Social capital is a key concept in the social sciences and — even though most people do not use the term — in common sense. Who you know matters in all sorts of ways. Such connections are associated with access to resources and opportunities of various kinds.
Do governments do enough to influence that aspect of our lives and encourage net upward social mobility rather than perpetuating inherited wealth and status? A new joint study by researchers from the UK and the US suggests not, and makes some striking recommendations for change.
Using data from Facebook alongside public sources and a survey, the researchers — some of whom work for Facebook’s owner, Meta, and others for the British government’s behavioral insights team (known as the “nudge unit”) — mapped friendships across the UK. Their finding is that children from poorer backgrounds who live in less economically segregated communities have higher incomes as adults.
Those who grow up in the 10 percent least-connected local authority areas can expect to earn ￡5,100 (US$6,598) less annually than those in the 10 percent most-connected ones. There are big regional variations, with more connectedness in big cities and the southeast of England, and much less in deprived parts of Wales and Northern Ireland. Such findings are intuitive and unsurprising to anyone with progressive politics. A commitment to breaking down the rigid class distinctions and prejudices of the past, to distribute opportunities more evenly, is what lies behind the left’s traditional support for comprehensive education, the UK’s National Health Service and mixed communities in which people who own their homes live alongside less wealthy renters.
The intermingling that the sharing of neighborhoods and institutions encourages brings benefits to everyone by promoting social cohesion and trust. Importantly, it protects vulnerable households from neglect and social exclusion due to the lack of transport links, leisure facilities and shops that can afflict poor areas.
It is encouraging to learn that, despite the shameful levels of poverty and worsening social mobility of recent years, the poorest half of the British population have about half (47 percent) of their friendships with the higher-income half (in the US, the figure is 39 percent). Such ties can be seen as a form of resistance to the further entrenching of privilege.
Future research would probe the role of schools and health. The study said that poorer people make more friends in their neighborhoods, while richer ones make them at university. It also points to the “unique” role of universities in exposing young people to wealthier peers — highlighting the social-mobility function of higher education. More unexpected, perhaps, is a proposal for policies to promote hobbies and clubs, because the friendships made in those settings are especially likely to cross class boundaries.
Those at the top and bottom ends of the wealth scale have the fewest friends from other groups — a finding that backs up existing knowledge about the socially corrosive effects of inequality. Opportunities to boost the social capital of those who need more of it must not be allowed to distract from their pressing needs for higher incomes and better housing.
There is an irony in having Meta as a partner in the research, given the weight of evidence that attention-greedy and under-regulated social media businesses are themselves degrading social life in key respects, and fueling social and political polarization. All the same, this is a valuable study.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS