[Magdalen] Whither Scotland?

[James Oppenheimer]

It's interesting to think how much impact genetics has over the long run.
For instance, If I were actually a descendent of Rashi, I would have his
genetic code.

How much?  Well, if we figure twenty-five to thirty years per generation,
and assume twenty to thirty generations, the amount of genetic component
may be something like one half to the twenty-fifth or thirtieth power. That
would be roughly 0.000000001 give or take.  That is not very much.

9.313225746154785e-10 for thirty generations.  This cool rendering of real
numbers is essentially the number displayed, but with the decimal point
shifting to the left ten (10!) places.  A very small number indeed.

However, if one postulates that the elite families consciously strive to
hold on to their eliteness, I suspect this all by itself would account for
a tendency of the elites to stay elite. Not even considering the superior
education and general background development the elites get...





James W. Oppenheimer
*“If you have a chance to accomplish something that will make things better
for people coming behind you, and you don’t do it, you're wasting your time
on this Earth.”  -- *Roberto Clemente

On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 8:09 AM, Jim Guthrie <jguthrie at pipeline.com> wrote:

> A bit off track on the Scot names . . . but this is interesting research
> on the influence of surnames on economic well-being as well as social
> mobility:
>
> Published by EH.Net (September 2014)
>
> Gregory Clark, The Son Also Rises: Surnames and the History of Social
> Mobility. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2014. xii + 364 pp.
> $30 (cloth), ISBN: 978-0-691-16254-6.
>
> Reviewed for EH.Net by Laura Salisbury, Department of Economics, York
> University.
>
> In The Son Also Rises: Surnames and the History of Social Mobility,
> Gregory Clark (UC-Davis) marshals centuries of historical data for the
> purpose of characterizing social mobility in the very long run. Examining
> the performance of individuals with historically elite surnames, he argues
> that social status is dramatically more persistent than most existing
> estimates suggest. Covering a broad range of geographic regions and
> historical periods, Clark’s findings are striking. However, I find his
> interpretation of these findings less convincing.
>
> The book is divided into three parts. In the first part, Clark introduces
> his methodology for measuring social mobility, and he characterizes
> long-term mobility in three countries:  Sweden, the United States, and the
> United Kingdom. The methodology involves identifying historically elite
> surnames from each country and, over a very long period, tracking their
> relative representation in both institutions of higher learning and in
> professions like law and medicine. In the case of modern England, he is
> able to look at wealth outcomes as well. Clark finds that, in all three
> countries, individuals with elite surnames are significantly
> overrepresented in high status positions. Using these surname groups, he
> estimates an implied rate of intergenerational persistence in each country
> to be in the range of 0.75-0.80; in contrast, conventional estimates are
> typically less than 0.60.
>
> Clark goes on to describe the mechanism that he believes to be driving
> this high degree of persistence. In brief, he argues that a person’s life
> outcomes are determined in part by what he calls “social competence,” or
> underlying ability, which is only imperfectly measured by the life outcomes
> of the person’s parents. As surnames are transmitted across many
> generations, they embed more information about this underlying competence,
> hence the greater degree of persistence measured using surnames instead of
> parental achievements.
>
> Clark suggests that underlying social competence is transmitted across
> generations genetically, or by a social process resembling the transmission
> of genes. In part 2, he presents evidence on socioeconomic persistence from
> other countries (India, China, Chile, and Japan) that he argues is
> consistent with this interpretation. In particular, he shows that
> persistence of social status is high in an endogamous society, and the
> degree of persistence is not appreciably interrupted by political regime
> change. Part 3 contains closing remarks on the future of social mobility
> within and across countries.
>
> This book contributes a great deal to the discussion on social mobility.
> One of Clark’s major insights is that studies of mobility across two
> generations — the industry standard until recently — must be plagued with
> error in the measurement of socioeconomic status, and that taking a very
> long view of mobility may yield very different results. The major roadblock
> that other researchers have encountered is that there is little data out
> there that would enable such a study. The use of surnames is an inventive
> tool for overcoming these data limitations.  Other researchers (myself
> included) are taking steps to incorporate multiple generations into studies
> of intergenerational income transmission using historical census data.
> However, very few such studies are able to look at mobility over more than
> a few generations. Clark’s book uses data spanning hundreds of years, and,
> as such, provides an entirely novel perspective on this important question.
>
> Of course, the ability to take this very long-run view comes at a cost.
> The bulk of the book centers on the transmission of professional or
> educational attainment among elite families or ethnic and religious groups;
> most studies examine income transmission for a nationally representative
> sample of families. The process of status transmission among elites may be
> fundamentally different from the process of status transmission in the
> entire population. If this is the case, it means that Clark’s results apply
> to a very particular type of persistence and should be interpreted as such.
> Clark acknowledges this possibility and argues against it; however, I think
> this is still an open question. Nonetheless, even if the book merely
> demonstrates persistence of elite status over many generations, this in
> itself is an important contribution that both academics and policymakers
> should value.
>
> What I find less convincing is Clark’s account of the mechanism by which
> social status is maintained over such long periods. He is very quick to
> attribute social status to productive individual characteristics. In
> particular, he presumes that the achievement of status markers like
> education or wealth is driven by social competence, which he suggests is
> transmitted genetically.
>
> It seems important to note that there is more to social class than
> “competence.” The tendency for elites to employ social, cultural and legal
> institutions to maintain their position is well explored in the literature
> on political economy and history. I think Clark is too quick to dismiss the
> various institutional mechanisms through which class is transmitted in the
> societies under investigation in this book. He argues that, because these
> countries have different institutions and social structures, the
> cross-country commonality in the persistence of social status is evidence
> that these institutions do not matter. I would be surprised if this
> convinces many readers. Of course, the broad collection of countries
> studied in this book makes it difficult to fully explore the unique
> institutional environments that may cause social class to persist in each
> place. Still, I do not think that Clark gives sufficient evidence for us to
> conclude that genetics are the primary driver of status persistence.
>
> Take, for example, the discussion of mobility in India (chapter 8). Clark
> shows an extremely high degree of persistence of social status, which he
> measures using surnames common to different castes; he also notes that
> endogamous marriages have long been prevalent in India. Clark takes this as
> evidence that social class is genetically transmitted — couples are more
> likely to transmit genetic traits enabling success to their children if
> both halves of the couple possess these traits. However, a compelling
> alternative explanation is that India’s relatively rigid, socially enforced
> class system precludes social mobility while simultaneously discouraging
> marriages that cross class lines. It seems impossible to disentangle
> institutional barriers to class mobility from genetics in this case.
>
> In short, Clark’s book begins a fascinating and important conversation
> about social mobility. He favors a single, unifying explanation for the
> persistence of social status across the globe, which may not convince many
> readers. Still, I think Clark’s findings are important to engage with, and
> they will factor into discussions about social mobility for years to come.
>
> Laura Salisbury studies historical marriage markets, income mobility, and
> the development and consequences of historical income support programs. Her
> publications include “Selective Migration, Wages, and Occupational Mobility
> in Nineteenth Century America,” Explorations in Economic History, 2014.
>
> Copyright (c) 2014 by EH.Net. All rights reserved. This work may be copied
> for non-profit educational uses if proper credit is given to the author and
> the list. For other permission, please contact the EH.Net Administrator (
> administrator at eh.net). Published by EH.Net (September 2014). All EH.Net
> reviews are archived at http://www.eh.net/BookReview
>
>
> To unsubscribe click here, to edit your profile click here.
> newsletternewsletter
>
> --------------------------
>
> Cheers,
> Jim Guthrie
>