I think that Ruy Teixeira’s (and economist Thomas Piketty’s) hypothesis about today’s Democratic Party could use a bit of refinement:
The Democrats have become and remain today a “Brahmin Left” party. “Brahmin Left” is a term coined by economist Thomas Piketty and colleagues to characterize Western left parties increasingly bereft of working-class voters and increasingly dominated by highly educated voters and elites, including of course our own Democratic Party. The Brahmin Left character of the party has evolved over many decades but spiked in the 21st century. The chart below illustrates this trend.
How so? Consider the following:
- In 1960 7.7% of Americans had four year college degrees or better; today 37.5% do
- In 1960 2% of Americans had professional degrees; in 2018 3.47% did.
- Once members of the professions, those in finance, and graduates of selective institutions are discounted, the income benefit of a college education disappears
- It used to be the case that there was more than a standard deviation in IQ’s difference in IQ between college grads and non-grads. That is no longer the case.
- Between 1950 and 2010 the number of government employees increased almost four-fold, from 6 million to 22.5 million. After ten years without notable increases the number increased sharply during Joe Biden’s term in office.
- Total employees (including government employees) increased less than four-fold over the same period.
- The majority of union members now work for the government.
And none of that includes government contractors or grant recipients.
When you put all of those factors together I would submit two conjectures:
- Today’s college graduates are pretty ordinary.
- A significant proportion of today’s college graduates either will go on to work for government at one level or another or plan to.
or, said another way, people with college educations aren’t brahmins any more by any stretch and it’s completely unsurprising that a large percentage favor expanding government. They’re voting their pocketbooks.
“A significant proportion of today’s college graduates either will go on to work for government at one level or another or plan to.”
What is a significant proportion? If 37.5% of people today have at least a four-year degree, that’s about 125 million people.
“Between 1950 and 2010 the number of government employees increased almost four-fold, from 6 million to 22.5 million. After ten years without notable increases the number increased sharply during Joe Biden’s term in office.”
All of that increase took place at the state and local level. The federal government civilian workforce has remained remarkably steady. On the notable increase under Biden, most of that was returning to the pre-pandemic trend following a steep drop. Absent the pandemic effects, I don’t see anything remarkable.
That’s correct. What complicates the picture at the federal level is the large number of contractors and grant recipients.
Ask the AI and it says…
“While there’s no single, definitive percentage, recent data indicates that around 7.5% of job applications from the class of 2024 on Handshake, a college recruiting platform, were for government positions, an increase from 5.5% in 2023. ”
Define significant. We can also look at it an other way. Most sites claim there are between 20-22 million goer workers so let’s say 21 since math will be easier. Roughly 1/3 of fed workers need a degree and there are 3 million of them, so 1 million. That leaves 18 million state and local workers and 2/3 of them have a degree, so 12 million. That’s 13 million total. Assume about 4 million college grads per year over 30 years and you get 120 million. So you get about 12% of grads ending up in a gift job. So a fairly low percentage of new grads look for a govt job and probably somewhere between 12%-15% end up in one. (Some of these numbers vary a lot as sometimes they include military and post office, sometimes they dont.Some are actually looking at job requirements and some look at the actual employees. )
The IQ thing needs some math. Reading the original meta-analysis helps. Just on the basis of pure math, if more people go to college you reach a point where their average has to drop. Note that the meta-analysis, by my reading, looks at people who go to college and not necessarily at graduates*. Anyway, about 62% of people do some college. In order for them to have a 115 average, the people who do no college would need to have about a 40 average according to the study people (seems low to me since my back of the envelope would be closer to 60).
So the real question then is what is the average IQ of someone who doesnt do any college? Probably about 90. Not a 17 point differential but still large. Of course as the meta-analysis points out When you factor in the Flynn effect that 102 means they have a higher IQ than people the people going to college 70 years ago.
*As I noted the paper appears to look at all of those who matriculate and not just on grads though their wording is slippery. Papers looking only at those who graduate claim IQs over 110 for the most part though I did find one claiming as low as 105.
Final note, Shapiro is changing job requirements in PA. Only 8% now actually require a degree.
https://www.pa.gov/governor/newsroom/press-releases/governor-shapiro-leads-the-nation-on-eliminating-college-degree-.html#:~:text=Along%20with%20the%20executive%20action,require%20a%20four%2Dyear%20degree.
Very interesting discussion. In the book The Fourth Turning (1997) by Neil Howe and William Strauss, they talk about how politics realign on a generational cycle. In the follow-up book The Fourth Turning is Here, Neil Howe talks about how the politics took this generational shift in 2016. Prior to 2016, the dividing line was rural/urban. Now the split is shifting to an educational basis. The 2024 election certainly seems to support his claim. There are 11 states where over 40% of the population has a bachelor’s degree. Biden carried all 11. There are 29 states where less than 35% of the population has a bachelor’s degree. Trump carried 28 of these states (New Mexico was exception).
When we talk about PhD holders in large cities (“Elites”), there is a huge difference in views from the rest of America. There was a survey completed by The Committee to Unleash Prosperity comparing the views on a number of topics. One example was whether they would support banning air conditioning to fight climate change. 53% of “Elites” and 68% of Ivy League graduates would support banning air conditioning vs. 13% of voters overall. I think this is who Ruy refers to as the Brahmins. Since I live in the South, you can pry my air conditioner from my comfortably cool dead hands.
I have to agree with the others. You need to provide some context for “notable”, “significant”, etc.
I’ve been to the Deep South in the old days before air conditioning in the summer. Necessarily, life was lived differently.
Hmm. 2 different search engines and neither could find any polls on the issue of getting rid of air conditioning to help climate change.
Steve
So accurate that the Democrat party tossed their incumbent and standard bearer for an ACTUAL Brahmin.
“Hmm. 2 different search engines and neither could find any polls on the issue of getting rid of air conditioning to help climate change.”
Try googling: “committee to unleash prosperity ban air conditioning to fight climate change” It shows up as the first search result for me.
Steve, In case the search engine didn’t provide the document, here is the link:
https://committeetounleashprosperity.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Them-vs-Us_CTUP-Rasmussen-Study-FINAL.pdf