Here at the Spherical Model, we talk about the
interrelationships of the political, economic, and social spheres. Freedom
affects prosperity, and both are significantly affected by the civilization
level of the people.
I came across a long piece by Megan McCardle for Bloomberg News (I’m estimating 25-30
pages, but online it’s a bit uncertain) about the state of Utah, where I grew up. And the
interrelationships are evident.
Let’s start with some descriptions. The story begins with
the population: 192,672. That’s the city proper. But that’s not really
accurate. That puts it in the range of the Tri-Cities in Washington State
(Kennewick, Richland, and Pasco together), which has a small town feel, and not
even a 4-year college. The Salt Lake metropolitan area is actually well over a
million. And if you extend the area north to Ogden and south to Provo, you’re
up to nearly 2.5 million. It’s not as big as, say, Houston, but it’s
significant in population size.
Salt Lake City, view from airplane, May 2014 |
Salt Lake City and surrounding areas have a high percentage
of Mormons, since the valley was settled by Mormons after they had been driven
from five previous homes by mobs burning and looting their property and killing
them. (The Governor of Missouri had signed an extermination order, which made
murdering Mormons legal.) So, it’s no wonder they wanted a place of their own,
away from threats, where they could settle permanently.
Going back there, when daughter Social Sphere went to
college, she commented, “I’ve never seen so many blonds.” I hadn’t noticed it
growing up, but she was right. It’s a little startling after Texas. A lot of
the Utah population comes from the northeastern US, plus many from England and
Scandinavia (my heritage). So blonds are common.
But there are other notable demographics as well. Hispanics
are around 22%. Then there are sizable populations of Pacific Islanders, and
Asians (Nepal, Myanmar, Sri Lanka), and Bosnians.
There are only about 2.7% blacks. There has never been a
migration of blacks to Utah. There has also never been slavery, and blacks (and
women) had the vote all along, before statehood in the 1890s (statehood took
away the women’s right to vote for a couple of decades). McArdle asserts that institutional racism is the reason blacks stay away—I have to say that’s an
incorrect assessment of the people, and of the Mormons. But I’ll save that
debate for another day.
Anyway, some of the comparisons between Utah and other places
are like apples and oranges just because there isn’t an underlying racism
issue. And another overriding question is, can the things that are working be
transferred elsewhere, or is it because of the Mormons?
Upward Mobility
Upward mobility—the American Dream—is more likely in Utah
than in the rest of the US. The main impetus of the article is to explore why
there is this upward mobility gap:
A child born in the bottom quintile of incomes in Charlotte
[North Carolina] has only a 4 percent chance of making it into the top
quintile. A child in Salt Lake City, on the other hand, has more than a 10.8
percent chance—achingly close to the 11.7 percent found in Denmark and well on
the way to the 20 percent chance you would expect in a perfectly just world.
Government Spending
Government spending isn’t
the reason. Utah’s government seems to commit very limited funds for both
fighting poverty and for education. “Utah is dead last in per-pupil education
spending.” It’s not last in educational outcomes, however. For K-12 schools, it ranks 22nd, but in higher education it ranks 2nd. For
overall education it ranks 9th.
They have a surprising solution for homelessness that seems
to be working, called “Housing First.” It turns out, if you just outright pay
for housing for the homeless, before dealing with the cause of that individual’s
homelessness, it’s cheaper and more effective than the crisis-led practice of
dealing with them once they show up in emergency rooms.
As McArdle summarizes:
That’s the thing about the government here. It is not big,
but it’s also not … bad. The state’s compassionate conservatism goes
hand-in-hand with an unusually functional bureaucracy.
Volunteer Help
Besides actually cheerful, helpful government workers, the
biggest factor seems to be community involvement, with an army of volunteers.
The volunteering starts in the church wards, where bishops
keep a close eye on what’s going on in the congregation, and tap members as
needed to help each other. If you’re out of work, they may reach out to small
business people to find out who’s hiring. If your marriage is in trouble,
they’ll find a couple who went through a hard time themselves to offer advice.
Besides the very local, very personal volunteering, there’s
also larger, more institutional helping. Welfare Square is visited by
governments all over the country and the world, to see how it’s done, and to
see what they can replicate. It’s not just a food pantry; it’s a production
facility—actually a network of production facilities: bakeries, dairies,
canneries, farms, orchards, and more.
Here in Houston we have a peanut butter cannery producing
for Church welfare storehouses in Utah and all over. It’s run by volunteer
labor. Additionally, the cannery is used by the Houston Food Bank to produce about 400,000 jars a year for local food pantries. The only jars actually
sold are to Mormons buying a case or so for their personal family pantries. All
the rest is donated to the poor.
LDS Peanut Butter Factory in Houston |
Help from the Church is intended to be temporary. And
recipients are expected to do volunteer work in exchange for the help, whenever
physically possible. Usually help will be to tide a household over for a matter
of a few months, all the while helping them find gainful employment, or head
toward the training or education they need. There’s no life-long welfare help
in the Church.
McArdle contrasts that with government
programs:
This combination of financial help and the occasional verbal
kick in the pants is something close to what the ideal of government help used
to be. Social workers used to make individual judgments about what sort of help
their clients needed or deserved. But such judgments always have an inherently
subjective and arbitrary quality, which courts began to frown on in the middle
of the 20th century, in part because they offered considerable discretion for
racial discrimination.
Turning government welfare into an automatic entitlement
based on simple rules undoubtedly made it fairer, and kept people from slipping
through the cracks. But making it harder to remove benefits from people who
stopped trying also made it easier for people to make understandable short-term
decisions which turned into long-term dependence, leaving a significant number
of people disconnected from work and mired in multi-generational poverty.
One of the factors in upward mobility is what BYU research
David Sims calls “middle classness that’s so broad it’s almost infectious.” He
means that young people are exposed to social differences beyond how they were
raised. Moving up looks possible. And belief leads to efforts to succeed.
Lots of Marriage, Not
Much Alcohol
Mormons contribute some additional social benefits. Mormons
don’t drink alcohol, so poverty-related outcomes of alcohol addiction are a much
smaller problem in Utah.
Also, Mormons are more likely to be married. We’ve talked
about the formula for avoiding poverty in America at
the Spherical Model from time to time. That comes up again here:
Economists Isabel Sawhill and Ron Haskins famously estimated that we
could reduce poverty by 71 percent if the poor did just four things: finished
high school, worked full time, got married and had no more than two
children — and the number of children was the least important factor in that
calculation.
Salt Lake Temple, photo from the Conference Center in the rain, January 2012, by Social Sphere |
Marriage avoids poverty not only for the couple as individuals,
but also for the children in the next generation. Marriage builds social
capital. In areas of the US where it looks like upward mobility is racially
caused, “once they controlled for the family structure of the community, that
effect disappeared. Marriage seems to have more of a correlation with mobility
than race does.”
And not just the families of married parents benefit; neighborhoods
benefit:
If you live in a neighborhood full of single mothers who had
a hard time finishing school, that’s probably the future you’ll expect for
yourself and your own kids. If you live in a neighborhood full of thriving
two-parent families, that’s probably the future you’ll envision, even if your
own father disappeared when you were 2. Marriage matters at the individual
level, but it also matters at the community level, because the community can
strongly shape individual behavior.
That sounds just like something we’d come up with here at
the Spherical Model. Families are the basic unit of civilization. You need a
critical mass of families with intact married parents in order to get out of
savagery and into civilization.
Results
So, here’s what you need, if you want Utah’s results of
exiting poverty. You need married parents raising families with stability and
caring. You need a volunteer force to care for the less fortunate. You need
people willing to care for one another, rather than leaving that to government.
And you need minimal government bureaucracy that, where necessary, is done with
care and efficiency.
You might get that where there’s not a handy supply of
Mormons. I’m even hopeful that it is possible. That’s what the Spherical Model
shows. But if you need social capital to get underway, it sure is handy to
start with a Mormon population.
No comments:
Post a Comment