YSK zip code person a importance the up success made in their grew
Little bit of titlegore there.
we call it the postcode lottery cos we british innit
- in the US
Also in the Netherlands.
I love that the yuros think they are that much ahead of the US socioeconomicly and with race. It’s so cute.
They probably know better than I do, but this seems backwards to me. People aren’t poor because of where they live, they live where their means allow, and that has a pretty big influence on one’s “success”
It was studied in the Netherlands a few years ago, and it turns out that for people from the same social economic background in the same city, the neighbourhood you grew up in made all the difference. Oeople who grew up in the “right” neighbourhood made on average 50% more pay.
Source?
edit: nvm, see a few comments down below. i was too impatient.
There are techniques, statistical , experimental etc. to see how the associations change in different circumstances to try to unpick complex causality like this, at least a little.
This just looks like a database and presentation of naive correlations though, I can’t see any evidence of actual research to try to see if the correlation holds up after controlling for third factors, or focussing in on variation that is plausibly independent. Maybe twins, adopted into similar households in different places or something like that.
I don’t know what a “claremont mckenna college” is but it seems like a bag of shite to me. Albeit I’m judging from a quick skim of this article.
zip code is simply appears “important” because it is the fine grained unit of analysis ; so much data is available at that level. if they had data at household level, and people’s actual social and economic networks then the analysis would not be bound to the zip code.
We used to analyse educational outcomes with local level indicators of deprivation vs household ones (like free school meals status). Or use longitudinal survey data with questions about household income. Invariably the “importance” of neighborhood characteristics diminished greatly when household level factors could be taken into account.
I don’t know what a “claremont mckenna college” is but it seems like a bag of shite to me. Albeit I’m judging from a quick skim of this article.
Claremont McKenna is a respected college in LA, it’s just kinda small (1.5k students, part of a consortium of around 8.5k students in adjoining campuses). This article appears to be part of a “News” update of their web page describing a visiting speaker from Harvard; the talk was about the visiting speaker’s research.
Thanks, my mistake . It sounds like harvard is the bag of shite then. That would accord with my experience of supposedly “prestigious” european things that purport prestige.
My apologies to claremont mckenna; though i would suggest , to protect their own reputation, they might want to suck fewer harvard cocks.
“Immense opportunities for applying then … in the private sector.”
What possible mode of profit are they looking at with this research?
