HOW EQUAL IS EQUAL?

There is a generally held myth that is very hurtful to those Americans who find themselves earning incomes in the lower two fifths of all earners. The myth is that America has a meaningful level of economic mobility that justifies it being considered a nation of equal opportunity. The myth is sustained by the relatively small number of cases that can be used to support it. That is, some poor people do become rich. But let us look at this myth and see what some of the numbers indicate is the real situation.

One thing a person who looks into this issue of persistent poverty finds out is that education is central to any chance at breaking out of the “poverty trap.” The economist, Joseph E. Stigliz,¹ reports that in the US, there is a stronger relation not only between parents' educational level and their children's educational level, but their economic and “socio-emotional” outcomes than in just about any other advanced nation. As I have already reported in this blog, the level of inequality is higher in the US than these other nations and this strong relation between parental education and their off-springs' success bodes that future inequality will only get worse. Of course, all of this brings into question: given the current economic conditions in the US, just how much opportunity exists?

Stiglitz adopts a definition of equality as a national economy in which 20% of those in the bottom fifth will not see their offspring escape that lowest level of income. The nation that comes closest to this ideal figure is Denmark, where only 25% of the poorest see their children remain poor. Reputed class-conscious Britain can boast a 30% figure. In America the figure is 42% or, stated more positively, 58% of those in the bottom fifth will see their children escape the bottom quintile level of income. But before you believe this is still a good rate in bettering their lot, let me point out that about two-thirds of those born into the bottom fifth will still live their lives in the bottom 40% of wage earners – those represent households making roughly $40,000 a year or less. These figures indicate an economy that does not provide much equal opportunity as measured either in absolute terms or as compared to other advanced economies.

Given these figures, what should civics students make of them? The first point a civics teacher would attempt to make clear is that ever since the nation's origin, we have had a concern for equality. But this promotion of equality was never one that reflected what would become associated with Marxian thought. That is, our support of equality had more to do with equal condition before the law and equality in terms of economic opportunity. It did not set equal results – people generally living within the same economic and social standing – as the aim. It simply set out to strive for a social reality in which everyone had an equal shot at making it financially and the government would treat everyone the same. For example, if you break the law you should be punished in similar fashion to everyone else regardless of how rich you are or whom you might know. This ideal is so ingrained as a cultural belief that chances are a teacher would need only to remind students of this national bias in order to provide context for what would follow. Then comes the question: what exactly does it mean to have equal opportunity? And once that is determined, how do you know a nation provides equal opportunity? The standard stated above – full equal opportunity exists when only 20% of those in the bottom quintile in income will have their children remain in the bottom quintile – is provided by the Economic Mobility Project. This project is funded by the Pew Charitable Trust and is well respected. But students might be given the challenge of devising their own way of measuring economic opportunity. They might take into account what people in general consider equal opportunity to be by devising and administering an appropriate survey questionnaire to adults they know. The next stage in an inquiry might have students apply their adopted or devised measure to American realities and see how much Americans actually believe, as indicated by the levels of economic mobility, in equal opportunity. This can be analyzed by looking at what really materializes in terms of both economic conditions in the US and how public policy functions in any national effort to establish equal opportunity. Are we a nation that simply pays lip service to this ideal? How have we done historically; have we been better in providing equal opportunity in the past than today, and does existing governmental policy really address providing opportunity or does it offer counterproductive effects? For example, recently Rush Limbaugh, a famous conservative pundit, argued that welfare provides disincentives to people working and that, therefore, acts to inhibit meaningful opportunity. A simple “Google” review indicates that a lot of scholastic and journalistic interest has been dedicated to this very controversial assertion. Again, these concerns can be used to provide questions students can research.

What we do know is that poverty rates have increased since the beginning of our most recent recession. We also know that median wage has decreased during these last few years. And we know that the fate of the middle class in America has been deteriorating since the seventies. The question of whether our nation is living up to our commitment to establish and maintain meaningful economic opportunity has become and continues to be a vibrant concern. Our students should become proficient in talking and deliberating about this important issue. As a federalist based system, equality is a vital and legitimizing ideal for how we organize our governance.

1Stiglitz, J. E. (2012). The price of inequality: How today's divided society endangers our future. New York, NY: W. W. Norton and Company.