Just a few decades ago, more than 90 percent of 30-year-olds earned more than their parents had earned at the same age. Now it's only about 50 percent. What happened -- and what can be done about it?

United States


00:00:00Freakonomics radio is supported by swell investing an impact investing platform invest in high-growth companies that are solving today's biggest challenges like clean water disease eradication and renewable energy claim your $50 bonus through swell investing.com freak Gillette on demand delivering you the quality razors you need without the hassle of long-term commitments choose from several different razors and adjust your order as often as you like pain and how often you shave it sounds pretty easy right learn more at Gillette on demand. Com
00:00:37let's start today with a pop quiz
00:00:42in 1970 what percentage of 30 year olds in America earning more money than their parents at earned at that age adjusted for inflation of course that is number 1 and number 2 what percentage of American 30 year olds today I'll give you a second to think it over
00:01:05alright you ready for the answer the percentage of American 30 year olds in 1970 running more than their parents during 2:30 was 92% that amazing that in a nutshell is what we call the American dream and what's the percentage now
00:01:27it's somewhere around 50% which has led some people say this
00:01:37the American dream
00:01:40is dead Donald Trump's view of the American dream and his promise to revive it had a lot to do with his getting elected president according to Gallup polls before the election more than 50% of Americans saw our economic conditions worsening in case you're wondering it's not just cranky old people a pole from the Harvard Institute of politics found that nearly 50% of Millennials think the American dream is dead we went out on the streets of New York ourselves to ask people if they thought the American dream was real and achievable absolutely it's real I mean she's actually standing here in Battery Park you look it up different people from all across Nations that come to America to realize the American dream if you really work hard then you can do whatever you want in America and might be a little difficult at first you could still do it I think it's a motivator to try to achieve it
00:02:40dream is something of a mythology for a way in which to advance and have a good life under what is essentially patches to capitalist system but a country founded on exploitation put in some work you put in some sweat and you can definitely make the American dream happen while there's a lot of my family our families are refugees came to this country about 30 years ago had nothing was able to send all their kids to college was able to have a house was able to give a better future for myself and their children then they would ever have had back in Vietnam
00:03:25I love the conversations we have these days about the American dream are in political terms or theoretical terms but today on Freakonomics radio the actual unvarnished economics of the American dream which we will Define for the sake of today's conversation as this if you're born into a low-income family do you really have a shot at rising up no matter what your background is and we'll discuss why the American dream is really dead or maybe if it's just moved a bit north you're twice as likely to realize the American dream if you're growing up in Canada rather than the US
00:04:18from WNYC Studios this is Freakonomics radio the podcast that explores the Hidden Side of everything here is your host Stephen Dubner
00:04:35James truslow Adams born in 1878 to a wealthy New York family became of financier and later an author he won a Pulitzer Prize for history of New England and later read a book called The Epic of America even though it was written during the Great Depression Adams took a fundamentally bullish view of the United States his book was hugely popular and as best as we can tell it introduced the phrase the American dream Adams to find this as that dream of the land in which life should be better and richer and Fuller for everyone opportunity for each according to ability achievement the phrase caught on and not just a little bit especially among our presidents of the Bedrock of our economic success is the American dream the American dream does not come to those who fall asleep every citizen has access to the American dream they have live the American dream the American dream
00:05:35succeed or fail in the 21st century the American dream
00:05:41is dead the reason my parents came to this country was in search of the American dream that is Raj Chetty so I was born in New Delhi India and came to the United States when I was 9 years old and grew up mostly in the Midwest City is now an economist at Stanford I study issues of inequality in opportunity and how we can use economic policy to improve people's up Teddy was one of the scholar is behind the research I cited earlier about the massive drop in the share of 30 year old Americans earning more than their parents did in fact he's behind a lot of the most important research on income inequality mobility and the fragile state of the American dream his work is highly regarded by the people who give Awards he's one MacArthur genius fellowship and the John Bates Clark metal politicians admire him as well. Thank you for your participation
00:06:40been Senator Jeff sessions went ready testify to the Senate hearing on income mobility and inequality is a favorite of democrat Hillary Clinton really interesting work being done by Professor Rod Shetty and his colleagues as well as Republican Paul Ryan Economist or are others they'll tell you this is social capital city is the policymakers policymaker The Economist Economist which means he tries to be above all empirical not ideological or political one of my mission is to try to end Rex more evidence into these important policy debates because I think we're making huge investment decisions with very little knowledge about exactly what is going to work are you a political participant on Independence and so you can ride that's actually that you know sad part about this I think it's very difficult to keep yourself objective which is very important
00:07:40give me a minute important to me that I have some fun things that I think are more supportive of policies that Democrats are pushing and there are some fun things that are more supportive policies that Republicans are pushing academics I know whose work gets cited for political purposes have told me that the work is inevitably cherry-picked or cream skimmed to suit the politicians position I think while the big picture Focus might be chosen based on political views there are lots of details that matter greatly and I think science can be very useful there in addition perhaps guiding which areas we focus on affordable housing versus tax cuts versus other things
00:08:24all his influence Chevy is only 37 years old that was actually the last person in my family to publish a paper on my my parents are both in academics and have two older sisters who are bioscience Eddie went to Harvard as an undergrad but he didn't spend much time under grounding he got his Ph.D at 23 basically I sexy or PhD and didn't go to college in the sense that starting my sophomore year I actually didn't take any undergraduate classes at Berkeley than Harvard and in 2015 moved to Stanford
00:09:00you are hardly the first Economist from Harvard to go to Stanford the last 4 years it's been quite a little Exodus recently as the field of Economics is Shifting two words big data and increasing use of modern statistical techniques like machine learning to think about economic questions Stanford has tremendous strength in those areas and other fields and of course we all know that the birthplace of much of modern Computing is here in Silicon Valley at Stanford economist's in particular but social scientist more broadly have in the past few years especially just been being gobbled up by Tech firms because they to have discovered that big data is potentially exciting and number of academic the comments many of whom I'm sure you know well Moonlighting or sidelining with tech firms Uber and Facebook and on and on what about you was at was at an appeal for you to be out there and are you doing any Consulting
00:10:00sizing work on the side with these private firms are you strictly an academic Economist that is a very important Trend I myself am not doing any work with those forms directly but what I am interested in is working with the data forms like Facebook and Twitter for instance to think about social and economic policy questions so you know to give you an a concrete example I'm starting a project with my colleague Matt Jackson here at Stanford and the others at Facebook were exploring the role of social networks in an equality and trying to understand essentially whether you can Network yourself out of poverty social scientist have been interested in that sort of question for a very long time but we just haven't had the data to really investigate that question precisely from an empirical point of view and the Facebook date of course are game-changing in that respect
00:10:55a lot of Chinese research falls under the banner of something called the equality of opportunity project that is a group of Economist and other social scientist we're trying to find the most effective and efficient ways to address chronic poverty which Teddy argues is really important because the economy that for so many years facilitated the American dream for so many millions is no longer reliably doing so while modern technology and economic growth is changing the world of tremendous ways we can now do things with our cell phones that we never would have imagined 10 years ago I think unless we think carefully about social policy doesn't necessarily end up benefiting everyone there are many people for whom progress over the last 30 years hasn't really had a tremendous impact on their lives in terms of better opportunities for their kids or Better Health outcomes and so forth admits the
00:11:55American Dream worked out great for his immigrant family so would that personal motivation probably out of scientific interest on to think about whether the American dream you know truly is alive and well and what the determinants of the American dream art so how do you do that how do you measure the state of the American dream and more important how do you identify the determinants that enable one family or one kid to shoot up out of poverty While others are left behind well if you're an economist you do that with data lots and lots of data
00:12:34so did we we came at this the specific angle we took is by using the large data that we have now from administrative tax and Social Security records that we were able to see for the full population what income distributions look like for kids and for parents and so you can basically ask taking say all the kids born in America in the 1980s what fraction of the kids born to low-income families actually make it to the top of the income distribution know and you know how much energy generation Mobility is there in America
00:13:11in the US if you take say the set of children were born to families in the bottom quintile of the income distribution in the bottom V about 7/2 % of those kids make it to the top fifth of the income distribution and that number in isolation doesn't sound off the bat so bad that's right so exactly seven and a half percent is that a big numbers that are small number you know it's hard to judge an isolation so we did take to get some contacts for that I think Stephen it's useful to start first by thinking about comparisons across countries so if you look at that number and other countries where we have comparable dated like the United Kingdom for instance in the UK that number is 9% in a little bit higher not to all that much higher to go to a place like Canada or Denmark the numbers 13% or 13 and a half percent that's quite a bit higher end it's useful to Inn in thinking about these numbers 13% of big number well you have to remember course
00:14:11no matter what you do you can't have more than 20% of people in the top 20% right so the maximum value the statistic can take I think is the plausibly 20% to put in more precisely if you lived in a society where your parents Play No role at all and determining your outcomes we expect 1/5 of kids to Rise From The Bottom 20% to the top 20% and so relative to that Benchmark that upper bound if you will the 13 and a half percent rate in Canada and the seven and a half percent written us that's what that's a really big difference it's almost like you're twice as likely to realize the American dream of moving up if you're growing up in Canada rather than the US right or perhaps more precisely we should just call it the Canadian dream instead of the American dream if they're twice as good but we want to know then is why I write what makes that more possible in Canada so that's what your research is really about yes as I did
00:15:11find the factors that move that needle exactly exactly so you know that I think is kind of useful as background but there are lots of differences between Canada and the US the first of which is that Canada has less in a Quality Inn in the u.s. there's less distance between the 20th percentile in the 80th percentile in Canada relative to America which means us are you making a social pointers is a statistical Point other words it's easier to move because it's a smaller jump that's exactly right you know it from a statistical point of you one of you could have it may be the reason you say hi or upward mobility in Canada is not really so much that it is actually easier to move up in Canada but just there's it's easier to make that move because it's a shorter distance in a sense so that's one example of why I think these cross-country comparisons while they can be motivating in and of themselves it's good it's inevitably going to be very difficult to say for sure what you can learn from comparing tender to be us but I think before you don't even get to the issue of why is the u.s. different from Canada to the turns out the story even in America itself is much more nuanced within him
00:16:11there are actually a number of places that truly are land of opportunity places where kids achieved the American dream at high rates in some places like in Salt Lake City Utah or in the Bay Area something like 13% of kids are making it from the bottom V to the top 50 turns out in the center of the country like in Iowa for example in many areas by while you see more than 15 or 16% of kids making it from the bottom to the top V so higher than the numbers we see in the data for Canada and for Scandinavian countries but at the other end of the spectrum you take places like Atlanta Georgia or Charlotte North Carolina or much of the southeast of the US and you have rates of Opera Mobility below four and a half percent lower than any country for which we currently have data so that shouldn't really I guess surprises if you know a little bit about the makeup in history of the United States and end the fact that we are states that have different policies different populations that
00:17:11obviously counties and cities that really different. I think that most of this variation is regional but what's perhaps more surprising is that as we assume in more finally we continue to find almost as much variation so kids growing up in San Francisco for example have about twice the chance of climbing from the bottom to top as kids just across the bay bridge in Oakland
00:17:41coming up on Freakonomics radio the preliminary results of a program to address poverty what you ended up finding was frankly I think somewhat disappointing alright then how do you engineer the possibility of the American dream we've identified five factors that seem to be particularly strongly correlated with these differences
00:18:19Freakonomics radio is supported by Caspar Lee to make a Quality Suites surface that cradles your natural geometry in all the right places choose from three different mattresses their original the wave in the essential Casper offers affordable prices hassle-free returns and free shipping in the US and Canada plus you can be sure of your purchase with Casper's 109th risk-free sleep on it trial right now get $50 towards select mattresses by visiting casper.com freak and using freak at checkout terms and conditions apply Freakonomics radio is supported by netsuite by Oracle the business management software that handles every aspect of your business and an easy to use cloud platform save time and money by managing sales Finance accounting orders and HR instantly right from your desk or phone get the free guide crushing the five barriers to growth at netsuite.com
00:19:19freak Freakonomics radio is supported by Postmates who just gets it literally will pick up dinner and bring it right to you wherever you are saying goes for breakfast lunch a bottle of wine dustrial size bag of Flamin Hot Cheetos whatever you need Postmates gets it so go ahead download Postmates now on iOS or Android and get anything anywhere anytime new customers enter code freak for $100 in Postmates delivery credit credit is valid for 7 days after Redemption anything anywhere anytime they get Postmates
00:19:58the Stanford Economist Raj Chetty has been working with large datasets try to understand why so many Americans are no longer living the American dream when it comes to Economic Opportunity Shetty and his colleagues found huge Regional in even local differences throughout the us as he told us kids growing up in San Francisco how about twice the chance of living the American dream has kids from just across the bridge in Oakland why one easy explanation would be that the people in those different areas are just different they have different abilities of cultures different job opportunities and that certainly has some explaining to repower but Shetty and his colleagues found the story isn't that simple
00:20:44a lot of this variation is driven by differences in childhood environment as opposed to differences in conditions in the labor market or the types of jobs that are available or unemployment rates things that affect you in adulthood how do the data explain but it's the childhood environment making the difference so we're going to start by thinking about families who move when their child is exactly 9 years old my age 9 that happens to be the earliest age we can examine and currently available data and that's not just because you were nine years old when you moved from India to Milwaukee is it and I'm not quite just a coincidence okay ninja interesting coincidence and so when we look at these nine-year-old to move we find that they end up roughly halfway between the kids who grew up in Oakland from birth and the kids who grew up in San Francisco from birth so their earning roughly $35,000 when we tracked them forward 21 years and measure their own and comes when their age 30 so that's where the kids are moving lyrics
00:21:44Aqua 9 right so now it's replicate that for kids and move under 10 11 12 and so forth and so on and what you end up seeing in the data is a very clear declining pattern where the leader you make that move from Oakland to San Francisco the less of the game you got in fact if you move after your 21 or 22 or so you get absolutely no gain at all and if you moved in your early 20s or when you're 30 there's the relationship is completely flat there's no further game from moving so this sort of analysis leads us to the conclusion that first of all where you grow up matters it's not just that the kids who live in Oakland or somehow different from the kids who live in San Francisco second you see the neighborhood environment matters because of childhood factors than odd factors in adulthood right this is hardly a new idea that growing up in a poor neighborhood isn't the best mulching ground for economic success this idea
00:22:44in fact lead the Clinton Administration to experiment in the mid-1990s with a program called moving to opportunity they took about 5,000 families across five large cities in the US including New York Chicago and Los Angeles to New York for instance so for instance in New York many of the families were living in the Martin Luther King Towers which is a very high poverty large public housing project in New York they took these families and they randomly assign them to one of three groups the first was a control group they stayed put in the Martin Luther King towers and then there were two treatment groups one of which was called the standard Section 8 Housing Voucher group this group could use the vouchers to move wherever they wanted so many families for example move to the place in the mid Bronx called Soundview which is about 6 miles away from them and I'll catch hours so not in the super high concentrated poverty public housing project but not in a dramatic
00:23:44different neighborhood either families in the third group we're also given a Housing Voucher however with an additional restriction is that you could only use this voucher to rent a house or apartment in a place where the poverty rate below 10% so basically trying to encourage families to move into more mixed income areas hence the program's name moving to opportunity or MTO the people behind the program suspected at least hoped the families who remove themselves from concentrated poverty would end up having better outcomes themselves for both of you don't already in the labor market and their kids would be coming into the labor market so what happened what you ended up finding was frankly I think somewhat disappointing so you didn't see any differences in employment rates are average levels of earnings there were some positive health effects lower obesity and better mental health friends since but the MTO
00:24:44was largely considered a failure I think it's left the field in kind of a difficult spot because people still at you know I think instinctively Felton anecdotally felt like to of course it's got a matter where you grow up but this gold standard scientific experiment is telling us that it doesn't matter freakonomic outcomes that indeed was the consensus among researchers who analyze the MTO data but several years later Chetty and is calling Nathaniel hendren wound up taking another look at the data and they saw a rather large benefit among some people who participated in m t o y or hypothesis was that earlier studies of MTO had looked at impacts on adults and children who were older at the point of the movie remember the moving to opportunity experiment was conducted in the mid-1990s the studies that found disappointing results were published roughly 10 years later and of course
00:25:44children who were very young at the point of the experiment was implemented see kids who were two or three years old 10 years after these burners implemented they were still only 12 and so obviously you couldn't measure their earnings at that point because they weren't they weren't working yet so these earlier studies for that reason mainly focused on adults and older units and they didn't find much of an impact but in light of our findings on the importance of childhood exposure that actually made sense we thought well in our data it looks like you need to be in order of release an effect of moving to a better neighborhood you need many years of exposure to that better neighborhood and that's what led Teddy and his colleagues to reexamine the MTO data they added a layer of IRS data in order to measure the longer-term earnings for the kids were young when they moved and quite remarkably and I I still do you know vividly remember seeing this when we were setting this at the IRS looking at the data when you look at
00:26:44children who Moved when they were young you see extremely clearly that they are doing grammatically better today as adults they are earning 30% more they're 27% more likely to go to college there 30% less likely to become single parents and that interview just kind of completely changed everything and nothing has changed people's perceptions of them to you okay so young kids who move out of high-poverty neighborhood do much better later on what exactly does this signify what's going on in the poor neighborhoods to depress income Mobility what's going on in the better neighborhoods to increase answering those questions has become a big part of rachetti's work he and his colleagues have come up with five significant explanations the first is residential segregation
00:27:36cities that are more segregated by income and by race tend to have much lower levels of upward Mobility so if you look at a city like Atlanta it's incredibly segregated City now cities that look like that in terms of residential structural we find systematically 10. Very low rates of upward mobility and contrast if you look at a place like the Bay Area at least in the 1980's and 1990's in this Steven I think is changing quite a bit of time especially here in Silicon Valley is prices are rising but in the 1980s 1990s the berry I was relatively integrated at least compared to Atlanta where you had neighborhoods of San Francisco with both middle and high-income people you had people of different ethnicities living near each other and those kinds of cities tend to have much higher rates of upward Mobility the second Factor income inequality
00:28:26you have more people in the middle class you also tend to have higher levels of upward Mobility this relationship is what Alan Krueger based on cross-country data term The Great Gatsby curve the idea that there's a link between an equality and anyone generation and rates of intergenerational Mobility why is this link interesting if if one can interpret a causally it's a dress that as we have growing in a quality over time as we do in the US we might be concerned about that not just because we're worried about equitable distribution but also because we're worried that it might have Road children's chances of achieving the American dream and so again we don't know exactly what the mechanism is and whether this is really a causal effect in a quality causing changes in an upward Mobility but there does seem to be some link between these two factors the third Factor they identified relates to family
00:29:21it turns out that the single strongest correlation we find in the data is with measures of family structure such as the fraction of single parents living in an area we find that place has been more single parents have significantly lower levels of Alfred Mobility down interpreting this correlation it's very important to note that it's not purely driven by the fact that growing up in a one-parent family leads to worse outcomes for children and the way you can see that is if we look at the subset of kids who grow up in a two-parent household we see if that for that subset of children even for them growing up in neighborhood with a lot of single parents is associated with lower levels of upward Mobility so it's not literally about whether your own parents are married or not again it's picking up some community-level Factor we're growing up in a place that has a lot of single parents you know maybe there's more family instability or it's correlated with some third factor that is leading to higher
00:30:21single Parenthood whatever reason that seems to be strongly associated with lower levels about permeability the fourth Factor social capital
00:30:31and it's the idea of social capital I think of it relation to the old adage that it takes a village to raise a child with someone else in your community help you out when you need help so as an example Salt Lake City with the Mormon church is thought to be the quintessential example of a city with a lot of social capital and corresponding Leonardi data seems to exhibit a lot of social Mobility concept of social capital I know Steven was popularized in a very well-known book by Bob Putnam called bowling alone we put out an episode not long ago called trust me with Putnam who teaches public policy at Harvard years ago he was looking at the decline of Civic life in America we were becoming more and more isolated or as a friend suggested we once you mean we're bowling alone and the reason for the title of that book is social capital is notoriously difficult to measure and Bob had the creative idea of using the number of bowling alleys in an area
00:31:31in particular weather people are bowling alone as a proxy for Social Capital the core idea of social capital is so simple that I'm almost embarrassed to say it is that social networks have value does a huge amount of work on how social networks help us find jobs so I was amazed to find I remember actually discussing this with Bob in his office at Harvard that the number of bowling alleys is actually very highly correlated with rights of upward mobility in our own data were you skeptical when you first looked at that I was surprised certainly have I also thought Bob Bob Bob Bob really had some Forsyth than thinking about bowling alleys but I I mentioned that here because it illustrates a caveat to all of these relationships because they these are all correlations rather than causal effect right and so it would be surprising if the policy implications to draw from this is that we should build more bowling alleys to
00:32:31increase upward mobility in the United States and so I think that that's a very important caveat to keep in mind and I mentioned it because it's V factor is a bit of an exception to that stuff V factors School quality we find that place of a better Public Schools as you might expect intuitively have much higher it's about Pride Mobility and I'm that Dimension there's a lot of very good evidence showing that improving the quality of schools can really meaningfully affect rates of intergenerational Mobility so I would treat School quality a little bit differently from the other four factors where we see strong correlations but are not yet sure exactly what because we know each of the factors that you've discussed even I could think of some potential policy ideas to improve them do you think much about that or are you content at this point to do the research that allows policymakers to have those ideas to make those moves to take the next step to think about what this means for policy what the causal mechanisms are what the love
00:33:31wizard that we can push to change some of these factors until you know that I think is a good Segway now to come back to the moving to opportunity experiment which I see is a way to potentially Taco segregation one concrete way in which you might try to integrate a city is by giving families low-income families housing assistance to be able to rent houses in Moore mixed income neighborhoods there by being a mechanically reducing segregation know I could hear you talking about this extolling the virtues the Layton virtues that you ultimately on Earth of a program like moving to opportunity were the government spends a bunch of money to relocate families and I couldn't think I know you're just another big government spending Advocate on the other hand I know that you have thought quite a bit about the money that is spent in the US on a variety of affordable housing programs I believe the total of roughly 45 billion dollars so I'm curious as an economist how you would assess the efficiency of typical or historical housing
00:34:31nothing in the US and compare that to the ROI on something like moving to opportunity certainly recognize that in a time when we have our government that's already spending quite a bit on initiatives like the dancer can't simply be to just spend more on these problems I think the power of these data and what we need to be doing is spending money and smarter ways and so this is a good example of a program for spending 45 billion dollars on various forms of affordable housing but we're not spending that money in the most efficient possible way in order to achieve outcomes like reduce poverty in the long run so let me give you a couple of examples on dimensions in which we can I think make improvements first the optimal age at which to to help families move his when their kids are born or when their kids are very young in practice we do almost exactly the opposite we put families on waiting lists when they have kids and those waiting list sometimes take many many years particularly in the most depressed cities where we really would like to be moving families out of
00:35:31askreddit poverty and so what ends up happening is that families only get the opportunity to move exactly when their kids are older but just exactly backwards right for in terms of what you'd like to be accomplishing year so that's a tweak that would not increase program cost but I think would dramatically increase impact another example is that the vast majority of housing vouchers are currently being used in very high Poverty of the opportunity areas and that is problematic because we find that it's really critical to move to these higher opportunity low property areas in order to see beneficial outcomes until we're working with HUD in a large group of public housing authorities to figure out how again without spending more money how we might be able to reform the program so we can get more families that get these vouchers to move to neighborhoods that are going to better serve their kids in the long run have further important aspect to think about in the context of cost is that
00:36:31sent it that the government will actually recover much of the money we invest in programs like this because we see that these children who are earning 30% more as adults they of course are paying more in income taxes themselves as they are have higher learning until we calculate that the extra income taxes that they pay actually more than offsets the incremental cost of a program like moving to opportunity so it's actually a week thank God you know my budget saving program in many ways your work has been cited by politicians certainly across the aisle by Paul Ryan you personally tutored Hillary Clinton in mobility issues and perhaps others you've advised the Obama Administration and advise Jeb Bush I'm really curious to know how was going to ask you how it feels to have that policy poll I don't know if you actually have pulled but at least you're in the room and you are looked to as an authority who really understands or can explain cause and effect in addressing these issues that policymakers
00:37:31with all the time off and not in an evidence-based manner so could you just talk about that what those conversations are like if you feel there there fruitful if you feel your research is considered seriously and perhaps even acted upon yes I am quite encouraged by how interested policymakers are in this type of evidence and I think there is a genuine interest on off and on both sides of the aisle and trying to do better things with the money that we're spending I think when you can come into a room and say I'm not saying we should spend an extra 30 billion dollars on affordable housing I'm saying we should take the money we're already spending and then maybe tweak it in certain ways an accident reforms that based on the evidence will actually deliver better outcomes that we all want to achieve I think that can really be impactful my senses by the way a lot of the the political influence that matters he was not just at the national level but at the local level given the nature of the problem Mayors can do a lot and we noticed that measures are talking about things differently and are
00:38:31is ultimately the evidence that were accumulating in the number of other researchers will ultimately influence policy
00:38:40since our interview with Raj Chetty he's met for an hour and a half with Ben Carson the presumptive Secretary of Housing and Urban Development as cheddy described it in an email he in a staff were eager to hear about how the data could help us make better use of the dollars HUD is spending to achieve better outcomes for low-income children we asked Eddie if he would consider serving in this Administration himself I would not have considered serving in either Trump or Clinton administration he wrote largely because I'd like to continue focusing on Research to identify the best policy Solutions at this point perhaps down the road I'd reconsider Trinity also wrote this I hope that the new Administration will take an evidence-based approach to making policy decisions for instance by making smart investments in childhood education affordable housing and other programs that can create opportunity in effective ways
00:39:34if you want to look at some of the research by Raj Chetty and his colleagues on the equality of opportunity project I suggest you spend some time on their website you can look it up equality of opportunity project and next time on Freakonomics radio we will expand this conversation about the state of the American dream one argument we've all heard is at the US with two willing to let its manufacturing jobs go to China and elsewhere economist's were for the most part sanguine they told us not to worry that the upsides of global trade cancel out the downsides of that job loss
00:40:11when they say now I'm much less sanguine about it than I used to be I think if we had realized how traumatic the pace of change would have been we would at a minimum had much better policies in place to assist workers and communities that suffered these very severe and immediate consequences and we might have tried to moderate the pace at which it occurred the true story of Chinese trade and American job loss it's next time on Freakonomics radio
00:40:45Freakonomics radio is produced by WNYC Studios and Dumber Productions this episode is produced by Greg Wazowski our staff also includes Shelly Lewis Christopher worth Stephanie Tam Merit Jacob weisel Amber Allison Hockenberry and my Morgenstern Henry Huggins and Brian Gutierrez and we had help on this episode from Andrew done and no I'm osband you can subscribe to Freakonomics radio on iTunes or wherever you get your podcasts you should also check out our archive at freakonomics.com which has every past episode including transcripts you can find us on Twitter and Facebook and if you want to drop us a line which will certainly read that we probably won't have time to reply the address is Radio at freakonomics.com thanks for listening

Transcribed by algorithms. Report Errata


By ​Dubner Productions and Stitcher

Discover the hidden side of everything with Stephen J. Dubner, co-author of the Freakonomics books. Each week, Freakonomics Radio tells you things you always thought you knew (but didn’t) and things you never thought you wanted to know (but do) — from the economics of sleep to how to become great at just about anything. Dubner speaks with Nobel laureates and provocateurs, intellectuals and entrepreneurs, and various other underachievers. Special features include series like “The Secret Life of a C.E.O.” as well as a live game show, “Tell Me Something I Don’t Know.” 

United States
355 episodes
since Mar, 2012
Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from ​Dubner Productions and Stitcher, which is the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Listen Notes, Inc.


Thank you for helping to keep the podcast database up to date.