Equality of sexes leads to greater inequality between classes

This morning the Today programme's estimable series on social mobility came to an end with a debate involving Simon Jenkins and Jeff Randall (listen to it here, it starts 20 minutes into the clip). They were discussing, among other things, whether social mobility had stalled or was continuing to increase.

One important point seemed to be missing from the discussion and, unless I missed it, from the series too. The increased mobility of women in the last decade.

Greater equality between men and women is welcome and means that we are an opportunity society today in at least one way we have never been before.

One consequence of greater sex equality though, will be to entrench class and reduce economic equality. As high-earning men marry high-earning women the multiplier effect lifts the wealthy family even higher above the low-earning counterpart.

Sex equality is one explanation for what many believe has been a slowing in social mobility.

Comments

[MIDDLECLASSWARRIOR]

It is an interesting thought that as women become more economically active and successful at forging a careers they have less children and those children become become better off through the generations. Perhaps it is because that where there are two successful working parents they can afford houses in better areas or private schools and so the children get better qualifications and so better jobs. In turn, their children wil then benefit.

[tapestry]

Rich parents got rich by motivation. Their kids are often a bit lazier as they get a high standard of living when they're young. They don't work as hard as their parents, but still have money and enjoy life.

Their kids have money but didn't experience seeing the drive that created the higher standard of living in the first place, and they blow it, not seeing any point in bothering, as their parents were lazy but still had money.

The level for the next generation then gets a bit chilly and either they or their kids have the motivation to work hard again and take risks to rebuild the family fortune. That's about the norm.

The problem in Gordon Brown Britain that the ones who would have made money give up too soon as they find that they pay so much tax and have so much IHT to pay on death that they stop pushing ahead before they make enough money to support the next two generations.

Likewise at the bottom of the scale, they get so much benefit from tax credits that they lose income by working too much. This kills the motivation to build wealth.

Net effect is that the cycle of wealth and poverty in the same families going up and down has been broken.

Brown's done it. He's made all families either dependent on the state, or sick of being part of the system. Life is now as boring as he is himself. Everyone's stuck at the level they're at, and nothing can move.