Raj Chetty on Economic Mobility
What this covers
Raj Chetty joins Russ Roberts to discuss his research on what drives economic mobility in America, with a particular focus on a recent study published in Nature that identifies economic connectedness—the degree to which low- and high-income people interact within a community—as a surprisingly strong predictor of upward mobility. The conversation moves between Chetty's empirical findings, their policy implications, and methodological questions about how economists verify causal claims. Central to the discussion is the measurement of cross-class friendships using privacy-protected Facebook data on 72 million Americans, and the argument that economic connectedness matters more than poverty, inequality, or segregation alone in determining whether children escape their starting income.
The conversation covers several distinct findings and tensions. Chetty argues that segregation appears driven by removable barriers—information gaps, difficulty navigating housing markets—rather than deep preference, as demonstrated by the Seattle Creating Moves to Opportunity experiment, where a $2,500 counselor intervention raised moves to high-opportunity neighborhoods from 15% to 60%. He estimates that closing the connectedness gap would raise low-income children's adult incomes by roughly 20%, though acknowledges this is not a determinant of fate; zip code alone explains only 5–10% of individual outcomes. The discussion also addresses the decline in absolute upward mobility across generations—from roughly 90% of children born in the 1940s–50s earning more than their parents, to about 50% today—and examines whether policy interventions coupling resources with social-capital support might prove more effective than traditional approaches. A thread throughout is Chetty's insistence that theory remains essential to empirical work, particularly for extrapolating findings to new contexts and handling general vs partial equilibrium dynamics that simple treatment-control comparisons cannot capture.
Chetty argues that 'economic connectedness'—the degree to which low- and high-income people interact within a community—is the single most powerful predictor of upward economic mobility across U.S. neighborhoods, distinct from other forms of social capital, and that this points toward tractable policy interventions like assisted moves and pairing resources with social support.
- Across-neighborhood mobility correlates strongly (~0.7) with economic connectedness even after controlling for poverty, segregation, and inequality
- Closing the connectedness gap by moving low-income kids to comparable neighborhoods would raise their adult incomes by ~20%
- Segregation appears driven by removable barriers (information, navigation) rather than deep preferences, as shown by the Seattle Creating Moves to Opportunity experiment
Interconnected housing, zoning, and school policies systematically reduce mobility and increase economic segregation.
- A cluster of American policies reduces physical and economic mobility and increases economic segregation: restrictive rules on building new housing in cities, minimum apartment-size zoning laws that bar poor people's toehold, neighborhood-based school assignment that segregates schooling by income from kindergarten onward, and employer-tied healthcare; together these have made Americans move less and intermingle less, which is corrosive for a democracy.
“we make it hard to build new housing in American cities”
Economic segregation becomes self-reinforcing through social barriers that price reductions alone cannot overcome.
- Once economic segregation gets entrenched it is hard to reverse, because moving into a new neighborhood is socially intimidating—the cars, dress, and child-rearing norms differ, making people uncomfortable and inclined to return to familiar areas; so reducing housing prices via zoning is insufficient, and a counselor/mentor who provides knowledge and norms is needed to break it down.
“60% of people in the treatment group end up moving to a high upward mobility place, compared to 15% in the controlled”
Mobility data showing poorest people outpacing parents partly reflects mechanical income effects rather than real progress.
- In the mobility data, the poorest people do better than the richest at getting ahead of their parents, partly mechanically: if your parents are poor it is easier to exceed their income, whereas if they are rich it is harder—so longitudinal evidence shows people generally do get ahead.
“the poorest people do better than some of the richest people in terms of getting ahead of their parents. Partly because if your parents are poor, it's easier to get ahead of them.”
Econometric credibility is limited because complex assumptions cannot be verified against ground truth like physical science.
- A core problem with the empirical 'credibility revolution' is that econometric results are hard to verify because they rely on many complex assumptions and cannot be checked against ground truth the way physics can (e.g. predicting exactly where a spacecraft lands); psychology has seen much of its empirical work fail to replicate, and economics may face a similar problem.
“It's really hard to know how credible it is. I know it's called the credibility revolution--obviously in Psychology, less so than in Economics, but in Psychology a lot of the empirical work has been discredited.”