Ashcroft & Race

[Wojtek Sokolowski]

At 04:11 PM 1/5/01 -0500, Doug wrote:
>Well, no kidding. I've read a good bit of this literature, and even 
>written on it. And yes, all other things being equal there is 
>identifiable race and gender discrimination in wages, usually of 
>around 10%. But, to quote Joan Robinson, cet. is rarely par., so 
>controlling for "the effects of different variables" - education, 
>occupation, industry, etc. - is to control for the effects of 
>"pre-market" discrimination: the crowding of women and nonwhites into 
>low-wage jobs, crappier educational opportunities, etc.
>
>So here you are, conceding, sort of, that race and sex are categories 
>with real material/social effects. Where's that leave your argument 
>that it's all a figment of the Cultural Left's imagination?

There is a diffrence between attributing 10% of wage inequality to the
effect of race or gender after an empirically sound study, and attributing
100% of it a priori, just because one happens to dislike the political
system in this country.  Which is precisely the point I'be been
consistently trying to make on this list, and which effort earned me the
reputation of a closet reactionary.

Another point - 10% is certainly 10% too much, but it does not seem that
much when you compare it to other countries.  I've seen similar studies of
labor market segmentation in Poland (can find you the cite if interested)
where the gender is the major factor accounting for diffrence (around 50%
of all explained variance, if memory serves).  Studies of femal upward
mobility also show Poland being far behind the US in this respect, its
socialist credentials notwithstanding.

wojtek