Spot the errors in this argument:

They say education explain differences in household wealth. “Yet large racial and ethnic wealth gaps exist even among college graduates and among families headed by someone with a graduate or professional degree.” These unexplained gaps in racial and ethnic wealth are the result of “unobservable facts” reflecting “systemic/structural” barriers “such as discrimination or other long-lasting or structural disadvantages.…The remainder of the gaps await more fundamental change in the nature of our society and the individuals who inhabit it. [These findings reveal] the extent of our ignorance about the ultimate causes of and potential remedies for racial and ethnic wealth gaps.”

- Quoted parts from College Is Not Enough: Higher Education Does Not Eliminate Racial and Ethnic Wealth Gaps by William R. Emmons and Lowell R. Ricketts (2017) Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review.

To simplify the authors’ argument:

There are a few standard explanations for unequal outcomes. But those explanations do not explain all the variance in outcomes. Therefore, unobservable facts reflecting systemic barriers explain the rest and they are the ultimate cause of injustice. Elimination of these barriers will require fundamental change in the nature of our society.

Here’s the problem: occupational factors combined with age are much better predictors of wealth than education. Education level is only a rough proxy for career trajectories. And we all know that college degrees are not all created equal. Degrees in the humanities, art, and the social sciences don’t have the same earning potential as degrees in engineering, medicine, or law. Plus, having the right degree doesn’t automatically mean one will advance to the top of one’s profession. Other factors* are at play.

But the authors of College Is Not Enough: Higher Education Does Not Eliminate Racial and Ethnic Wealth Gaps weren’t interested in exploring additional “observable facts” that might contribute to wealth disparities, such as factors that predict occupation and career advancement within an occupational field. They simply jumped to the conclusion that systemic discrimination was the problem and structural change the solution.

My impression is that the authors knew where they wanted to go and found a way to get there.

—

* For instance, it is well documented that math ability influences choice of college major, job preferences, and career earnings – and that, on average, African-American college students score worse on math ability tests than White students. For example, according to one study, African American STEM majors trailed White STEM majors by “well over one standard deviation”.  According to another study, “preferences for jobs associated with particular majors do differ across abilities.” Thus, even within the same occupational field, math ability may impact job choice, promotion and pay. This possibility is worth looking into, because if math ability does indeed account for some portion of unequal income and wealth outcomes, then very specific remedies are suggested (all related to improving math ability throughout the lifespan). The remedies may not be as sexy as “structural change”, but I bet they’d be more effective.

None of this is to say that discrimination doesn’t contribute to unequal outcomes. But it’s disingenuous to look at a subset of other possible causes and then simply assert that systemic barriers requiring structural change account for whatever the other factors don’t explain.

References:

Arcidiacono, P. (2004). "Ability sorting and the returns to college major." Journal of Econometrics 121(1): 343-375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2003.10.010

Emmons, WR and Ricketts, LR (2017) "College Is Not Enough: Higher Education Does Not Eliminate Racial and Ethnic Wealth Gaps," Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review, First Quarter 2017, pp. 7-39. https://doi.org/10.20955/r.2017.7-39 

Riegle-Crumb, C., & King, B. (2010). Questioning a White Male Advantage in STEM: Examining Disparities in College Major by Gender and Race/Ethnicity. Educational Researcher, 39(9), 656–664. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X10391657