|
September 23, 2005
More on the welfare state and race
Andrew McGuinness of the blog AnomalyUK has pointed me to a study by Alesina, Glaeser and Sacerdote that may have been the basis for Paul Krugman's claim that racial diversity (plus racial animosity) explains America's smaller welfare state in comparison to Europe. I haven't read the study. But given that the Scandanavian countries have the least racial diversity and the most generous welfare states, and the US the reverse, a correlation across OECD countries does seem plausible. Andrew rightly notes that "all this is quite orthogonal to the argument over the effectiveness of state welfare systems in reducing poverty." If there is a correlation across OECD countries, it raises the question of reverse causation. A country with an expensive welfare state can't afford to just let the whole world in. I experienced this effect firsthand some years ago when I was offered a job in Australia, but the immigration authorities barred entry of my kids (who need special education). A country with an expensive welfare state will impose immigration policies that tend to maintain its ethnic homogeneity. Which are the racist countries now? If we consider the racially disparate impact of immigration barriers against the world's poor, the causal story becomes quite different from Krugman's: America can afford to be less racialst in its immigration policies (e.g. against Latinos) because it has a less expensive welfare state. Testing the correlation across US states would remove the immigration-restriction factor, because mobility across states is unrestricted. But that also means that we need a time-series test, because if the (disproportionately black and Latino) poor have migrated to states with larger welfare benefits, a cross-section will spuriously suggest (contra Krugman) that a whiter state population causes lower welfare benefits. ADDENDUM: Having now perused the Alesina-Glaeser-Sacerdote paper, it's obvious that Krugman was drawing heavily on that paper -- so heavily that it's shameful that he didn't mention it in his column. 2nd ADDENDUM: Frank Stephenson has pointed me to a paper by Erzo Luttmer [Journal of Political Economy, 2001, vol. 109, no. 3], which seems to reinforce AGS. Its abstract states that "levels of welfare benefits are relatively low in racially heterogeneous states." Posted by Lawrence H. White at 12:28 PM in Economics
·
TrackBack (0)
|
The statesman who should attempt to direct private people in what manner they ought to employ their capitals would not only load himself with a most unnecessary attention, but assume an authority which could safely be trusted, not only to no single person, but to no council or senate whatever, and which would nowhere be so dangerous as in the hands of a man who had folly and presumption enough to fancy himself fit to exercise it. -Adam Smith
Our Bloggers
Joshua HallRobert Lawson E. Frank Stephenson Michael C. Munger Lawrence H. White Craig Depken Tim Shaughnessy Edward J. Lopez Brad Smith Mike DeBow Wilson Mixon Art Carden
Blogroll
Search
Archives
By Author:
Joshua HallRobert Lawson E. Frank Stephenson Michael C. Munger Lawrence H. White Edward Bierhanzl Craig Depken Ralph R. Frasca Tim Shaughnessy Edward J. Lopez Brad Smith Mike DeBow Wilson Mixon Art Carden
By Month:
September 2008August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004
Powered by
Site design by |