The US has traditionally stood for a large amount of equality of opportunity, at least among whites. This implies that the success of children would depend mainly on their ability and energy, and much less so on their parents’ incomes and education. This has always been an aspiration rather than a fact, and the disturbing evidence in several studies indicates that equality of opportunity has declined by a lot during the past half century. In a recent book, Coming Apart, Charles Murray highlights this apparent fact with interesting statistics.
Another way to state what has happened during the past half century is that the degree of mobility between generations has apparently declined. The evidence suggests that children of successful parents are more likely to be successful relative to others of their own generation than was true in the first half of the 20th century. One important reason for this, I believe, is that education is now a much more important determinant of economic success than it was in 1960. Educated parents have always been much better than parents with relatively little education at preparing their children to succeed at school. This difference in preparation of children is now more important because greater education has become more necessary to succeed in the modern knowledge-driven American economy.
One approach to thinking about the causes of this trend is to divide employment opportunities into good and bad jobs. Some discussions assume, implicitly or explicitly, that the number of good jobs is rather fixed, that many individuals of different classes are capable of filling these good jobs, and hence that who gets the better jobs depends on contacts, influence, and credentials, like having a college degree. On this approach to labor markets, children of upper class parents-those with greater income and education- are more likely to succeed now than in the past because their overall education and other “credentials” have increased compared to those of children from the lower classes.
This seems to be the implicit view of the job market behind an op-ed piece this week in the NY Times by Charles Murray. In discussing what can be done to reduce the advantage of children from the upper classes, he advocates eliminating unpaid internships, eliminating the use of SAT scores in determining college admissions, and ending the ability of companies to list a college degree as necessary to apply for certain jobs. On the view that the number of good jobs is rather fixed, that many young persons of all backgrounds are capable of handling these jobs, and that having a college education does not generally signify greater knowledge and other skills, his suggestions might reduce some of the “artificial” advantages that children from the upper classes have in getting these jobs.
A very different view of the labor market is much more consistent with the substantial growth in the number of “good” jobs during the past century in every developed country. On this human capital inerpretation, the number of good jobs is not fixed but depends on the skills of workers, so that companies provide many more good jobs when the skills of workers increase. This approach implies that children from the upper classes are much more likely to get good jobs because they have much better skill sets than do children from the lower classes. This skill set includes not just knowledge and information, but also the ability to get to work on time, to start and finish tasks successfully, and to get along with colleagues. Children from the lower classes have fallen further behind in their earnings because their skill sets have fallen further behind those of children from the upper classes.
The reasons why this has happened since 1960 are not fully known, but some changes since then do seem crucial. Children from the lower classes are now far more likely to be raised by single parents than they were in 1960. Guidance from both parents is of great importance in preparing children for modern labor markets, and for all other aspects of life. Educated upper class parents start teaching their children when they are very young considerable knowledge and also other traits that are valuable when the children grow up. My colleague James Heckman has stressed that lower class children are by age 5 already considerably behind children from the upper classes, and that these differences grow as children age. As a result, children from lower classes are much more likely to drop out of high school, and much less likely to receive a college education. They end up with worse jobs, greater unemployment, and much higher crime rates.
From the prospective that the number of good jobs depends on the skills of workers, Murray’s proposals make little sense. The goal should not be to take away unpaid internships and other ways that improve learning, sometimes mainly of children from the upper classes. Rather, the goal should be to increase the skills of children from poorer, less educated, and less stable family backgrounds, so that they become more productive in the work place.
I am not suggesting this goal is easily accomplished. For example, how do we make parents more caring about their children, or reduce the tendency of women from the lower classes to have children without being married or without being in other stable relationships with the fathers of their children? The two most attractive options appear to be greater emphasis on early childhood education and better schools, but much further research is necessary. This research is more likely to be forthcoming once it is generally accepted that limited knowledge and limited other work skills are the main reasons why children from low educated and low income families have over time fallen further behind children from educated and wealthier families.
funds may not reach the need of the children who lost their home ...cause the gov doesn't work enough at this matter..
Posted by: stella@raplica handbags | 03/18/2012 at 08:59 AM
This is a serious problem. This needs to be dealt with as soon as possible.
Posted by: general insurance company | 03/20/2012 at 06:52 AM
While Murray does a good job documenting the problem, he offers few solutions. That’s unfortunate because, as Ross Douthat of the New York Times points out, Coming Apart makes a “very convincing case ... for the power of so-called ‘traditional values’ to foster human flourishing.” This is true even in “economic landscapes that aren’t as favorable to less-educated workers” as in the heyday of industrial America, the decades following World War II.
Posted by: Hauling | 03/20/2012 at 07:09 AM
Children dont get the proper funds alloted by the government.
Posted by: Calgary liquor delivery | 03/20/2012 at 07:17 AM
Discussing things like racism can open up deep wounds. When the intensity level rises, pause to let everyone take a deep breath.
If your class includes students from diverse backgrounds, you might consider providing safe space to "vent" by creating opportunities for students to do activities in segregated groups before engaging in interracial dialogue. If you choose this strategy, be sure to provide options for people who are bi- or multi-racial or who are not black or white.
Posted by: dial a bottle | 03/20/2012 at 07:25 AM
THERE’S been a lot of commentary from all sides about my recently published book, "Coming Apart", which deals with the divergence between the professional and working classes in white America over the last half century.
Posted by: Liquor Delivery | 03/20/2012 at 07:31 AM
Although there is an accepted agreement that predjudice is bad, and acceptance is good, we often as a society take this for granted and do not address it conciously. We assume that our kids will not become racists because we are not, and we bend a little as we tolerate seemingly small harmless gestures of racism.
Posted by: Calgary dog wash | 03/20/2012 at 07:37 AM
oh you said right i.e. earlier education in childhood is necessary you cave done the nice job
Posted by: vijayasingh | 03/21/2012 at 03:29 AM
Let’s redefine Human Life Cycle in a Management Sciences Perspective (Let’s adjust it according to our wishes)
http://www.youtube.com/user/professorkamran/videos
Posted by: Kamran Habib Khan | 03/21/2012 at 11:58 PM
the education is more important for the children,that is the capital of alive。
Posted by: NFL Jersey | 03/22/2012 at 06:38 AM
Your post is knowledgeable and I got interesting in info area. You also did good job in your thought process.
Posted by: vijayasingh | 03/23/2012 at 03:48 AM
"Free Law??" Fairly cryptic. ARE you just another, desperate, spammer?
Posted by: Jack | 03/23/2012 at 09:14 PM
Good post.You did a good work,and offer more effective imformation for us!Thank you.
Posted by: mlb cap | 03/25/2012 at 10:04 PM
Articulation is not possible without practice and your post is like amazing things you have mentioned. Thanks to write the article and keep writing. It’s really good.
Posted by: aditi | 04/06/2012 at 02:00 AM
"Circumvent the practical problems of being a single parent that are apparently at the center of the class divide by making sure that women CAN prevent pregnancy until they are either married or in a stable relationship." Posted by: Tandras8 | 03/13/2012 at 12:25 PM
Well, let me advise you Tandras8, I am from a very small town in MA and guess what, we had a family planning clinic. When I was 15 I went there and got my birth control, very afford-ably by the way, it was free. the Office visit was free too! So, the clinics are there, that isn't an issue; what the issue is, to me, is that there are too many of the less educated getting pregnant because of the generational welfare that they are in that tells them when they have kids they will get income. And why should I work if I'm gonna get paid anyways? The more children they have the more income they receive, and believe you me these people know how to work the system so that they get every darn penny that the government hides from those of us who do not need their damned handouts.
America was build on hard work! The first citizens of this new country had a heck of time the first few winters they were here and they worked! I don't care if you have to work at McDonald's or Wal-Mart for income, I'm tired of giving my paycheck to single parents,deadbeats and welfare recipients that just do not want to work and think that more is better as you get more money.
Posted by: dw101 | 04/12/2012 at 10:14 AM
Not only that (above)but I come from a lower middle class family. we were on food stamps for most of my childhood. at the ripe old age of 13 I was put to work in tobacco drying barns. And on Saturdays I would get overtime by working in the fields cutting and collecting the tobacco leaves. That is what lower middle class folk did when I was a kid. Some in the tobacco fields, others in the cucumber fields and when the summer job was over and we returned to school in the fall, we had part time jobs at ice cream parlors, the department store, the supermarket. We did not sit around and expect others to support us.Even today as I near 50 yrs old, I still work two jobs and have never collected any assistance because I was told that I was a very capable young white female. that may have been 25 yrs ago, but If I lost my job today and had to get unemployment, I still could not get any other type of assistance, even if they kids were still at home and in school, not because I am a white female, but because I am CAPABLE! And like many others who do not want a welfare state, hard work never hurt anyone and if you want to get somewhere better then where you've been, you've got to work to get there! And work HARDER then anybody else!
Posted by: dw101 | 04/12/2012 at 10:25 AM
You are an author full of passions and very wise, your article tell me a lot of truth
Posted by: josh freeman jerseys | 04/19/2012 at 01:40 AM
One thing that we need to clarify is our terminology in this debate.
Posted by: Beats Monster Headphones | 04/19/2012 at 04:35 AM
I agree. But the question is the time frame.
Posted by: Cheap Air Max 2010 | 04/19/2012 at 04:38 AM
Thank you for such an informative website and post on the EU debt crisis. This is particularly the case when there seems to be constant and volatile opposition in these weaker EU nations to austerity measures.
Posted by: Cheap Air Force Ones | 04/19/2012 at 04:44 AM
Will China Overtake Us? which is good news for both the US and the Chinese people.
Posted by: Nike Air Max 90 | 04/19/2012 at 04:47 AM
I found your post unique in every respect. It’s knowledgeable and informative thanks to post it.
Posted by: kriti gupta | 04/19/2012 at 05:26 AM
What you said made a lot of sense. But, think about this, what if you added a little content? I mean, I dont want to tell you how to run your blog, but what if you added something to maybe get peoples attention? Just like a video or a picture or two to get .To examine this level of your respective duty money back guarantee, visit the RATES websites as a result of seeking out it all throughout google search.
Posted by: tee shirt lacoste | 04/24/2012 at 03:53 AM
nice post,thanks .
Posted by: magasin lacoste | 04/24/2012 at 03:54 AM
building body build bodybuilder bodybuilders muscle bodybuilding protein rate form increase training contest competition nutr sport weight time trophy general.
Posted by: Schlierkamp | 05/02/2012 at 10:24 AM