One of the most interesting sections of the book focuses on the British debate over the poll tax. This is a notoriously forfeitary tax, or lump-sum tax, as economists say it—one pays the same sum in pounds sterling whether one is rich or poor. It was imposed by Margaret Thatcher in 1989–1990 in place of the old rates tax, which was a proportional tax levied on housing, with the sum due increasing in rough proportion to the value of one’s home. The poll tax therefore resulted in a sharp tax hike for the poorest taxpayers, and a drastic drop for the richest ones. To say that this reform was unpopular is to put it mildly: urban rioting and parliamentary insurrection ensued, while the Iron Lady stubbornly dug in her heels until she was finally voted out of power by the Conservative MPs in November 1990 and quickly replaced by John Major, who promptly abolished the poll tax.
Why the Trans-Pacific Partnership Is Nearly Dead
But when I ask my students why they refused to accept anything less than $250 and thereby risked getting nothing at all, they say it’s worth the price of avoiding unfairness.
.. The American economy looks increasingly arbitrary, as CEOs of big firms now rake in 300 times more than the wages of average workers, while two-thirds of Americans live paycheck to paycheck.
The North-South Divide on Two-Parent Families
That conventional wisdom stems from the fact that politically conservative states, for all their emphasis on family values, have long had high divorce rates. In the Northeast, California and Illinois, divorce is notably low. As a result, some researchers have argued that families in blue states are more stable than families in red states.
.. So, however, has marriage, while single parenthood — and the number of children who never live with both parents — has risen sharply. Marriage and single parenthood don’t break down along the same red-blue lines that divorce does.
Recruitment, Resumes, Interviews: How the Hiring Process Favors Elites
But if you look at how these firms’ recruiting processes actually work in practice now, the chances of getting into one of these firms from what’s called a non-targeted school is extremely low. And this is because these firms starting around the 1980s shifted from a hiring system in which people were hired in a one-off fashion through informal networks to really really focusing on on-campus recruitment where firms hire directly out of the graduating classes and oftentimes earlier from elite universities.
.. But in terms of inequality, what ends up happening is if you’re not at one of those schools, the only way to really get into one these firms is to have a personal connection to someone who already works there.
.. But what’s wrong with it is that I don’t think people understand the extent to which elite university admissions are biased against individuals from lower-income backgrounds. We have this narrative that they really are the most rigorous admissions processes that cherry pick the best and the brightest irrespective of social background—and that’s actually pretty false. Some of the things that matter most in getting into an elite college—whether it’s your SAT score, your extra-curricular participation, the actual high school you attended—are so strongly influenced by social class that you’re not necessarily getting the best and the brightest. You’re getting good and bright people who come from the most privileged backgrounds.
.. What kind of social skills are elite companies looking for?
Rivera: I think a lot of what they’re looking for when they’re looking for social skills—or “polish”—is conformity to this particular way of interacting that’s very common in upper-middle-class, upper-class social circles. They’re really really looking for, in the interview setting, not only someone who presents well—in terms of someone who’s dressed professionally, who makes eye contact, who seems confident (because those tend to be social skills that are valued even if you go across class), but they’re looking for conformity to these very specific ideals, this delicate balance between being a good listener, and following instructions and what the interview has to say, but also subtlety taking charge.
.. Rivera: Yeah, interviewers really look for “personal passion.” The idea of passion was so central to a convincing story, things like obligations were kind of a buzzkill. They wanted something that had more of a personal touch, and it was fueled by inner drive instead of any type of external demand—whether it’s a family member you have to take care of, or you have to pay your tuition bills, and so forth. That was not as valued.
.. we lack sophisticated language for distinguishing and talking about class versus race. What ended up happening in the interview is that some, not all, but some interviewers assumed that minority candidates who were racial minorities came from disadvantaged backgrounds.
.. Rivera: In terms of schools … schools are crucial because they really do shape the candidate pool into these jobs. I think that adopting less class-biased admissions criteria at elite universities would be really really important. I think giving less weight to extracurricular activities and the specific high school someone attended could be an important step. I also think, and other researchers show, that if you rely more on class ranks than SAT scores you’ll probably help level things out a little bit. The SAT is great at many things, but it’s also a huge engine of inequality.
.. I think another thing that could be done is blinding evaluators, both in resume screens and in interviews, to candidates’ extracurricular activities. That’s because extra-curricular activities are a huge source of class inequality whether it’s in university admissions or in interviews.