1
00:00:00,120 --> 00:00:02,640
Speaker 1: I'm now better educated than my current wife, but I'm

2
00:00:02,680 --> 00:00:06,240
Speaker 1: not looking to divorce her simply to marry someone with

3
00:00:06,280 --> 00:00:16,119
Speaker 1: a PhD. That's good. This episode of Bloomberg Benchmark is

4
00:00:16,120 --> 00:00:20,960
Speaker 1: sponsored by HSBC, winner of Trade Finance America's sixteen Company

5
00:00:21,000 --> 00:00:23,880
Speaker 1: Award for Best Supply Chain Finance Bank in North America

6
00:00:24,640 --> 00:00:33,680
Speaker 1: HSBC where Ambition connects with Opportunity. Hello, and welcome back

7
00:00:33,720 --> 00:00:37,320
Speaker 1: to Bloomberg Benchmark, a podcasts about the global economy. It's

8
00:00:37,360 --> 00:00:41,440
Speaker 1: Thursday seven. I'm a Bloomberg News joining from my hometown

9
00:00:41,440 --> 00:00:44,680
Speaker 1: of Tokyo. Also joining from DC is Tori Still Well,

10
00:00:44,880 --> 00:00:50,520
Speaker 1: Hey Tor, Hey hockey. Hi, what's new. Well, the cherry

11
00:00:50,520 --> 00:00:54,520
Speaker 1: blossoms are blowing in the breeze and it's pretty nice outside,

12
00:00:54,520 --> 00:00:57,240
Speaker 1: so not too much they complain about over here. Oh nice.

13
00:00:57,360 --> 00:00:59,560
Speaker 1: By the time our listeners here the show, though, the

14
00:00:59,640 --> 00:01:03,880
Speaker 1: cherry awesomes will be gone. Well that got real depressing

15
00:01:03,920 --> 00:01:08,240
Speaker 1: real quick. Well, you know, I think I'm back during

16
00:01:08,280 --> 00:01:11,040
Speaker 1: the Edo period, and I think, like the eighteen hundreds

17
00:01:11,120 --> 00:01:14,560
Speaker 1: or something, there was this big philosophy in Japan that

18
00:01:14,640 --> 00:01:18,640
Speaker 1: what's beautiful, it's fleeting, So they went around and replanted

19
00:01:19,000 --> 00:01:21,520
Speaker 1: a lot of the cherry blossom trees here to make

20
00:01:21,560 --> 00:01:25,000
Speaker 1: sure that the trees on the ground were the kind

21
00:01:25,040 --> 00:01:27,959
Speaker 1: of trees that bloom really quickly and then disappear really

22
00:01:28,040 --> 00:01:32,000
Speaker 1: quickly too, So you know what's beautiful as fleeting. That's

23
00:01:32,000 --> 00:01:34,800
Speaker 1: good to know. I like that. I'm gonna make a

24
00:01:34,880 --> 00:01:38,520
Speaker 1: mix tape called that or something. So Aki, we have

25
00:01:38,680 --> 00:01:41,440
Speaker 1: quite the topic today, right, we do? We do? We

26
00:01:41,480 --> 00:01:45,080
Speaker 1: are talking about love and economics, which it's like the

27
00:01:45,080 --> 00:01:48,840
Speaker 1: perfect melding of my two favorite topics. I've been an

28
00:01:48,840 --> 00:01:52,920
Speaker 1: economics journalist for seven years now, so I can't help

29
00:01:52,960 --> 00:01:56,520
Speaker 1: but think of everything through the lens of their economy,

30
00:01:56,600 --> 00:02:01,000
Speaker 1: even for something as you know, romantic and and wonderful

31
00:02:01,040 --> 00:02:04,880
Speaker 1: and mysterious as like love and love and dating and marriage.

32
00:02:05,440 --> 00:02:08,960
Speaker 1: But love isn't always rational, isn't Acky, No, it is not,

33
00:02:09,120 --> 00:02:13,000
Speaker 1: but we try to make it. I guess well, you know,

34
00:02:13,040 --> 00:02:17,600
Speaker 1: today we're talking about this phenomenon called assortative mating um

35
00:02:17,680 --> 00:02:20,800
Speaker 1: and it's when two people who are pretty similar to

36
00:02:20,840 --> 00:02:24,639
Speaker 1: each other get married. So, uh, that can be referring

37
00:02:24,680 --> 00:02:27,720
Speaker 1: to any kind of traits. It could be race and ethnicity,

38
00:02:27,760 --> 00:02:30,280
Speaker 1: it can be income level. Today we're going to be

39
00:02:30,440 --> 00:02:34,320
Speaker 1: mostly talking about education level. Acky it sounds like you

40
00:02:34,360 --> 00:02:37,280
Speaker 1: went down sort of a rabbit hole when you were

41
00:02:37,320 --> 00:02:40,120
Speaker 1: researching this topic, and I think it'd be fun to

42
00:02:40,240 --> 00:02:42,920
Speaker 1: discuss a little bit of the broad findings in the

43
00:02:43,000 --> 00:02:46,440
Speaker 1: research and then we can move on to a discussion. Yeah, definitely.

44
00:02:46,680 --> 00:02:50,200
Speaker 1: Let's let's introduce our special guests with you in the

45
00:02:50,320 --> 00:02:54,800
Speaker 1: DC studio first though. Richard Reeves is a Senior Fellow

46
00:02:54,840 --> 00:02:57,680
Speaker 1: of Economic Studies and also co director of the Center

47
00:02:57,720 --> 00:03:01,120
Speaker 1: on Children and Families at Brookings. Richard, thanks so much

48
00:03:01,160 --> 00:03:03,120
Speaker 1: for joining us. Great to be here, Rocky, thanks for

49
00:03:03,160 --> 00:03:05,760
Speaker 1: hug me. Hi. Tori, So, I guess before we jump

50
00:03:05,840 --> 00:03:08,880
Speaker 1: into the show, I think we should talk about our

51
00:03:08,919 --> 00:03:11,600
Speaker 1: own partners, since we're talking about a topic like a

52
00:03:11,720 --> 00:03:15,600
Speaker 1: sort of mating. So, Tori, you met your boyfriend Tucker

53
00:03:15,880 --> 00:03:18,680
Speaker 1: in college, right. Tucker and I have been dating for

54
00:03:18,960 --> 00:03:21,520
Speaker 1: two and a half years now. We met in college,

55
00:03:22,320 --> 00:03:27,160
Speaker 1: actually as freshman almost seven eight years ago, which seems

56
00:03:27,200 --> 00:03:30,279
Speaker 1: like a really long time ago, and it is um

57
00:03:30,320 --> 00:03:32,520
Speaker 1: but we did actually we actually did not start dating

58
00:03:32,680 --> 00:03:37,960
Speaker 1: in college. We sort of rekindled our friendships slash live

59
00:03:38,440 --> 00:03:43,400
Speaker 1: here in d C when I moved here in and Richard,

60
00:03:43,440 --> 00:03:47,400
Speaker 1: what about you, are you married? Yes? I am. I

61
00:03:47,440 --> 00:03:50,559
Speaker 1: feel like I've been lud onto a show under false pretentions.

62
00:03:51,440 --> 00:03:55,320
Speaker 1: I've got lots of statistics about marriage patterns. I wasn't

63
00:03:55,920 --> 00:03:58,600
Speaker 1: ready to talk about my own marital history, but but

64
00:03:58,680 --> 00:04:01,880
Speaker 1: I'm happy to share it. I actually did marry someone

65
00:04:01,880 --> 00:04:04,120
Speaker 1: who I met at college as well, my college sweetheart,

66
00:04:04,840 --> 00:04:08,160
Speaker 1: but that marriage ended in divorce, so UM, sorry to

67
00:04:08,200 --> 00:04:10,360
Speaker 1: pass that bad news on Torge. But the good news

68
00:04:10,440 --> 00:04:14,200
Speaker 1: is that I then met my second wife, who was

69
00:04:14,200 --> 00:04:16,760
Speaker 1: American and she's kind of one of the main reasons

70
00:04:16,760 --> 00:04:19,919
Speaker 1: that I'm now here with this funny accent, and she

71
00:04:20,000 --> 00:04:22,719
Speaker 1: and I met through work, so I guess you could

72
00:04:22,760 --> 00:04:26,600
Speaker 1: say that the first marriage was assortative mating through education

73
00:04:27,160 --> 00:04:31,000
Speaker 1: and the second one was assortative mating through occupation. But

74
00:04:31,200 --> 00:04:34,760
Speaker 1: clearly clearly kind of selecting, or if you like, this

75
00:04:34,800 --> 00:04:38,760
Speaker 1: is kind of pre online dating. UM still finding ways

76
00:04:38,800 --> 00:04:41,400
Speaker 1: to end up with people with pretty similar education levels,

77
00:04:41,400 --> 00:04:43,760
Speaker 1: the same in the case of my first marriage and

78
00:04:44,160 --> 00:04:46,000
Speaker 1: similar in the case of my second marriage, although I've

79
00:04:46,000 --> 00:04:48,960
Speaker 1: subsequently cheated because although we were both college graduates when

80
00:04:49,000 --> 00:04:53,440
Speaker 1: we met, I've subsequently got a PhD. So I'm now

81
00:04:53,640 --> 00:04:56,280
Speaker 1: better educated than my current wife. But I'm not looking

82
00:04:56,760 --> 00:04:59,560
Speaker 1: to divorce her simply to marry someone with a pitch

83
00:04:59,640 --> 00:05:11,680
Speaker 1: D good. I accept it, right, Hockey. What about you

84
00:05:11,760 --> 00:05:15,520
Speaker 1: and Emily? Yeah, so my girlfriend Emily and I both

85
00:05:15,520 --> 00:05:18,360
Speaker 1: have bachelor degrees, but Emily is about to start law

86
00:05:18,400 --> 00:05:22,440
Speaker 1: school in September, so she's about to out educate me too.

87
00:05:22,800 --> 00:05:26,040
Speaker 1: But for now, I guess we've fit into the box

88
00:05:26,080 --> 00:05:30,520
Speaker 1: of assortative meeting. So the research is pretty clear on

89
00:05:30,560 --> 00:05:34,400
Speaker 1: how we're marrying more people who share the same educational

90
00:05:34,640 --> 00:05:38,880
Speaker 1: background as us. So one study found that people are

91
00:05:39,160 --> 00:05:42,320
Speaker 1: marrying someone with a similar level of education at the

92
00:05:42,400 --> 00:05:46,279
Speaker 1: highest rates since the Gilded Age. That's that's kind of

93
00:05:46,320 --> 00:05:50,400
Speaker 1: a crazy statistic. So people were marrying, you know, amongst

94
00:05:50,440 --> 00:05:53,719
Speaker 1: their own education levels at the turn of the twentieth century,

95
00:05:53,839 --> 00:05:56,440
Speaker 1: and then throughout the first half of the nineteen hundreds

96
00:05:57,040 --> 00:05:59,400
Speaker 1: that rate was going down a lot, so people were

97
00:05:59,480 --> 00:06:03,520
Speaker 1: kind of mixing a lot more. And ever since, right

98
00:06:03,560 --> 00:06:06,280
Speaker 1: around World War Two, it's been steadily coming back up.

99
00:06:06,560 --> 00:06:08,800
Speaker 1: And it seems like that's happening in tandem with growing

100
00:06:08,800 --> 00:06:12,680
Speaker 1: income inequalities. So Richard, sort of, what's the blame here,

101
00:06:12,720 --> 00:06:15,520
Speaker 1: what's going on? I think we have to understand what's

102
00:06:15,600 --> 00:06:19,160
Speaker 1: driving the increase in a sortative mating. So it's quite

103
00:06:19,200 --> 00:06:21,680
Speaker 1: right to say that since the sixties, the proportion of

104
00:06:21,680 --> 00:06:26,160
Speaker 1: people marrying at the same education level has increased, So

105
00:06:26,200 --> 00:06:30,040
Speaker 1: now most people marry somewhat of the same education level,

106
00:06:30,120 --> 00:06:34,280
Speaker 1: just over whereas it was down in the forties before.

107
00:06:34,960 --> 00:06:37,279
Speaker 1: But that's against the backdrop of a massive increase in

108
00:06:37,360 --> 00:06:41,479
Speaker 1: female education. Right. So one of the reasons why male

109
00:06:41,560 --> 00:06:45,680
Speaker 1: college graduates are now marrying female college graduates um as

110
00:06:45,720 --> 00:06:47,719
Speaker 1: opposed to the people who would have married is because

111
00:06:47,720 --> 00:06:50,039
Speaker 1: there are a lot more female college graduates. There's a

112
00:06:50,080 --> 00:06:53,880
Speaker 1: trend underlying underlying it, and so it's actually quite hard

113
00:06:53,920 --> 00:06:55,800
Speaker 1: to know whether or not there was a sortative mating

114
00:06:55,839 --> 00:06:58,880
Speaker 1: going on before on some other level, right interest i

115
00:06:59,000 --> 00:07:03,119
Speaker 1: Q what that, but that that's now showing itself through

116
00:07:03,240 --> 00:07:06,320
Speaker 1: education because women are obviously much more educated than they

117
00:07:06,320 --> 00:07:08,520
Speaker 1: were before. So it's just simply a bit to use

118
00:07:08,560 --> 00:07:12,840
Speaker 1: economic terms, there's just a biggest supply of female college graduates,

119
00:07:12,880 --> 00:07:15,920
Speaker 1: which is meeting the demand of both men and women

120
00:07:15,960 --> 00:07:19,080
Speaker 1: to marry someone of the same education level. And then

121
00:07:19,080 --> 00:07:21,440
Speaker 1: that as you say that, as you say then is

122
00:07:21,480 --> 00:07:27,400
Speaker 1: having an inadvertent byproduct of increasing income in equality because

123
00:07:27,400 --> 00:07:29,680
Speaker 1: the other trend is that we see increasing wages for

124
00:07:29,680 --> 00:07:32,600
Speaker 1: college graduates relative to everybody else, So the returns to

125
00:07:32,600 --> 00:07:35,680
Speaker 1: college education have gone up. Now you've got more women

126
00:07:35,680 --> 00:07:40,480
Speaker 1: who are college graduates, they are marrying male college graduates,

127
00:07:40,480 --> 00:07:44,040
Speaker 1: so that's two college graduates per household and there and

128
00:07:44,120 --> 00:07:45,760
Speaker 1: each of them are owning more than they were four

129
00:07:45,840 --> 00:07:47,600
Speaker 1: years ago. So you add one trend on top of

130
00:07:47,640 --> 00:07:50,080
Speaker 1: the other. And what that means is that quite a

131
00:07:50,120 --> 00:07:54,680
Speaker 1: significant amount of the increase in income in equality, up

132
00:07:54,720 --> 00:07:57,440
Speaker 1: to say a seventh of it, crudely speaking in calling

133
00:07:57,440 --> 00:07:59,480
Speaker 1: to one of my colleagues, can be explained by a

134
00:07:59,560 --> 00:08:02,119
Speaker 1: sort of mating, and by the rise in assorted mating.

135
00:08:02,120 --> 00:08:04,160
Speaker 1: I think it's important to it's not a new phenomenon,

136
00:08:04,360 --> 00:08:08,840
Speaker 1: it's just increasing, and that is a factor in growing

137
00:08:08,840 --> 00:08:12,640
Speaker 1: income and equality. Right, you know, I was reading I

138
00:08:12,680 --> 00:08:16,080
Speaker 1: think a study in sociology UM that also found that

139
00:08:16,560 --> 00:08:21,200
Speaker 1: men were increasingly preferring women who had the same education

140
00:08:21,280 --> 00:08:23,360
Speaker 1: level as them. So like when you kind of think

141
00:08:23,360 --> 00:08:27,320
Speaker 1: about maybe like the nineteen sixties and a male lawyer

142
00:08:27,440 --> 00:08:32,280
Speaker 1: might have married his female secretary, who is who maybe

143
00:08:32,400 --> 00:08:35,760
Speaker 1: never went to college. But now more and more those lawyers,

144
00:08:35,800 --> 00:08:39,880
Speaker 1: I think they're marrying other female lawyers, or maybe like

145
00:08:40,000 --> 00:08:43,679
Speaker 1: a prominent client or something like that. Um or to

146
00:08:44,080 --> 00:08:46,560
Speaker 1: how long have you been married to your current wife?

147
00:08:47,320 --> 00:08:50,240
Speaker 1: It's just a trick question that you tripped deliberately trying

148
00:08:50,240 --> 00:08:53,000
Speaker 1: to trip me into getting this wrong. So I think

149
00:08:53,000 --> 00:08:54,760
Speaker 1: you can then to send this podcast to my wife.

150
00:08:55,760 --> 00:09:00,720
Speaker 1: We've been married for fifteen years. Fifteen years and tour

151
00:09:00,800 --> 00:09:04,440
Speaker 1: you've been with Tucker for two and a half years. Right. Yeah,

152
00:09:04,720 --> 00:09:08,120
Speaker 1: So you guys probably don't know the world of online

153
00:09:08,200 --> 00:09:10,640
Speaker 1: dating too much. But a year ago I was single,

154
00:09:10,760 --> 00:09:12,960
Speaker 1: so I was using all kinds of different apps, and

155
00:09:13,760 --> 00:09:16,200
Speaker 1: you know what kind of struck me was there all

156
00:09:16,200 --> 00:09:21,880
Speaker 1: these services that let you explicitly filter people out according to, like, um,

157
00:09:21,960 --> 00:09:26,200
Speaker 1: their education level, or their income bracket, or even like

158
00:09:26,240 --> 00:09:30,480
Speaker 1: their race, so you could be like, oh, filtered by Yeah,

159
00:09:30,679 --> 00:09:36,600
Speaker 1: it's become really controversial in the online and it's pretty terrible.

160
00:09:36,840 --> 00:09:38,960
Speaker 1: And and even back when I was single, I was thinking,

161
00:09:38,960 --> 00:09:41,480
Speaker 1: my gosh, this is really problematic, Like this is really

162
00:09:42,280 --> 00:09:45,679
Speaker 1: you know, if the use of online dating grows, we

163
00:09:45,760 --> 00:09:49,960
Speaker 1: might see even more assortative mating. If if people kind

164
00:09:49,960 --> 00:09:53,079
Speaker 1: of tend to, you know, filter out according to these

165
00:09:53,080 --> 00:09:57,280
Speaker 1: pretty superficial demographic characteristics. Um, Richard, do you have any

166
00:09:57,280 --> 00:10:00,000
Speaker 1: thoughts on that? Yeah, it's I think that what's happened

167
00:10:00,320 --> 00:10:04,439
Speaker 1: is that algorithms are being added to the assortative mating process.

168
00:10:04,480 --> 00:10:06,680
Speaker 1: So you know, through these online dating platforms, you can,

169
00:10:06,920 --> 00:10:09,240
Speaker 1: as you say, just filter out. So I think that

170
00:10:09,280 --> 00:10:12,600
Speaker 1: there was there's a strong trend anyway to be meeting

171
00:10:12,760 --> 00:10:17,640
Speaker 1: and marrying people of the same education level, but online

172
00:10:17,720 --> 00:10:19,120
Speaker 1: dating just kind of takes that to a new level,

173
00:10:19,120 --> 00:10:21,960
Speaker 1: which is that you you reduce the chance of even

174
00:10:22,040 --> 00:10:25,400
Speaker 1: by accident, meeting somebody who isn't at the same education

175
00:10:25,400 --> 00:10:27,320
Speaker 1: and you literally just take them off. You're not even

176
00:10:27,320 --> 00:10:29,480
Speaker 1: in the market for that at all. So at least

177
00:10:29,480 --> 00:10:32,800
Speaker 1: if in terms of non online dating, you might go

178
00:10:32,840 --> 00:10:34,680
Speaker 1: to a party, you might get talking to someone and

179
00:10:34,720 --> 00:10:37,480
Speaker 1: only part way through the conversation discover that they never

180
00:10:37,480 --> 00:10:40,719
Speaker 1: finished their college degree or whatever. But by then you

181
00:10:40,760 --> 00:10:43,480
Speaker 1: might already be interested in them. But if you've already

182
00:10:43,520 --> 00:10:45,600
Speaker 1: filtered that out, then you're only going to meet people

183
00:10:45,640 --> 00:10:48,760
Speaker 1: who you've pre selected on the base of their education level.

184
00:10:48,800 --> 00:10:51,720
Speaker 1: So other things being equal, it seems almost certain that

185
00:10:52,000 --> 00:10:55,640
Speaker 1: online dating will increase what is already quite a quickly

186
00:10:55,800 --> 00:11:00,000
Speaker 1: rising level of assortative mating with all the benefits um

187
00:11:00,000 --> 00:11:03,240
Speaker 1: at all the challenges that that brings. Right, there's I

188
00:11:03,240 --> 00:11:05,680
Speaker 1: think there was one study that looked at the logs

189
00:11:05,880 --> 00:11:09,960
Speaker 1: of an unnamed online dating company, and that study found

190
00:11:10,000 --> 00:11:13,720
Speaker 1: that people definitely gravitate to other people, um, you know,

191
00:11:13,760 --> 00:11:16,800
Speaker 1: who have similar characteristics, and that was on education level,

192
00:11:17,040 --> 00:11:21,920
Speaker 1: income level, definitely recent ethnicity, and even some really random

193
00:11:21,960 --> 00:11:24,959
Speaker 1: things like hey, we're we're. There's lots of ugly phrases

194
00:11:24,960 --> 00:11:27,079
Speaker 1: in this We've had a sort of mating and algorithms,

195
00:11:27,080 --> 00:11:30,880
Speaker 1: but perhaps the ugliest of all is marital homogamy and

196
00:11:31,000 --> 00:11:34,640
Speaker 1: homogamy in the sociology literature, and that's just a very

197
00:11:34,679 --> 00:11:37,760
Speaker 1: sociological way of saying people marry people who are like themselves.

198
00:11:38,120 --> 00:11:40,080
Speaker 1: And that does reach beyond education into all kinds of

199
00:11:40,080 --> 00:11:42,480
Speaker 1: other things. So it could include religion, for example, they

200
00:11:42,480 --> 00:11:44,920
Speaker 1: could include to stend of your faith, it can include race,

201
00:11:44,960 --> 00:11:47,560
Speaker 1: it can include all kinds of things. And that's a

202
00:11:48,080 --> 00:11:51,880
Speaker 1: that that's a trend that's as old as human history.

203
00:11:52,320 --> 00:11:54,880
Speaker 1: What's interesting, though, is that some of that is break

204
00:11:55,040 --> 00:11:57,480
Speaker 1: is actually going in the other directions. So, for example,

205
00:11:57,840 --> 00:12:00,480
Speaker 1: you are seeing increased marriage across rati all lines in

206
00:12:00,480 --> 00:12:03,199
Speaker 1: the US that's actually been ticking up um and it's

207
00:12:03,280 --> 00:12:07,200
Speaker 1: quite pronounced for Asian Americans, for example, quite likely to

208
00:12:07,240 --> 00:12:10,280
Speaker 1: marry non Asian Americans. But across all races now there's

209
00:12:10,320 --> 00:12:13,640
Speaker 1: been an increase in marrying across race lines, and so

210
00:12:13,679 --> 00:12:16,480
Speaker 1: actually we're getting to the point now where it's more

211
00:12:16,520 --> 00:12:19,040
Speaker 1: common to marry someone of a different race or ethnicity

212
00:12:19,120 --> 00:12:21,839
Speaker 1: than to marry someone of a different social class. So

213
00:12:22,360 --> 00:12:24,600
Speaker 1: the trends are going the other way, which is quite interesting.

214
00:12:24,720 --> 00:12:28,480
Speaker 1: So you're sort of seeing more class segregation or education

215
00:12:28,520 --> 00:12:33,280
Speaker 1: segregation in terms of marriage alongside less racial segregation by marriage,

216
00:12:33,280 --> 00:12:35,960
Speaker 1: which isn't to say that we're anything like past racial segregation,

217
00:12:36,040 --> 00:12:38,160
Speaker 1: but so the filters that we just talked about are

218
00:12:38,200 --> 00:12:40,480
Speaker 1: actually it turns out that, certainly in terms of people's

219
00:12:40,480 --> 00:12:43,400
Speaker 1: behavior and who they actually end up marrying, the education

220
00:12:43,440 --> 00:12:46,280
Speaker 1: and class are playing, if anything, is slightly stronger role

221
00:12:46,360 --> 00:12:50,000
Speaker 1: now than race, depending on the races that you're talking about. Wow,

222
00:12:50,240 --> 00:12:52,320
Speaker 1: I want to take a short break here to hear

223
00:12:52,360 --> 00:13:00,000
Speaker 1: from our sponsor, and then we'll come right back this episode.

224
00:13:00,000 --> 00:13:03,640
Speaker 1: The Bloomberg Benchmark is sponsored by HSBC with over eight

225
00:13:03,679 --> 00:13:07,200
Speaker 1: thousand global relationship managers on the ground in over sixty countries.

226
00:13:07,480 --> 00:13:19,680
Speaker 1: HSBC makes your global ambition their local business HSBC. So, Richard,

227
00:13:19,720 --> 00:13:22,880
Speaker 1: in a previous life, you were in government. Before you

228
00:13:22,960 --> 00:13:24,520
Speaker 1: moved to the US A couple of years ago, you

229
00:13:24,520 --> 00:13:27,840
Speaker 1: were the director strategy to the Deputy Prime Minister in

230
00:13:27,880 --> 00:13:31,520
Speaker 1: the UK. And I understand your former boss made increasing

231
00:13:31,600 --> 00:13:35,000
Speaker 1: social mobility a big part of this platform, right he

232
00:13:35,080 --> 00:13:37,400
Speaker 1: certainly did, yes, And so you've spent a lot of

233
00:13:37,440 --> 00:13:40,720
Speaker 1: time thinking about social mobility, and even since then you've

234
00:13:40,720 --> 00:13:43,800
Speaker 1: written a lot about that, um, you know, making sure

235
00:13:43,840 --> 00:13:46,559
Speaker 1: that we have the kind of economy where poor kids

236
00:13:46,800 --> 00:13:49,840
Speaker 1: could rise the income ladder and eventually become you know,

237
00:13:49,880 --> 00:13:53,200
Speaker 1: comfortable or even rich. And and so I'm wondering, like,

238
00:13:53,280 --> 00:13:57,680
Speaker 1: does this trend of assortative mating doesn't concern you? Yes,

239
00:13:57,720 --> 00:14:00,079
Speaker 1: it does, for for two reasons really want to is

240
00:14:00,120 --> 00:14:03,280
Speaker 1: that it doesn't. It does add to increased incoming equality,

241
00:14:03,320 --> 00:14:05,920
Speaker 1: which is obviously not the same thing as mobility, but

242
00:14:06,320 --> 00:14:09,040
Speaker 1: can be associated with lack of mobility. So you do

243
00:14:09,080 --> 00:14:11,640
Speaker 1: see that it adds to the widening economic divides. So

244
00:14:12,520 --> 00:14:15,680
Speaker 1: there's that, and that other things equal economic resources do

245
00:14:15,760 --> 00:14:19,520
Speaker 1: matter for people's life chances. So just purely economically assorted

246
00:14:19,640 --> 00:14:21,840
Speaker 1: mating has has an impact, but I think I think

247
00:14:21,840 --> 00:14:25,160
Speaker 1: it actually goes slightly more deeper than that, because we

248
00:14:25,400 --> 00:14:28,040
Speaker 1: not only see the college graduates more likely to marry

249
00:14:28,160 --> 00:14:31,080
Speaker 1: college graduates, but their marriages also tend to be more stable,

250
00:14:31,640 --> 00:14:34,240
Speaker 1: they tend to be more likely to last, the children

251
00:14:34,240 --> 00:14:36,000
Speaker 1: tend to be born within the marriage, and so on,

252
00:14:36,000 --> 00:14:38,080
Speaker 1: and so actually what's happening in the US is that

253
00:14:38,120 --> 00:14:41,880
Speaker 1: college graduates look quite traditional in their approaches to marriage

254
00:14:42,160 --> 00:14:45,240
Speaker 1: and to divorce and to child rearing within marriage, contrary

255
00:14:45,240 --> 00:14:47,479
Speaker 1: to what you might thought would happen, maybe in the seventies.

256
00:14:47,960 --> 00:14:50,040
Speaker 1: But at the other end of the education spectrum, or

257
00:14:50,040 --> 00:14:54,960
Speaker 1: even towards the middle, you're seeing more divorce, more children

258
00:14:55,000 --> 00:14:57,200
Speaker 1: being born outside of marriage and then maybe subsequently leading

259
00:14:57,240 --> 00:15:00,240
Speaker 1: to a marriage, but less stable marriages as well. And

260
00:15:00,320 --> 00:15:04,440
Speaker 1: instability and parenting are huge factors for life chances for children.

261
00:15:04,880 --> 00:15:08,480
Speaker 1: So it's almost as if the research suggests quite strongly

262
00:15:08,520 --> 00:15:12,520
Speaker 1: that stability matters for kids life chances. Marriage is one

263
00:15:12,560 --> 00:15:15,560
Speaker 1: way to provide that stability, especially in America quite different

264
00:15:15,560 --> 00:15:17,840
Speaker 1: to Europe in that sense, and so it's almost as

265
00:15:17,840 --> 00:15:20,680
Speaker 1: if upper middle class or college educated Americans they got

266
00:15:20,720 --> 00:15:23,640
Speaker 1: the memo that it's good to get married first, then

267
00:15:23,680 --> 00:15:25,960
Speaker 1: have your kids, make sure economically secure, and try and

268
00:15:26,000 --> 00:15:27,880
Speaker 1: make the marriage last and raise your kids together if

269
00:15:27,920 --> 00:15:29,920
Speaker 1: you can. And in fact, I think that's that's the

270
00:15:30,000 --> 00:15:31,960
Speaker 1: role that marriage plays for a lot of Americans. Now.

271
00:15:32,000 --> 00:15:33,680
Speaker 1: You don't need to get married to be dating or

272
00:15:33,720 --> 00:15:35,960
Speaker 1: in a relationship or to have and you don't don't

273
00:15:35,960 --> 00:15:38,560
Speaker 1: need it very often economically, So it's mostly about kids now.

274
00:15:39,280 --> 00:15:40,640
Speaker 1: And so what that means is the kids who are

275
00:15:40,640 --> 00:15:44,000
Speaker 1: fortunate enough to be born to college educated parents not

276
00:15:44,000 --> 00:15:46,600
Speaker 1: only have more money and more educated parents, but also

277
00:15:46,640 --> 00:15:49,000
Speaker 1: the family itself is more likely to be stable. And

278
00:15:49,040 --> 00:15:51,120
Speaker 1: so we're seeing as one advantage pile on top of

279
00:15:51,120 --> 00:15:52,840
Speaker 1: the other and at the other end and at one

280
00:15:52,880 --> 00:15:54,880
Speaker 1: disadvantage pile on top of the other. That means in

281
00:15:55,000 --> 00:15:59,680
Speaker 1: terms of intergenerational mobility is that the chances of your

282
00:15:59,720 --> 00:16:02,240
Speaker 1: state as being inherited to some extent of ending up

283
00:16:02,240 --> 00:16:04,640
Speaker 1: in the same place roughly on the ladder as your parents,

284
00:16:04,960 --> 00:16:08,440
Speaker 1: if anything, that's getting worse and so Assortedive mating is

285
00:16:08,440 --> 00:16:11,400
Speaker 1: one of those really interesting and difficult problems. It's much

286
00:16:11,440 --> 00:16:14,440
Speaker 1: harder than ca to of education or affordable college order

287
00:16:14,480 --> 00:16:17,440
Speaker 1: because it's this is about intimate life choices. How do

288
00:16:17,440 --> 00:16:18,960
Speaker 1: you how do you go about fixing exactly? What does

289
00:16:18,960 --> 00:16:21,520
Speaker 1: that do have? Conmagine the public policy that says, okay,

290
00:16:21,680 --> 00:16:24,280
Speaker 1: we're just going to randomly choose your marriage partner for

291
00:16:24,360 --> 00:16:28,520
Speaker 1: you can have state, you can have an arranged marriage policy,

292
00:16:28,640 --> 00:16:32,600
Speaker 1: but deliberately you know, says no, No, you're a college graduate,

293
00:16:32,600 --> 00:16:34,360
Speaker 1: so you're not allowed to marry a college Right. It's

294
00:16:34,400 --> 00:16:38,840
Speaker 1: clearly we're in the realm of dystopian fantasies. Um. But

295
00:16:38,920 --> 00:16:40,600
Speaker 1: I do think we might want to think a little

296
00:16:40,640 --> 00:16:46,000
Speaker 1: bit about segregation more generally, segregation occupationally, segregation, geographically, segregation,

297
00:16:46,120 --> 00:16:48,640
Speaker 1: education and now maritally, and the extent to which there

298
00:16:48,680 --> 00:16:51,800
Speaker 1: are these sort of almost different lives being led by

299
00:16:51,840 --> 00:16:55,040
Speaker 1: people of different backgrounds, which reduces the chances of meeting

300
00:16:55,080 --> 00:16:57,120
Speaker 1: someone and marrying across those lines. So it may become

301
00:16:57,200 --> 00:16:59,760
Speaker 1: quite self perpetuating. And so to that extent, I don't

302
00:16:59,760 --> 00:17:02,760
Speaker 1: think new us, particularly those who have married assortatively to

303
00:17:02,840 --> 00:17:06,520
Speaker 1: use that ugly word again, should throw any stones. I

304
00:17:06,560 --> 00:17:09,080
Speaker 1: think as policymakers or as analysts of the economy and

305
00:17:09,119 --> 00:17:11,240
Speaker 1: what's happening, I do think it's something that we have

306
00:17:11,320 --> 00:17:13,800
Speaker 1: to take quite seriously in terms of understanding lack of

307
00:17:13,840 --> 00:17:17,720
Speaker 1: my ability. We spent so much time hearing about uh

308
00:17:18,000 --> 00:17:21,639
Speaker 1: fixes to income inequality in terms of tax policy and

309
00:17:21,800 --> 00:17:26,800
Speaker 1: education policy, and um all kinds of other income redistribution schemes.

310
00:17:26,800 --> 00:17:29,160
Speaker 1: But you know, I think the question here is are

311
00:17:29,520 --> 00:17:35,240
Speaker 1: our own classist, snobby, maybe even a litist preferences to blame?

312
00:17:35,359 --> 00:17:38,800
Speaker 1: And I think the answer is partially yes, Well, I

313
00:17:38,800 --> 00:17:41,560
Speaker 1: think it's quite That's when it gets very difficult, because

314
00:17:42,119 --> 00:17:44,920
Speaker 1: they are they are our preferences, and so the question

315
00:17:44,960 --> 00:17:46,520
Speaker 1: then becomes just to whether or not we should be

316
00:17:46,600 --> 00:17:49,560
Speaker 1: judging ourselves or other people for having those preferences. And

317
00:17:49,920 --> 00:17:52,520
Speaker 1: I think I also think let's let's let's look at

318
00:17:52,560 --> 00:17:54,960
Speaker 1: this from a positive aspect. We've looked at it from

319
00:17:54,960 --> 00:17:57,639
Speaker 1: a negative one too, which is, look if one of

320
00:17:57,680 --> 00:18:00,200
Speaker 1: the reasons why this is also happening and why men

321
00:18:00,240 --> 00:18:02,320
Speaker 1: and women want to marry someone of the same education level,

322
00:18:02,320 --> 00:18:04,919
Speaker 1: it's because gender roles have changed too. So that's the

323
00:18:04,960 --> 00:18:08,000
Speaker 1: other factor here. So you mentioned earlier lawyers might have

324
00:18:08,040 --> 00:18:10,480
Speaker 1: married their secretary, or a doctor might have married that's

325
00:18:10,480 --> 00:18:12,800
Speaker 1: the stereotype, and now lawyers are marrying lawyers and that's

326
00:18:12,800 --> 00:18:14,680
Speaker 1: the fact my brother is a doctor. Guess what, he's

327
00:18:14,680 --> 00:18:18,399
Speaker 1: married to a doctor. Um. Right. So whereas when my

328
00:18:18,440 --> 00:18:20,920
Speaker 1: mom was a nurse, she would date doctors. My dad's

329
00:18:20,960 --> 00:18:23,280
Speaker 1: not a doctor, but she's so because she was a nurse. Now,

330
00:18:23,760 --> 00:18:25,919
Speaker 1: the fact that women are our doctors and lawyers, and

331
00:18:25,960 --> 00:18:28,240
Speaker 1: that men would prefer to be with someone who's a

332
00:18:28,240 --> 00:18:31,440
Speaker 1: doctor or a lawyer is a sign of huge progress

333
00:18:31,560 --> 00:18:34,239
Speaker 1: in terms of gender equas. So what you're saying is

334
00:18:34,520 --> 00:18:39,440
Speaker 1: gender equality good tick, a long way to go, but

335
00:18:39,440 --> 00:18:42,720
Speaker 1: but one of the by products of that with a

336
00:18:42,760 --> 00:18:47,520
Speaker 1: sort of mating is increased household income inequality and possibly

337
00:18:48,080 --> 00:18:52,200
Speaker 1: less intergenerational mobility. And so as with all of these things,

338
00:18:52,600 --> 00:18:55,879
Speaker 1: there's always trade off, there's always costs and benefits to

339
00:18:55,960 --> 00:18:58,480
Speaker 1: these different trends, and and and our job really is

340
00:18:58,480 --> 00:19:00,240
Speaker 1: to try and sort through all those trends and see

341
00:19:00,240 --> 00:19:03,879
Speaker 1: what the implications of them are, and not to say

342
00:19:03,920 --> 00:19:07,080
Speaker 1: I think it's illegitimate really force policy makers to start

343
00:19:07,119 --> 00:19:10,520
Speaker 1: casting judgment on who we should or shouldn't marry. Um,

344
00:19:10,560 --> 00:19:13,880
Speaker 1: But it might be relevant to say this is one

345
00:19:13,880 --> 00:19:15,960
Speaker 1: of the reasons why income in equality is so high,

346
00:19:16,280 --> 00:19:18,840
Speaker 1: and that might put a different cast on arguments for

347
00:19:18,880 --> 00:19:22,959
Speaker 1: more redistribution, for example, So it doesn't sound like, you know,

348
00:19:23,119 --> 00:19:26,000
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders next proposal should be, let's assign all the

349
00:19:26,040 --> 00:19:29,679
Speaker 1: spouses by lottery. Let's make it way more equal that

350
00:19:29,720 --> 00:19:34,760
Speaker 1: way fund though that would be to hear him say, Richard,

351
00:19:34,840 --> 00:19:39,760
Speaker 1: what do you think about, you know, widening economic inequality itself,

352
00:19:39,840 --> 00:19:43,280
Speaker 1: changing our own meeting patterns, kind of the direction of

353
00:19:43,320 --> 00:19:46,480
Speaker 1: causality in the other way. That's very interesting. So we

354
00:19:46,720 --> 00:19:48,440
Speaker 1: have focused so far on the impact of a sort

355
00:19:48,480 --> 00:19:50,959
Speaker 1: of to mating on income in equality. And actually one

356
00:19:51,000 --> 00:19:53,840
Speaker 1: of the studies that you may have seen that certainly reds,

357
00:19:53,880 --> 00:19:56,719
Speaker 1: shows that the Genie coefficient, which is a very wonky

358
00:19:56,840 --> 00:19:59,840
Speaker 1: measure of income in equality, would be seven points lower

359
00:19:59,840 --> 00:20:03,000
Speaker 1: in US were it not for assortative mating. So if

360
00:20:03,040 --> 00:20:06,080
Speaker 1: people did if people did marry randomly using the lottery

361
00:20:06,119 --> 00:20:10,720
Speaker 1: Tori's lottery idea, I'm calling it your idea, not my idea.

362
00:20:11,680 --> 00:20:13,600
Speaker 1: So let's say we did do randomly, then the Genie

363
00:20:13,640 --> 00:20:16,120
Speaker 1: coefficient would be point three four are than point four three.

364
00:20:16,240 --> 00:20:19,240
Speaker 1: But in in layman's terms, what that means is that

365
00:20:19,320 --> 00:20:21,639
Speaker 1: the US would be about as equal as France or Italy.

366
00:20:22,880 --> 00:20:26,480
Speaker 1: So imagine your utopia or a dystopia where actually people

367
00:20:26,480 --> 00:20:28,440
Speaker 1: are randomly marrying. Then that is that's the kind of

368
00:20:28,440 --> 00:20:31,040
Speaker 1: effect you would have on income inequality. But at the

369
00:20:31,040 --> 00:20:34,800
Speaker 1: same time, widening income in equality may add to assortative mating,

370
00:20:34,840 --> 00:20:38,280
Speaker 1: as you just implied, because we see, for example, there's

371
00:20:38,320 --> 00:20:40,480
Speaker 1: a widening gap in your chances of going to and

372
00:20:40,520 --> 00:20:44,320
Speaker 1: completing for your college based on your parents income household income,

373
00:20:44,359 --> 00:20:47,440
Speaker 1: a widening gap. So you're seeing that it's relatively more

374
00:20:47,480 --> 00:20:49,920
Speaker 1: likely for children from affluent backgrounds to go to for

375
00:20:50,080 --> 00:20:52,280
Speaker 1: your colleges and stay at them compared to kids from

376
00:20:52,280 --> 00:20:54,960
Speaker 1: ball backgrounds. That gaps are widening over time. So guess what,

377
00:20:55,160 --> 00:20:58,879
Speaker 1: Tory met her boyfriend at college. But it turns out

378
00:20:58,920 --> 00:21:00,920
Speaker 1: that you're more likely to meet someone at college who

379
00:21:00,960 --> 00:21:02,840
Speaker 1: is from themselves from an affluent background, and that's one

380
00:21:02,840 --> 00:21:04,760
Speaker 1: of the reasons they're at college. Then you go and

381
00:21:04,800 --> 00:21:07,119
Speaker 1: live in a certain neighborhood and guess what your neighbors

382
00:21:07,119 --> 00:21:08,280
Speaker 1: are all kind of like you. And then you go

383
00:21:08,280 --> 00:21:10,320
Speaker 1: and work in a certain kind of institution like the

384
00:21:10,320 --> 00:21:13,280
Speaker 1: Brookings Institution or Bloomberg where guess what, you're surrounded by

385
00:21:13,359 --> 00:21:15,639
Speaker 1: the people's are And so actually, what's happening is that

386
00:21:15,880 --> 00:21:18,280
Speaker 1: some of the results of income in equality in terms

387
00:21:18,280 --> 00:21:22,720
Speaker 1: of occupational, geographical and educational segregation and inqual might actually

388
00:21:22,720 --> 00:21:25,879
Speaker 1: add to assortive meeting because candidly, you may not actually

389
00:21:25,920 --> 00:21:29,160
Speaker 1: be meeting that many people who aren't of your educational

390
00:21:29,240 --> 00:21:32,560
Speaker 1: level in order to date them in the first place. No,

391
00:21:32,720 --> 00:21:35,960
Speaker 1: speaking of France and Italy, I'm actually headed off there

392
00:21:36,160 --> 00:21:39,280
Speaker 1: for the next couple of weeks. What does it look

393
00:21:39,320 --> 00:21:41,600
Speaker 1: like in other parts of the world? Is this? Is

394
00:21:41,600 --> 00:21:45,040
Speaker 1: this an issue and a trend in other places? It is?

395
00:21:45,080 --> 00:21:47,040
Speaker 1: So I can only actually speak to the UK, I

396
00:21:47,080 --> 00:21:49,280
Speaker 1: don't I don't know the data elsewhere, but certainly within

397
00:21:49,320 --> 00:21:53,159
Speaker 1: the UK, um it's quite a significant factor. Um. So

398
00:21:53,280 --> 00:21:56,439
Speaker 1: you see the same educational and assorted mating patterns in

399
00:21:56,440 --> 00:22:00,520
Speaker 1: the UK, and in fact, by some estimates, the the

400
00:22:00,600 --> 00:22:04,639
Speaker 1: single biggest reason for a recorded decline in social mobility,

401
00:22:04,760 --> 00:22:08,439
Speaker 1: so for social mobility getting worse in the UK is

402
00:22:08,520 --> 00:22:13,159
Speaker 1: the increase in women's educational outcomes. Again come back to

403
00:22:13,160 --> 00:22:15,639
Speaker 1: this trade off. So that was a really difficult finding

404
00:22:15,720 --> 00:22:18,199
Speaker 1: for us in government and for those grappling with it,

405
00:22:18,280 --> 00:22:20,840
Speaker 1: is that the more the more educated women were getting

406
00:22:20,840 --> 00:22:26,199
Speaker 1: in the UK, the worst social mobility. God, why for

407
00:22:26,240 --> 00:22:29,359
Speaker 1: the reasons we just identified. Because the educated women marry

408
00:22:29,400 --> 00:22:31,879
Speaker 1: the educated men, they have high levels of human capital,

409
00:22:31,960 --> 00:22:34,320
Speaker 1: which they then turn into higher levels of financial capital

410
00:22:34,359 --> 00:22:36,639
Speaker 1: because of the returns to earnings, which means they can

411
00:22:36,720 --> 00:22:39,080
Speaker 1: live in good neighborhoods or afford private schools, which means

412
00:22:39,080 --> 00:22:42,320
Speaker 1: their kids do better. And so actually it's again one

413
00:22:42,320 --> 00:22:44,879
Speaker 1: of these things where you saw in the UK a

414
00:22:44,920 --> 00:22:48,920
Speaker 1: really interesting impact on intergenerational mobility, which is beyond the

415
00:22:48,960 --> 00:22:51,280
Speaker 1: reach of policy. And indeed good news, it's good news

416
00:22:51,320 --> 00:22:54,320
Speaker 1: and more women are going to college. But that good

417
00:22:54,359 --> 00:22:58,640
Speaker 1: news did carry with their implications for mobility and inequality,

418
00:22:58,720 --> 00:23:02,480
Speaker 1: which we should just be much about. Amazing, that's quite

419
00:23:02,480 --> 00:23:06,119
Speaker 1: the dilemma. Well, Richard, thank you so much for joining

420
00:23:06,200 --> 00:23:09,240
Speaker 1: us today. This was really a fascinating conversation. Thank you

421
00:23:09,280 --> 00:23:13,440
Speaker 1: for having me. It's been it's been fun, and thanks

422
00:23:13,440 --> 00:23:15,840
Speaker 1: to you all for listening to Bloomberg Benchmark. We'll be

423
00:23:15,840 --> 00:23:18,280
Speaker 1: back next week and until then, you can find us

424
00:23:18,280 --> 00:23:21,200
Speaker 1: on the Bloomberg Terminal and Bloomberg dot com, as well

425
00:23:21,200 --> 00:23:25,240
Speaker 1: as on iTunes, podcast, Stitcher, and other platforms. While you're there,

426
00:23:25,280 --> 00:23:27,040
Speaker 1: please take a minute to rate and review the show.

427
00:23:27,119 --> 00:23:29,879
Speaker 1: So more listeners can find us and let us know

428
00:23:29,920 --> 00:23:32,199
Speaker 1: what you thought of the show. We just love getting

429
00:23:32,240 --> 00:23:34,639
Speaker 1: your feedback and we really want to hear more. You

430
00:23:34,680 --> 00:23:37,360
Speaker 1: can talk to us and follow us on Twitter at

431
00:23:37,680 --> 00:23:42,000
Speaker 1: Richard Reeves Richard Lee Reeves for our guest Tori stillwell

432
00:23:42,080 --> 00:23:48,560
Speaker 1: and Akito seven. See you next week. This episode of

433
00:23:48,600 --> 00:23:53,560
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Benchmark was sponsored by HSBC. With HSBC, you have

434
00:23:53,680 --> 00:23:56,200
Speaker 1: up to the minute visibility and control of your global

435
00:23:56,240 --> 00:23:59,200
Speaker 1: cash positions, so your business can move at the speed

436
00:23:59,200 --> 00:24:01,159
Speaker 1: of opportunity. Hs b C