inspiring tons of young people to help others, certainly doesn’t qualify.

Yes she does.

I am familiar with the Crowleys and NYC did not trade up with AOC. I think her campaign was a wake up call to the Democratic machine in NYC and that’s a good thing but she has not otherwise been very impressive. Her poor grasp of facts has made for some embarrassing headlines.

[iiandyiiii]

@Damuri_Ajashi

Yes she does.

I am familiar with the Crowleys and NYC did not trade up with AOC. I think her campaign was a wake up call to the Democratic machine in NYC and that’s a good thing but she has not otherwise been very impressive. Her poor grasp of facts has made for some embarrassing headlines.

So your worry is that a single first-term congresswoman in her late 20s is not very impressive? That doesn’t seem like much of a worry. She just started on this, and she’s inspiring tons of people. In all likelihood, she’ll get better and better as she gets more and more experience. She’s way ahead of what Obama had achieved in his late 20s – and he got way smarter and way more experienced with time. If she does too at even a fraction of the same rate, we could have a national political superstar in the next decade or two.

As far as her grasp of the facts, I’m certainly not just going to take your word for it. I’ve seen her get a few things wrong, but that’s pretty normal for an outspoken politician who’s constantly speaking publicly. She certainly seems far ahead of every Republican in Congress as far as truthfulness and the facts, and at least as good as most Democrats, AFAICT.

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@BigAppleBucky

Equality of opportunity does not lead to equality of results

• Of course, but that is a trivial observation.

Of course but some people seem to think that a disparity in results means that there is a disparity in opportunity and want to correct for it by equalizing results.

There was a great OpEd in today’s NY Times by Nicholas Kristof and Sheryl WuDunn that essentially says lack of economic opportunity is killing working class people.

Who Killed the Knapp Family?

A few snippets:

We have deep structural problems that have been a half century in the making, under both political parties, and that are often transmitted from generation to generation. Only in America has life expectancy now fallen three years in a row, for the first time in a century, because of “deaths of despair.”

Isn’t that mostly the opioid crisis?

**

The stock market is near record highs, but working-class Americans (often defined as those without college degrees) continue to struggle. If you’re only a high school graduate, or worse, a dropout, work no longer pays. If the federal minimum wage in 1968 had kept up with inflation and productivity, it would now be $22 an hour. Instead, it’s $7.25.

Here is the graph for inflation. It’s more like $12

Explain to me why the minimum wage should be influenced by societal productivity?
Did the productivity growth occur in minimum wage jobs?
Or did it occur in jobs with higher automation, higher computerization and more high tech jobs?

FACT CHECK: How Much Would The 1968 Minimum Wage Be Worth Today?

We could use a bump but it’s not as bad as you that article makes it out.

**
A Harvard sociologist, William Julius Wilson, countered that the true underlying problem was lost jobs, and he turned out to be right. When good jobs left white towns like Yamhill a couple of decades later because of globalization and automation, the same pathologies unfolded there. Men in particular felt the loss not only of income but also of dignity that accompanied a good job. Lonely and troubled, they self-medicated with alcohol or drugs, and they accumulated criminal records that left them less employable and less marriageable. Family structure collapsed.

It would be easy but too simplistic to blame just automation and lost jobs: The problems are also rooted in disastrous policy choices over 50 years. The United States wrested power from labor and gave it to business, and it suppressed wages and cut taxes rather than invest in human capital, as our peer countries did. As other countries embraced universal health care, we did not; several counties in the United States have life expectancies shorter than those in Cambodia or Bangladesh.

---

---

Equality exists only in theory. In practice it does not.

What kind of equality. I don’t think equality ever even existed in theory.

Or, as Anatole France Put it:
** The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.**

Do you think America does this? I feel like we have a weak but barely adequate social safety net.

If America really wanted equality of opportunity, we’d have a 100% estate tax.

A 100% estate tax would be confiscatory. Anyone with that kind of money would move out of the country. It would only catch folks who died unexpectedly.

[BigAppleBucky]

@Damuri_Ajashi

Isn’t that mostly the opioid crisis?
Here is the graph for inflation. It’s more like $12

Explain to me why the minimum wage should be influenced by societal productivity?
Did the productivity growth occur in minimum wage jobs?
Or did it occur in jobs with higher automation, higher computerization and more high tech jobs?

FACT CHECK: How Much Would The 1968 Minimum Wage Be Worth Today? | Check Your Fact

We could use a bump but it’s not as bad as you that article makes it out.

What kind of equality. I don’t think equality ever even existed in theory.

Do you think America does this? I feel like we have a weak but barely adequate social safety net.
A 100% estate tax would be confiscatory. Anyone with that kind of money would move out of the country. It would only catch folks who died unexpectedly.

Deaths of despair, in the article, included not only drugs, but suicides, over eating bad food and other poor health habits. And in spite of more people getting health coverage under the ACA, many are still either not covered or inadequately covered and die for lack of insulin, or whatever.

Here is the graph for inflation. It’s more like $12

What graph?

Here is the link to a chart of the GNP Deflator. 4th QTR 1968 is 19.946. 3rd Qtr 2019 is 112.574. 1.6 * (112.574/19.946) = $9.03.

Why does productivity matter? You know the basic macro economic formula, right? PV=MQ (deltas) Generally, as productivity (P) goes up, the economy (Q = quantity) goes up. (Assuming the velocity of money and the money supply aren’t going nuts.) Since the size of the economy has increased as workers do more, they should be getting a bigger slice since the whole pie is bigger. But they are not.

While the data for productivity increases in minimum wage jobs almost certainly does not exist, the minimum wage can be used to gauge the share of income for all working class jobs. And without a doubt their productivity increases over 50 are above zero.

I agree that equality of opportunity is never going to happen. A 100% estate tax would come close to accomplishing that, but obviously would never happen. But we keep reducing the estate tax instead of increasing it. That just locks in a ruling class in this country.

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@BigAppleBucky

Deaths of despair, in the article, included not only drugs, but suicides, over eating bad food and other poor health habits. And in spite of more people getting health coverage under the ACA, many are still either not covered or inadequately covered and die for lack of insulin, or whatever.

Yes but isn’t it mostly related to the opioid crisis?

Isn’t the drop in out life expenctancy mostly related to the opioid crisis?

What graph?

About halfway down the page thre is a graph showing that the inflation adjusted value of all minimum wages for every year back to when we first had a minimum wage. 1968 was the high water mark. We never had a minimum wage that high in constant dollars and we’ve never had one that high since.

Here is the link to a chart of the GNP Deflator. 4th QTR 1968 is 19.946. 3rd Qtr 2019 is 112.574. 1.6 * (112.574/19.946) = $9.03.

What does that mean?

Why does productivity matter? You know the basic macro economic formula, right? PV=MQ (deltas) Generally, as productivity (P) goes up, the economy (Q = quantity) goes up. (Assuming the velocity of money and the money supply aren’t going nuts.) Since the size of the economy has increased as workers do more, they should be getting a bigger slice since the whole pie is bigger. But they are not.

I agree that workers are not getting a proportionate share of productivity gains but what makes you think that those productivity gains are due to the efforts of minimum wage workers? Are the minimum wage workers the ones driving the productivity gains?

While the data for productivity increases in minimum wage jobs almost certainly does not exist, the minimum wage can be used to gauge the share of income for all working class jobs. And without a doubt their productivity increases over 50 are above zero.

Why can the minimum wage be used as a gauge to measure how much income is going to working class jobs?

If i read the chart correctly our minimum wage right now is higher than it was during 50 of the 80 years we have had a minimum wage.

I agree that equality of opportunity is never going to happen. A 100% estate tax would come close to accomplishing that, but obviously would never happen. But we keep reducing the estate tax instead of increasing it. That just locks in a ruling class in this country.

A 100% estate tax is not only impractical, it is undesirable. And i am one of those people that are consistently firmly in favor of increasing taxes.

The estate tax cap has been doubled to 11 million. That is not dynastic wealth. The estate tax rate is 40%, it could be higher but anything much higher than that and you will see people tax planning their way around it.