Edward Conard

Top Ten New York Times Bestselling Author

  • “…reminds us that inequality sends a signal of what society lacks most, in America’s case, entrepreneurship and risk taking.” - Lawrence Lindsey, CEO, The Lindsey Group, former Director of the National Economic Council
  • “Unintended Consequences is full of substance, it is one of the must-read books of the year, and once I finish it I will be giving it a second read through right away.” - Tyler Cowen, Professor, George Mason University
  • “…a fresh argument for the productive value of inequality.” - David Autor, Professor of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • “Unintended Consequences represents the most cogent and persuasive analysis of the Financial Crisis to date.” - Andrei Shleifer, 1999 John Bates Clark Medal Winner
  • “…a very valuable contribution.” - Larry Summers, former Secretary of the Treasury and director of the National Economic Council, president emeritus, Harvard University
  • “…a comprehensive explanation of the modern economy.” - Julian Robertson, Founder, Tiger Management
  • “…reminds us that inequality sends a signal of what society lacks most, in America’s case, entrepreneurship and risk taking.” - Lawrence Lindsey, CEO, The Lindsey Group, former Director of the National Economic Council
  • “…a must-read for serious students of economic policy.” - Glenn Hubbard, Dean, Columbia Business School, and former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers
  • “…challenges misconceptions that distort our economic debates.” - Arthur Brooks, President of the American Enterprise Institute
  • “Unintended Consequences offers deep and well-argued analyses on almost every issue.” - The New York Times
  • “Unintended Consequences is far smarter and more thought-provoking than most economics written for the general public” - Greg Mankiw, Harvard University, Former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors
  • “…a very valuable contribution.” - Larry Summers, former Secretary of the Treasury and director of the National Economic Council, president emeritus, Harvard University
Upside of Inequality Oxford Unintended Consequences

AI Summary. Younger generations in the United States and other rich countries hold more zero-sum views than older ones, a pattern researchers link to growing up amid slower economic growth and lower mobility. People who have surpassed their parents, or whose families rose over generations, are less likely to think in zero-sum terms.

Stefanie Stantcheva The Economist
Date Posted:
Is Database:
Database

Zero-sum thinking, in terms of political and policy views is strongly associated with lower levels of intergenerational upward mobility. @S_Stantcheva notes, “Younger generations today are much more zero-sum than older ones.”

Does slower growth and lower mobility breed zero-sum thinking?

Core argument: Younger Americans think in more zero-sum terms than older generations, a pattern attributed to growing up during periods of slower economic growth and lower mobility.

Younger generations today are much more zero-sum than older ones. This way of thinking doesn’t just appear out of nowhere; it stems from people’s economic environment and experiences—not only their own, but also those of their families and even earlier generations. Economic mobility and growth play a big role. People who have done better than their parents, or whose families have experienced upward mobility over time, are less likely to think in zero-sum terms. This also explains why younger generations in America are more zero-sum: they have grown up during times of slower economic growth and lower mobility. Other rich countries exhibit a similar generational pattern. In contrast, in many poorer countries where younger generations have experienced more growth than earlier ones, the pattern flips.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. Younger Americans think in more zero-sum terms than older generations, a pattern attributed to growing up during periods of slower economic growth and lower mobility.
  2. People who have done better than their parents, or whose families experienced upward mobility over generations, are less likely to hold zero-sum views.
  3. Other rich countries show a similar generational pattern, while in many poorer countries whose younger generations experienced more growth than earlier ones, the pattern flips.

Related Articles:

  • Zero-Sum Thinking and the Roots of U.S. Political Divides — Zero-sum thinking — viewing gains for one group as losses for another — is associated with greater support for liberal economic policies, stronger alignment with the Democratic Party, and weaker alignment with the Republican Party. The authors also find it linked to believing the QAnon conspiracy theory holds some truth and to sympathy for the attack on the U.S. Capitol.
  • Are We Destined For A Zero-Sum Future? — Survey data show average views in high-income countries have become 20% more zero-sum — the belief that people get rich only at others' expense — over the past century, with two rises in zero-sum attitudes coinciding with growth slowdowns in the 1970s and the past two decades.
  • The Anatomy of Mamdani’s Political Earthquake — An analysis of New York City's mayoral vote finds that Mamdani's coalition centered on working-, middle-, and upper-middle-class renters across white, Hispanic and Asian neighborhoods and on the youngest voters, while Cuomo's support came from both the wealthy and the poor and from middle-class Black voters in an older Black electorate.
Showing 189 database articles primarily about Politics
Currently filtering by: