WOUT ULTEE RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN THE NETHERLANDS FALSE STRATIFICATION QUESTIONS OCTOBER 29, 2015 LECTURE IN THE COURSE OF TOMAS KATRNAK ON SOCIAL STRATIFICATION AT MASARYK UNIVERSITY BRNO FALSE QUESTIONS, VAGUE QUESTIONS DESCRIPTIVE QUESTIONS, TREND QUESTIONS, COMPARATIVE QUESTIONS DESCRIPTIVE QUESTIONS AND EXPLANATORY QUESTIONS THE DEEPEST EXPLANATORY QUESTION? ISOLATED QUESTIONS, CONNECTED QUESTIONS FALSE QUESTIONS AND ERRONEOUS QUESTIONS ANOMALIES OR PUZZLES OR CONTRADICTIONS WHY THERE IS SOMETING LIKE THE FIELD OF SOCIETAL STRATIFICATION WHAT DOES A FALSE QUESTION LOOK LIKE? AT WHICH BARBERSHOP IN NIJMEGEN DOES WOUT ULTEE GET HIS HAIR CURLED? WOUT’S HAIR IS NOT CURLED IN A NIJMEGEN BARBERSHOP WOUT’S HAIR IS NOT CURLED IN ANY BARBERSHOP WOUT DOES NOT CURL HIS HAIR AT HOME OR SOME OTHER PLACE EITHER WOUT’S CURLS ARE NATURAL! A POP-SCIENCE BOOK FROM 2015 SOME QUESTIONS ARE SO VAGUE THAT THEY EVEN CANNOT BE FALSE THIS VAGUE SUBTITLE REMINDED ME OF A CONVERSATION LONG AGO WITH A DUTCH SOCIOLOGIST THIS PERSON WROTE IN 1978 A GOVERNMENT REPORT ON SOCIETAL INEQUALITIES IN THE NETHERLANDS I ASKED HER WHAT SHE TOOK AS THE MAIN QUESTIONS ON INEQUALITIES IN THE NETHERLANDS HER REPLY: WHICH PROCESSES HAVE CAUSED THE DUTCH WELFARE STATE TO FUNCTION AS IT FUNCTIONS RIGHT NOW? THE QUESTION OF THE DUTCH SOCIOLOGIST WAS VAGUE AND REMAINED SO IN HER REPORT: THE REPORT SHOULD HAVE DESCRIBED FIRST HOW THE DUTCH WELFARE STATE FUNCTIONS – OR DYSFUNCTIONS WHEN COMING TO GRISP WITH THE REPORT THE REPORT’S QUESTION IS NOT HOW MANY PEOPLE UNLAWFULLY OBTAIN WELFARE BENEFITS AND WHY THEY CHEAT THE QUESTION SEEMS TO BE: WHY IS INCOME INEQUALITY STILL SO HIGH AFTER OLDAGE PENSIONS, UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS, DISABILITY PENSIONS, ETC? AND WHY IS THE LINK BETWEEN PARENTAL BACKGROUND AND CHILD’S LEVEL OF EDUCATION STILL THE HIGHLIGHTED WORDS IN THE LAST TWO QUESTIONS INDICATE THAT THE QUESTIONS ARE VAGUE THE REPORT ADMITS THAT OVERALL INCOME INQUALITY DECLINED BUT THE REPORT DOES NOT DETERMINE TO WHAT EXTENT WELFARE ARRANGEMENTS CONTRIBUTED TO THIS THE REPORT DOES NOT STATE THAT TALENTED YOUTHS FROM A LOWER BACKGROUND STILL GO TO LOWER SECONDARY SCHOOL RATHER THAN UPPER SECONDARY SCHOOL A LINK BETWEEN BACKGROUND AND LEVEL OF UPSHOT OF THIS DUTCH EXAMPLE: AVOID VAGUE QUESTIONS BY MAKING THEM MORE PRECISE ONE VAGUE QUESTION MAY LEAD TO QUITE DIFFERENT PRECISE QUESTIONS FROM DESCRIPTIVE QUESTIONS BY WAY OF COMPARATIVE QUESTIONS TO TREND QUESTIONS DESCRIPTIONS BECOME RICHER AND RICHER PROBABLY THE FIRST QUESTION ABOUT SOCIETAL STRATIFICATION IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC: PEOPLE DIFFER IN INCOME, HOW LARGE ARE INCOME DIFFERENCES RIGHT NOW IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC? COMPARED WITH 2005, ARE INCOME DIFFERENCES LARGER NOW? TAKING THE IN-BETWEEN YEARS INTO ACCOUNT, DOES THE TREND POINT TOWARDS LARGER OR SMALLER INCOME DIFFERENCES? THE QUINTILE DISTRIBUTION OF STANDARDIZED INCOME AFTER TAXES OF PERSONS IN HOUSEHOLDS, CZECH REPUBLIC 2005-2013 1E Q 2E Q 3E Q 4E Q 5E Q 2005 9.814.417.522.236.0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 10.1 14.517.722.035.7 THE TREND ? THE POOR HAVE BECO ME RICHE R, AND THE RICH HAVE BECO ME 10.114.517.722.135.6 10.3 10.2 14.717.821.935.3 14.717.721.735.6 10.214.717.721.935.5 2011 2012 2013 10.114.617.722.035.6 10.114.717.822.035.3 10.414.717.722.035.2 SOURCE: EUROSTAT, SILC HOW DOES THE TREND IN THE QUINTILE DISTRIBUTION FOR THE CZECH REPULBIC COMPARE TO THE TREND FOR THE NETHERLANDS? 1E Q 2E Q 3E Q 4E Q 5E Q N sd ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? CZECH REPUBLIC 2007 CZECH REPUBLIC 2013 10 14 18 22 36 10 15 18 22 35 NETHERLANDS 2007 NETHERLANDS 2013 9 14 18 22 37 10 15 18 22 35 THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST QUINTILE DECREASED IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC AND MORE SO IN THE NETHERLANDS THE CZECH REPUBLIC AND THE NETHERLANDS HAVE THE SAME INCOME INEQUALITY IN 2013, THE CZECH REPUBLIC WAS A BIT LESS UNEQUAL IN 2007 SOURCE: EUROSTAT SILC DATA AFTER A CERTAIN TIME, SOCIOLOGISTS GET BORED WTH DESCRIPTIVE QUESTIONS, THEY GET BORED EVEN AFTER A SIMPLE DESCRIPTION FOR ONE COUNTRY AT ONE MOMENT HAS BEEN TURNED INTO A COMPOSITE DISCRIPTION FOR SEVERAL COUNTRIES AT SEVERAL MOMENTS SOCIOLOGISTS START ASKING EXPLANATORY QUESTIONS EXPLANATORY QUESTION: WHY DID INCOME INEQUALITY DECREASE A BIT IN BOTH THE CZECH REPUBLIC AND THE NETHERLANDS FROM 2007 TO 2013? POSSIBLE ANSWER: IN TIME OF ECONOMIC CRISES, INCOME INEQUALITIES DECREASE AND THERE WAS AN ECONOMIC CRISIS IN BOTH THE CZECH REPUBLIC AND THE NETHERLANDS FROM 2007 TO 2013 HOWEVER, IT MAY BE HELD THAT THIS EXPLANATION ONLY SCRATCHES THE SURFACE AND THAT A DEEPER EXPLANATION IS REQUIRED: WHY WOULD INCOME INEQUALITIES BECOME SMALLER IN TIMES OF ECONOMIC CRISIS? THE ANSWER TO THAT DEEPER EXPLANATORY QUESTION MAY BE TAKEN AS THE STARTING POINT FOR AN EVEN DEEPER EXPLANATORY QUESTION, AND SO ON IS THERE SUCH A THING AS THE DEEPEST QUESTION? OF COURSE NOT BUT IN THEORETICAL SOCIOLOGY CERTAIN POSITIONS MAINTAIN THAT ROCK-BOTTOM EXPLANATIONS ALWAYS SHOULD REFER TO THE RATIONAL CHOICES OF INDIVIDUALS WHILE OTHER STANDS HOLD THAT FULLY SATISFACTORY EXPLANATIONS SHOULD REFER TO EMERGENT PROPERTIES OF THE INTERACTIONS OF PERSONS MAKING UP A SOCIETY BUT THERE IS ANOTHER WAY OF GETTING FED UP WITH QUESTIONS ABOUT INCOME INEQUALITIES, EVEN WITH EXPLANATORY QUESTIONS ABOUT INCOME INEQUALITIES WHICH IDEA IS DEPICTE D HERE? FROM THE STABILITY OF A SOCIETY’S INCOME DISTRIBUTION IT CANNOT BE INFERRED THAT THE INCOME LEVEL OF ALL ITS INHABITANTS REMAINS THE SAME THERE MAY BE UPWARD MOBILITY COMPENSATED BY DOWNWARD MOBILITY AN INCOME DISTRIBUTION CALCULATED FOR MONTHLY INCOMES DISPLAYS LARGER DIFFERENCES THAN AN INCOME DISTRIBUTION FOR YEARLY INCOMES STATISTICS NETHERLANDS FOUND IN THE 1980s THAT THE DISTRIBUTION FOR AVERAGE INCOME OVER THREE YEARS SHOWS SMALLER INEQUALITIES THAN THAT OVER ONE YEAR QUESTIONS ABOUT INCOME MOBILITY ARE WORTHY OF ATTENTION A RECENT CONCRETE EXPLANATORY QUESTION ABOUT INCOME MOBILITY: WHY IS IN THE FIRST DECADE OF THE 21RST CENTURY INCOME MOBILITY FROM PARENTS TO CHILDREN SMALLER IN THE UNITED STATES THAN IN THE COUNTRIES OF HOW ARE RELIABLE DATA ON INTERGENERATIONAL INCOME MOBILITY TO BE OBTAINED? OLD TAX FILES ARE NOT THERE IN DIGITAL FORM WITHOUT A FIXED PERSONAL IDENTIFIER AND A FIXED HOUSEHOLD IDENTIFIER OLD FILES CANNOT BE LINKED TO MORE RECENT FILES PANELS HAVE NOT BEEN RUNNING FOR A LONG TIME AND ARE VERY EXPENSIVE FIND A SUBSTITUTE: QUESTIONS ABOUT OCCUPATIONAL PRESTIGE MOBILITY ARE GOOD SUBSTITUTES FOR QUESTIONS ABOUT INTERGENERATIONAL INCOME MOBILITY THE CORRELATION BETWEEN INCOME OF FATHERS AND SONS AT MORE OR LESS THE SAME AGE IN THE USA ACCORDING TO THE MICHIGAN PANEL WAS 0.15 IF THE AVERAGE OF THREE YEARS OF INCOME WAS TAKEN THIS CORRELATION WAS 0.40 THE CORRELATION BETWEEN FATHER’S AND SON’S OCCUPATIONAL PRESTIGE ACCORDING TO SURVEYS WAS 0.40 IF FATHER-SON OCCUPATIONAL PRESTIGE MOBILITY HAS BEEN DESCRIBED FOR A COUNTRY (SEVERAL COUNTRIES) AT ONE (OR MORE) POINT IN TIME EXPLANATORY QUESTIONS CROP UP AGAIN THESE EXPLANATORY QUESTIONS USUALLY REFER TO THE LINK BETWEEN PARENTAL BACKGROUND AND LEVEL OF EDUCATION AND TO THE LINK BETWEEN EDUCATION AND INCOME OR PRESTIGE HERE IS ONE SUCH DEEPER I NOW WILL SPLIT THE BIG INEQUALITY QUESTION INTO SMALLER QUESTIONS I DO SO BY USING FIRST THE WEBERIAN ASSUMPTION THAT STRATIFICATION IS MULTI-DIMENSIONAL I DO SO SECONDLY BY USING THE NEOWEBERIAN ASSUMPTION THAT THE MEMBERS OF A SOCIETY WHO HAVE MORE RESOURCES, ALSO HAVE BETTER LIFE CHANCES IT IS UP TO A STRATIFICATION RESEARCHER TO PICK OUT A CONCRETE RESOURCE AND A CONCRETE LIFE CHANCE SOCIETAL STRATIFICATION ONE MOMENT INCOME DIFFERENCES TWO MOMENTS INCOME MOBILITY INTRAGENERATIONAL INCOME MOBILITY INTERGENERATIONAL INCOME MOBILITY MULTIDIMENSIONAL SOCIETAL STRATIFICATION INCOME AS ONE DIMENSION OF SOCIETAL STRATIFICATION EDUCATION AS A DIMENSION OF SOCIETAL STRATIFICATION OCCUPATIONAL PRESTIGE AS A DIMENSION OF STRATIFICATION ONE MOMENT INCOME DIFFERENCES TWO MOMENTS INCOME MOBILITY ONEMOMENT DIFFERENCE S IN EDUCATION BACKGROU ND EFFECTS ON EDUCATION FATHER-SON OCCUPATIONAL PRESTIGE MOBILITY INTRAGENERATIONAL INCOME MOBILITY INTERGENERATIONAL INCOME MOBILITY INEQUALITIES IN THE DISTRIBUTION OF LIFE CHANCES AND RESOURCES CLASS AS THE RESOURCE IN INDUSTRIAL MARKET SOCIETIES OCCUPATIONAL PRESTIGE AS A LIFE CHANCE INCOME AS A LIFE CHANCE QUINTILE SHAR ES GINI PERCEN T BELOW POVERT Y LINE INCOME MOBILIT Y CLASS MOBILITY UPGRADING, DOWNGRADING OR POLARIZATION OF CLASS STRUCTURES? FATHER-SON OCCUPATION AL PRESTIGE MOBILITY ABSOLU TE MOBILIT Y RATES RELATIV E MOBILIT Y CHANCE WHY DO SOME MEMBERS OF A SOCIETY CLIMB UP MORE THAN OTHER MEMBERS OF THIS SOCIETY? THIS QUESTION CONTAINS A LOGICAL FLAW IT IS AN ERRONEOUS QUESTION 1967 DATA WERE COLLECTED IN THE UNITED STATES IN 1962 LOOKING AT THIS PATH MODEL FOR THE STRATIFICATION PROCESS, ONE DOES NOT SEE A VARIABLE CALLED OCCUPATIONAL MOBILITY OR A VARIABLE CALLED EDUCATIONAL MOBILITY ONE SEES DOTS FOR FATHER’S EDUCATION, FATHER’S OCCUPATION, SON’S EDUCATION, SON’S FIRST OCCUPATION, SON’S PRESENT OCCUPATION BUT THERE ARE ARROWS GOING FROM DOT TO DOT, AND THERE ARE FIGURES NEXT TO THE ARROWS THESE FIGURES HAVE AS A MAXIMUM ONE, AS A MINIMUM MINUS ONE, AND IS THERE IS NO THE HIGHER THE VALUE OF THE COEFFICIENT, THE STRONGER THE DIRECT EFFECT OF, SAY, FATHER’S EDUCATION ON SON’S EDUCATION THIS IS THE SAME AS SAYING THAT IF THE VALUE IS HIGHER, THERE IS LESS EDUCATIONAL MOBILITY THE SAME FOR ALL OTHER ARROWS, SAY THE EFFECT OF FATHER’S OCCUPATIONAL PRESTIGE ON SON’S OCCUPATIONAL PRESTIGE OR FATHER-SON OCCUPATIONAL MOBILITY THE DIRECT EFFECT OF FATHER’S EDUCATION ON SON’S EDUCATION IS 0.310 THE DIRECT EFFECT OF FATHER’S OCCUPATION ON SON’S CURRENT OCCUPATION IS 0.115 HOW IS THIS IN OTHER COUNTRIES? THE FIRST PATH MODEL FOR THE STRATIFICATION PROCESS TO APPEAR IN THE LITERATURE WAS FOR CZECHOSLOVAKIA THE MACHONIN GROUP COLLECTED DATA IN 1967, AND THE BOOK CAME OUT DURING ‘’THE SPRING’’ IN CZECHOSLOVAKIA THERE WAS MORE OCCUPATIONAL MOBILITY, WITH A COEFFICIENT OF ONLY 0.019 BUT LESS EDUCATIONAL MOBILITY, WITH A COEFFICIENT OF SAFAR IN THE 1968 MACHONIN VOLUME REPRINTED IN ENGLISH IN QUALITY AND QUANTITY 1971 THERE IS AN ARROW MISSING WHICH ONE? THAT PATH IS .24 EVERYTHING YOU ALWAYS WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT MOBILITY WITHIN A SOCIETY IS IN PATH MODELS OF PROCESS OF STRATIFICATION ANY CORRELATION INVOLVING A MOBILITY SCORE MAY BE REWRITTEN AS A FORMULA INVOLVING BASIC CORRELATIONS SO, THE CORRELATION INVOLVING A MOBILITY SCORE DOES NOT TELL ANYTHING NEW INDEED, IT MAY PROVIDE COMPLETELY MISLEADING INFORMATION, MISLEADING IN THE SENSE THAT THE CORRELATION INVOLVING A MOBILITY SCORE TELLS AGAINST SOME HYPOTHESIS, WHILE THE SIMPLE CORRELATIONS FOUR TYPES OF QUESTIONS INVOLVING MOBILITY AS A DIFFERENCE SCORE: HOW IS IT POSSIBLE THAT PEOPLE WITH A FATHER WITH A HIGHER OCCUPATION, ALWAYS DISPLAY LESS INTERGENERATIONAL UPWARD MOBILITY? IF A PERSON’S FIRST JOB IS HIGHER THAN THAT OF THIS PERSON’S PARENTS, IS THE LATER JOB OF THIS PERSON HIGHER THAN THIS PERSON’S FIRST JOB TOO? IF FATHER’S OCCUPATION IS HIGHER, DOES THE SON HAVE MORE INTERGENERATIONAL UPWARD EDUCATIONAL MOBILITY? HAVING FOUND THAT INTERGENERATIONAL DO UPPER CLASS PERSONS HAVE HIGHER CHANCES OF UPWARD MOBILITY THAN LOWER CLASS PERSONS? THIS QUESTION IS ERRONEOUS, FOR UPPER CLASS PERSONS THERE JUST IS NO ROOM ABOVE WHERE THEY ARE THE CORRELATION BETWEEN A PERSON’S STATUS SCORE AT ONE MOMENT AND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PERSON’S LATER SCORE AND THAT EARLIER SCORE IS BY DEFINITION NEGATIVE BOUDON’S 1973 EDUCATION, OPPORTUNITY AND SOCIAL MOBILITY: ANDERSON FOUND THAT FATHER-SON EDUCATIONAL MOBILITY MAKES FOR ONLY LITTLE FATHER-SON OCCUPATIONAL MOBILITY, AND BOUDON CALLED THIS THE ANDERSON PARADOX BOUDON SOLD THE ANDERSON PARADOX AS A WORTHWHILE PUZZLE FOR STRATIFICATION SOCIOLOGY HOWEVER, THE ANDERSON PARADOX AMOUNTS TO AN ERRONEOUS QUESTION WHY DOES EDUCATIONAL MOBILITY MAKE FOR SO LITTLE OCCUATIONAL MOBILITY? ACCORDING TO DUNCAN THE LOW CORRELATION BETWEEN EDUCATIONAL MOBILITY AND OCCUPATIONAL MOBILITY IS NOT SURPRISING AT ALL THE SIMPLE CORRELATIONS ARE NOT PERFECT AND BY SUSTRACTING ORIGINAL SCORES, ALL ERRORS WIND UP IN THE DIFFERENCE SCORES MAKING FOR EVEN LOWER CORRELATIONS BETWEEN DIFFERENCE SCORES THAN BETWEEN ORIGINAL SCORES ARE THERE PUZZLES IN THE FIELD OF SOCIETAL STRATIFICATION? AT LEAST THERE WAS ONE GUIDING RESEARCH FROM THE 1960s ON WHY DID SOCIETAL INEQUALITY INCREASE WITH MAJOR ADVANCES IN SUBSISTENCE TECHNOLOGY, BUT WHY DID SOCIETAL INEQUALITY DECREASE WITH THE SHIFT FROM AGRICULTURE TO INDUSTRY? ADVANCES IN SUBSISTENCE TECHNOLOGY AS A RULE MAKE THE BALANCE OF THE MEANS OF POWER (RESOURCES) MORE UNEQUAL, BUT IT DOES NOT DO SO IN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES AND IT DOES NOT DO SO IN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES BECAUSE OF A SHIFT IN SOCIETAL IDEOLOGY THERE WAS A SHIFT FROM THE IDEA THAT THE STATE IS PRIVATE PROPERTY OF THE RULERS TO THE IDEA THAT THE STATE IS DERIVED RESEARCH FINDING: THE MORE YEARS AN INDUSTRIAL COUNTRY HAS HAD GENERAL SUFFRAGE FOR COMPETITIVE ELECTIONS, THE SMALLER THE INCOME DIFFERENCES FINDING: THE MORE YEARS AN INDUSTRIAL COUNTRY WITH GENERAL SUFFRAGE AND COMPETITIVE ELECTIONS HAS BEEN RULED BY SOCIAL-DEMOCRATIC PARTIES, THE SMALLER THE INCOME DIFFERENCES COMMUNISM DID NOT HAVE COMPETITIVE ELECTIONS HYPOTHESIS: STRONG ANTI-RIGHT LIMITS ON ELECTORAL COMPETITION WOULD SHIFT THE BALANCE OF THE MEANS OF POWER TOWARDS THE PERSONS WITH LOWER INCOME, THEREBY MAKING FOR SMALLER INCOME DIFFERENCES FINDING: INCOME INEQUALITIES UNDER LATER COMMUNISM THE NEW PUZZLE RIGHT NOW WE ARE 25 YEARS AFTER THE BERLIN WALL WAS OPENED AND THE IRON CURTAIN WAS LIFTED WHAT HAS HAPPENED WITH INCOME DIFFERENCES IN THE VARIOUS COUNTRIES OF THE WORLD? RISING INCOME DIFFERENCES IN THE UNITED STATES SINCE THE EARLY 1970s IN THE UNITED KINGDOM SINCE THE MID 1970s IN SWEDEN SINCE ABOUT 1980 IN THE NETHERLANDS SINCE ABOUT 1985 IN MOST POST-COMMUNIST SOCIETIES SINCE THE EARLY 1990s THE EARLY ANSWER: SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC PARTIES ARE CONTINUALLY LOSING ELECTIONS THE GLOBALISATION HYPOTHESIS AS THE LATER ANSWER: WORLD TRADE AGREEMENTS LIMIT THE POSSIBILITIES OF SOCIAL-DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENTS TO LOWER INEQUALITIES PIKETTY 2014 (BACK TO ENGELS 1845 AND MARX 1867) WHY WAS THE LONG-TERM TREND TOWARDS MORE WEALTH INEQUALITY IN THE RICHEST COUNTRIES OF THE WORLD INTERRUPTED IN THE FIRST DECADES AFTER WW2? UNDER WHICH CONDITIONS DOES THE LONG TERM TREND TOWARD HIGHER RETURNS TO CAPITAL COMPARED TO LABOUR AND EDUCATION IMPLY A TREND TOWARDS LARGER INCOME DIFFERENCES AND LARGER INEQUALITIES IN NEXT WEEK: AN UPDATED AND A FULLY NEO-WEBERIAN ARTICULATION OF THE PROBLEM OF SOCIETAL STRATIFICATION INEQUALITIES IN THE DISTRIBUTION OF RESOURCES AND LIFE CHANCES ONE-MOMENT AND ONEPERSON DISTRIBUTIONS PERCENT BELOW POVERTY LINE OPENNESS / CLOSURE QUINTILE SHARES TWO MOMENTS MOBILITY WHO MARRIES WHOM? (CONNUBIUM) WHO IS FRIENDS WITH WHOM? (CONVIVIUM) ABSOLU TE MOBILIT Y RATES RELATIV E MOBILIT Y CHANCE ABSOLUTE HETEROGA MY RATES RELATIVE HETEROGA MY CHANCES