If You Care About Social Mobility, You Need to Let Markets Work

A recurrent trope in American politics is that the American dream—the ability to go from rags to riches—is dead (or dying). That trope has been made so many times before that its current iteration is not particularly novel. But thanks to a couple of recent advances in data science, it might become so again.

The first is the “Great Gatsby Curve”—a term popularized by Miles Corak—which shows the link between a country’s income inequality and the likelihood of its residents to experience upward mobility. Being born into wealth means you can easily tap into your family’s financial resources to grasp opportunities that might otherwise be out of reach.

Conversely, those from poorer backgrounds are restricted by their limited means. Consider the example of education as a pathway to earning more than one’s parents. If the financial burden of education weighs more heavily on the poor due to the need of forgoing years of income and having minimal savings, then the wealthy are in a better position to invest in their education. Ergo, charts representing the relationship between income inequality and income mobility across generations tend to show a strong correlation. Since American inequality is believed to be on the rise, mobility must be waning.

The second is from the work of Raj Chetty (and many others who teamed up with him). Creating a rich dataset of mobility of individuals in the United States across generations, Chetty argued that social capital—the connections we share with each other—is a crucial determinant of mobility. As measures of social capital appear to be falling since the 1970s, it is easy to make the connection to falling intergenerational income mobility (something that Chetty himself has documented).

Both of these schools of thought, however, fail to consider one of the recurrent counters made regarding the failing American dream: that institutions matter. Multiple scholars have emphasized that intergenerational mobility can be heavily affected by institutions that encourage entrepreneurship, that increase the returns to efforts and that secure the rights to the fruits of those efforts. This is “economic freedom,” and it acts as a lure that motivates attempts at jumping up the income ladder. Simultaneously, economic freedom also entails that incumbent firms and businesses should not be protected from competition or be given special privileges. This amounts to stating that no “legalized” castes or privileges that cement existing socioeconomic statuses and limit intergenerational mobility should exist. The ability to contest incumbent players, which is what economic freedom secures, is thus a key ingredient of greater intergenerational income mobility.

This frequently stated counter has not been updated to respond to the newest iteration of the “American dream is dying” argument. In a recent working paper with Alicia Plemmons and Justin Callais, I decided to make such an update to account for the great data advances of the last decade. More specifically, we used the data assembled by Raj Chetty and his team in conjunction with the estimates of economic freedom in the different metropolitan areas in the United States. Our goal was simple: set up a horse race between economic freedom and the other variables and see which horse runs the fastest.

Our results show that economic freedom is a potent determinant of intergenerational income mobility. A person born in the economically freest quartile of metropolitan areas experiences between 5 and 12 percent more intergenerational income mobility. This effect is systematically larger than the effect of income inequality (something that echoes earlier work using international data by Justin Callais and myself). It is also stronger than all but one of the measures of social capital that Raj Chetty and his team used.

It could well be true that the American dream is dying as many pundits claim. Even though I personally doubt it, the remedy remains the same as it was before: Bet on the “economic freedom” horse.

https://catalyst.independent.org/2023/11/07/social-mobility-markets-work/

********************************************************

Christian Wedding Photographer Who Refused to Celebrate Same-Sex Marriage Wins Settlement

Virginia state officials agreed to settle a lawsuit with a Christian wedding photographer after he refused to use his business to celebrate same-sex marriage, according to a press release.

Bob Updegrove filed a lawsuit against then-Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring in September 2020 after a state law required him to affirm same-sex marriage in his photography business, according to court documents.

Alliance Defending Freedom, the nonprofit public interest law firm representing Updegrove, announced Monday that the state had agreed to settle, following the recent Supreme Court decision in 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, which determined that the government cannot compel a business owner’s speech.

“Free speech is for everyone. As the Supreme Court recently affirmed in 303 Creative, the government can’t force Americans to say things they don’t believe,” Johannes Widmalm-Delphonse, counsel for ADF, said in the press release. “This victory for Bob underscores how the 303 Creative decision will protect countless Americans from government censorship and coercion. The U.S. Constitution protects his freedom to express his views as he continues to serve clients of all backgrounds and beliefs.”

The Virginia Values Act prohibits businesses from discriminating based on sexual orientation, and Updegrove argued in the lawsuit that the law aims to “regulate Bob’s views—that marriage should be between a man and a woman—out of existence.” He claimed that under the law, he would be unable to publicly state anywhere on his website or business social media that he believes marriage is between a man and a woman, ultimately violating his right to freedom of expression under the First Amendment.

A district court ruled in March 2021 that while the case “creates ‘the odor of a case or controversy’ … the scent is not strong enough” for the court to rule in its favor, according to the opinion, forcing Updegrove to appeal. However, the Supreme Court ruled in June 2023 that the state of Colorado could not force Lorie Smith, a Christian web designer, to make websites celebrating same-sex marriage and chill her right to free speech.

As a result, the state agreed to settle to “avoid further costs and expenses of litigation,” according to the court documents.

“We commend [Attorney General Jason Miyares, who defeated Herring in November 2021 assumed the AG’s post after the lawsuit was filed] and his office for agreeing that state officials cannot punish Bob for exercising his First Amendment rights,” Widmalm-Delphonse said in the press release.

The AG’s office and the Office of Civil Rights did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

https://www.dailysignal.com/2023/11/06/christian-wedding-photographer-who-refused-to-celebrate-same-sex-marriage-wins-settlement

**********************************************

How a Working-Class Coalition Is Remaking the Republican Party

Patrick Ruffini is a Republican pollster with a reputation for deciphering data and spotting trends. His new book, “Party of the People: Inside the Multiracial Populist Coalition Remaking the GOP,” takes a deep dive into one of the biggest political realignments of our lifetime.

Ruffini spoke with The Daily Signal about the demographic changes that are rapidly transforming America’s two biggest political parties—and what it means for the 2024 presidential election and beyond.

“When I first started in politics, Republicans had this reputation as being the country club party,” Ruffini said. “Democrats had this reputation as being the party of the people, the party of the working class.”

He added, “Flash forward almost 20 years, and that trend has completely almost reversed.”

Recent election results show the GOP’s gains with working-class voters were not an aberration or confined to one candidate. Republicans today are increasing their support among non-college voters—the type of working-class Americans who once loyally supported Democrats.

“The parties used to be defined by income and now they’re defined by education,” Ruffini said. “I argue that that’s good news for Republicans in the sense that you have many more working-class, non-college voters in the country than you have college-educated voters.”

The breakdown for 2024, according to Ruffini, is about 60% non-college voters compared to 40% who have a college degree. This, he surmises, will provide the GOP with an advantage in upcoming elections. Factor in Republican gains with Hispanic and black voters, and you have a different GOP from the one of yesteryear.

Most surprising to Ruffini, however, is how the political alignment happened.

“I did not expect Donald Trump to be the one who was able to pull this off, but my credit goes to him for getting us to this point,” Ruffini said.

“The fact that he was able to expand the Republican coalition first to include the Rust Belt states and dramatically expand Republican performance among working-class voters in 2016, and then in 2020, almost defying the odds and winning re-election with the help of more Hispanic voters and continued progress among black voters,” he added. “It really has upended what we think the two parties are about.”

Ruffini began writing “Party of the People” after observing the trends of the 2020 election, and he hopes it serves as a helpful guide for readers to understand the realignment.

https://www.dailysignal.com/2023/11/07/how-a-working-class-coalition-is-remaking-the-republican-party/

************************************************

UK: Why won’t Gary Lineker call out the fascism of Hamas?

One of the most curious things following Hamas’s massacre of the Jews on 7 October was the silence of Britain’s fascism-spotters. You know these people. They see fascism everywhere. Everything from a fiery speech by a Tory politician to millions of ‘gammon’ going out to vote for Brexit reminds them of the 1930s. The minute someone says something they don’t like or votes for a thing they disapprove of, they’re logging onto Twitter to wail: ‘Is this Nazism?!’

It’s striking that someone so interested in contemporary events that echo the evils of the 30s has had so little to say about the worst anti-Jewish pogrom in 75 years?

And yet when Hamas carried out the worst assault on Jews since the Holocaust, the fascism-spotters were nowhere to be seen. In the wake of that unconscionable act that really did echo the 1930s, the virtue-signallers just stopped signalling. You and me saying ‘We hate the EU’ gets them weeping about the rebirth of the 30s, but the sight of a marauding gang of anti-Semites slaughtering Jewish men, women and children seemingly does not.

I’m afraid to say that Gary Lineker is a classic example of the centrist dad who wrings his manicured hands over ‘fascism’ yet falls strangely silent when actual fascism occurs. Lineker caused a stink earlier this year when he accused Suella Braverman of using ‘language that is not dissimilar to that used by Germany in the 30s’. Braverman’s linguistic crime was to say ‘we must stop the boats’. Given his keen interest in things that are ‘not dissimilar’ to 1930s Germany, Mr Lineker must have been all over the horrific anti-Jewish pogrom of 7 October, right? Oddly, no.

On the day of the atrocity itself, there wasn’t so much as a whisper about it, or about the 1930s, on his Twitter page. He did, however, find time to congratulate Spurs for getting to the top of the league and pat William Dalrymple on the back for his ‘great podcast’. How about the following day, when the dust was settling on the most violent anti-Jewish event since the death camps? Again, not a peep from our esteemed worrier about the 1930s. Instead he spent the day retweeting praise for his podcast The Rest Is Football.

Finally, on 9 October, he said something. A thundering denunciation of this terrible assault that was ‘not dissimilar’ to the violence of the thirties? A stinging critique of Hamas for its ‘immeasurably cruel’ behaviour (the words Lineker used to describe Braverman’s anti-boats policy)? Nah, he retweeted a link to a new episode of The Rest is Politics podcast about the Israel-Hamas conflict. The Rest is Politics, of course, is produced by Lineker’s pod empire, Goalhanger Productions.

Now, I’m not one of those people who thinks that just because someone tweets about things that he has to tweet about everything. In fact, I would prefer that Lineker only tweeted about football. And that everyone at the BBC whose wages are paid by us would stop spouting their milquetoast meanderings on world events. And yet it is striking, is it not, that someone who is so interested in contemporary events that echo the evils of the 30s has had so little to say about the worst anti-Jewish pogrom in 75 years?

Lineker would perhaps argue that he is unable to comment on the October 7 attacks after the BBC updated its social media guidelines for presenters earlier this year. But his latest intervention into the Israel-Hamas issue raises more questions about his selective moralism. He has locked horns with Braverman again, this time over her criticisms of the ‘pro-Palestine’ marches taking place every weekend. She says they’re ‘hate marches’, he says they’re not. ‘Marching and calling for a ceasefire and peace so that more innocent children don’t get killed is not really the definition of a hate march’, he tweeted. But that isn’t all that’s happening on these marches, is it Mr Lineker? You must know that.

We’ve seen mobs of men cry for ‘jihad’ (i.e. holy war) against the State of Israel. People have been arrested for chanting ‘God’s curse be upon the Jews’ and for glorifying the paragliding terrorists who descended upon southern Israel to murder Jews. We’ve seen people celebrating historic anti-Jewish massacres. We’ve seen Zionism being denounced as the ‘New Nazism’ – Jew-baiting dressed up as political critique. Some British Jews have said they avoid central London when these marches are taking place. Who should we trust on whether or not a public gathering feels hateful – our Jewish citizens or a former footballer? What a stickler.

Open cries for more violence against the Jewish state. Jewish schools temporarily shutting down to protect pupils’ safety. A Holocaust museum desecrated with graffiti saying ‘Free Gaza’. A massive hike in anti-Semitic attacks. Is any of this reminding you of the 1930s, Gary? Explain to us, please, why Suella Braverman’s immigration-control policies made you think of Nazi Germany but the horrendous fallout from Hamas’s act of evil seemingly does not. This goes for all those centrists and leftists who’ve spent the entire Brexit and Trump era fretting over fascism’s return: why so quiet now?

I believe we are witnessing the twilight of the virtue-signallers. The pompous ‘anti-fascist’ posturing of the middle-class left, of both rich centrists and overeducated radicals, now stands starkly exposed. These people love the moral pantomime of damning their political foes as ‘fascists’, but they run away from the generational moral challenge posed to us all by the barbarism unleashed on the Jewish people on 7 October. Their self-satisfied preening is worse than useless in the face of a growing global hatred that really is ‘not dissimilar’ to the 1930s.

https://www.spectator.com.au/2023/11/why-wont-gary-lineker-call-out-the-fascism-of-hamas

****************************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*****************************************