4 ms·

It reminds me of this research [0] showing that sons of wealthy slave owners (who presumably lost a large chunk of their "wealth" after the civil war) had caugh

by isolli 8y ago

It reminds me of this research [0] showing that sons of wealthy slave owners (who presumably lost a large chunk of their "wealth" after the civil war) had caught up or surpassed sons from similarly wealthy households by 1880. Conclusion: "This paper adds another data point to our understanding of intergenerational wealth transmission. Our conclusion: it’s not the resources here, it’s the social connections." [0] https://twitter.com/leah_boustan/status/1112689110819442690 https://twitter.com/leah_boustan/status/1112689110819442690

HarryHirsch 8y ago
For a more recent example, see nail parlors in the US. They were started by officers from the Vietnamese army who had come as refugees to the country. https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-32544343 https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-32544343
gwern 8y ago
It's an amazing paper but their interpretation of the results that "it's all social connections" is completely unsupported by their evidence and more consistent with standard human-capital / genetic inheritance.
- danharaj 8y ago
  Could you elaborate?
papermill 8y ago
That's interesting but I guess expected since a major component of success is access to power and capital. I remember reading something a while back that a significant portion of the post-war japanese and german economy, industry and government were controlled by the descendents of vanquished elites. I wonder how the children of our politicians and business elites do compared to ordinary folks? In the US, we have been brainwashed with the propaganda about meritocracy that we blindly believe as an absolute truth as children. It's only when we get older we realize that success has a lot more to do with connections than hard work.
ABCLAW 8y ago
>who presumably lost a large chunk of their "wealth" after the civil war I mean, having to hire labour rather than owning slaves changes the cost structure of their businesses, but it doesn't mean their plantations suddenly stopped growing things. If anything, this points towards the idea that slavery was economically inefficient.

by isolli 8y ago

HarryHirsch 8y ago

For a more recent example, see nail parlors in the US. They were started by officers from the Vietnamese army who had come as refugees to the country. https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-32544343 https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-32544343

gwern 8y ago

It's an amazing paper but their interpretation of the results that "it's all social connections" is completely unsupported by their evidence and more consistent with standard human-capital / genetic inheritance.

danharaj 8y ago
Could you elaborate?

papermill 8y ago

That's interesting but I guess expected since a major component of success is access to power and capital. I remember reading something a while back that a significant portion of the post-war japanese and german economy, industry and government were controlled by the descendents of vanquished elites. I wonder how the children of our politicians and business elites do compared to ordinary folks? In the US, we have been brainwashed with the propaganda about meritocracy that we blindly believe as an absolute truth as children. It's only when we get older we realize that success has a lot more to do with connections than hard work.

ABCLAW 8y ago

>who presumably lost a large chunk of their "wealth" after the civil war I mean, having to hire labour rather than owning slaves changes the cost structure of their businesses, but it doesn't mean their plantations suddenly stopped growing things. If anything, this points towards the idea that slavery was economically inefficient.