5 ms·

This is another in a long series of misdirections about income inequality by Tyler Cowen. More details: http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/11/desperate-effor

This is another in a long series of misdirections about income inequality by Tyler Cowen. More details: http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/11/desperate-effort-by-tyler-cowen-and-megan-mcardle-to-silence-discussion-about-income-inequality.html http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/11/desperate-effort-by-t... >Of all the causes behind growing income inequality, in the longer run this development may prove one of the most significant and also one of the hardest to counter. Well, that's pretty much why you chose to invent this little story, isn't it Tyler? In unrelated news, robots are totally going to steal your job, which may prove one of the most significant and also one of the hardest causes of income inequality to counter: https://www.aei.org/publication/will-robots-terminate-the-us-middle-class-a-qa-with-tyler-cowen-author-of-average-is-over/ https://www.aei.org/publication/will-robots-terminate-the-us...

Futurebot 11y ago
You might be right about an attempt at misdirection (I wouldn't speculate one way or another, but obviously EPI agrees with you), but I don't think that invalidates the case about income inequality being partially (among many other sources) caused by AM. It seems fairly well-supported by the evidence from NBER, which Cowen wasn't involved in: http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21595972-how-sexual-equality-increases-gap-between-rich-and-poor-households-sex-brains-and http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21595972-how-sex... The (also liberal) Brookings institution also seems to support it, so I don't think the opposition case is exactly ironclad: http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/social-mobility-memos/posts/2014/02/10-opposites-dont-attract-assortative-mating-reeves http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/social-mobility-memos/posts/2... Another thing to consider is that income inequality is increasing via second-order AM effects, via propagation across generations, rather than directly due to the marriages (http://www.economist.com/node/21640316 http://www.economist.com/node/21640316)

Futurebot 11y ago

You might be right about an attempt at misdirection (I wouldn't speculate one way or another, but obviously EPI agrees with you), but I don't think that invalidates the case about income inequality being partially (among many other sources) caused by AM. It seems fairly well-supported by the evidence from NBER, which Cowen wasn't involved in: http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21595972-how-sexual-equality-increases-gap-between-rich-and-poor-households-sex-brains-and http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21595972-how-sex... The (also liberal) Brookings institution also seems to support it, so I don't think the opposition case is exactly ironclad: http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/social-mobility-memos/posts/2014/02/10-opposites-dont-attract-assortative-mating-reeves http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/social-mobility-memos/posts/2... Another thing to consider is that income inequality is increasing via second-order AM effects, via propagation across generations, rather than directly due to the marriages (http://www.economist.com/node/21640316 http://www.economist.com/node/21640316)