Arnold Kling Versus David Leonhardt

George Leef

My friend Arnold Kling takes issue with several points in Leonhardt’s piece, especially his supposition that when people with college degrees who do work that doesn’t call for academic training earn more than people in the same field who don’t, it’s because going to college gave them more skills. Kling argues that it’s mistaken to assume causality. He suggests that if we could randomly put individuals who have college capabilities and those who don’t into various jobs, we would find that college coursework matters little.

Leonhardt’s headline was that college “pays off” even for cashiers. (The very fact that there are enough cashiers with college degrees to gather data on ought to cause people to wonder if we haven’t oversold college.) I’ll assume the statistics on that (derived from the new Carnevale study) are accurate. Why would it be that, on average, cashiers with college degrees earn more than cashiers without them? Obviously not because college courses improved their ability to do that work. Vocational courses haven’t yet descended to Cashier Studies 101. And I’m quite certain that employers don’t have dual pay scales for new cashiers, with college-credentialed ones getting more than the non-credentialed. So how do we account for the average differential?

I submit that it’s because some people are more reliable than others. Reliable workers (cashiers, dishwashers, opinion writers — anything) are more apt to stay on the job and earn raises, and people who have the capability of doing college work are more likely to be reliable than are people who don’t have that capability. It isn’t that college automatically makes someone a better worker, but that people who have a stronger work ethic, which correlates with college attendance, are more likely to stick around to earn raises. Workers who don’t have the discipline that it takes to get through even feeble college courses are the ones most likely to quit or get fired.

In short, what Leonhardt (and Carnevale) assume is a return to the “investment" in college is really a return to having basic skills and attitudes toward working.

  • Share

Most Commented

May 7, 2024


Creating Students, Not Activists

The mobs desecrating the American flag, smashing windows, chanting genocidal slogans—this always was the end game of the advocates of the right to protest, action civics, student activ......

March 9, 2024


A Portrait of Claireve Grandjouan

Claireve Grandjouan, when I knew her, was Head of the Classics Department at Hunter College, and that year gave a three-hour Friday evening class in Egyptian archaeology....

April 20, 2024


The Academic's Roadmap

By all means, pursue your noble dream of improving the condition of humanity through your research and teaching. Could I do it all again, I would, but I would do things very differently....

Most Read

May 15, 2015


Where Did We Get the Idea That Only White People Can Be Racist?

A look at the double standard that has arisen regarding racism, illustrated recently by the reaction to a black professor's biased comments on Twitter....

October 12, 2010


Ask a Scholar: What is the True Definition of Latino?

What does it mean to be Latino? Are only Latin American people Latino, or does the term apply to anyone whose language derived from Latin?...

September 21, 2010


Ask a Scholar: What Does YHWH Elohim Mean?

A reader asks, "If Elohim refers to multiple 'gods,' then Yhwh Elohim really means Lord of Gods...the one of many, right?" A Hebrew expert answers....