mindfullibrarian's review against another edition
4.0
This book was a great thinking piece for why the top 20% of the population (households earning over $120,000) are as much a problem in creating a classist society as are the top 1%. It was an uncomfortable read/listen, as it proposes solutions that would directly impact ME in a financially negative way, but I'm all for lifting those lower than I am, so I completely understand where he is coming from. All of the solutions are very high-level and policy-based, but for the lowly citizen, it can at least make you give pause when moving the earth to give your child every single opportunity to try to move them ahead of the rest, or moving out of a lower class neighborhood to one with better schools........a provocative read for sure.
rick2's review against another edition
1.0
This is a relatively short book, and it still managed to be full of fluff.
I guess it’s Brookings doing what they do best, which is mostly regurgitating the current zeitgeist of liberal thought into talking points for cocktail parties.
Can’t help but chuckle at the references to JD Vance after recent events in Ohio
I guess it’s Brookings doing what they do best, which is mostly regurgitating the current zeitgeist of liberal thought into talking points for cocktail parties.
Can’t help but chuckle at the references to JD Vance after recent events in Ohio
raingirlpdx's review against another edition
5.0
This book got a little wonky in the middle, and I was unclear about the "What to Do About It" conclusions, but it definitely defines issues of legacy college paths, internships, and other covert antics that keep the rich - rich, and unassailable. The halls of power begin in kindergarten and now continue throughout life. Private schools, elite job paths and insularity are contributing to the divides in society.
bike's review against another edition
A little more surface level than I would have hoped but in general a useful resource/framing.
some thoughts:
- really glad he talked about nimbyism as a form of opportunity hoarding. would have loved if he'd gone more in depth
- despite the title, the book doesn't focus that much on opportunity hoarding. mostly focuses on diagnosing the problem (lack of true meritocracy)
- frustrating how often he referenced j.d. vance, said things like "many conservatives have authentic, deep, often religiously based views about sex and contraception", said he was optimistic that trump would continue obama era policy to increase equity (lol)
- his section on reducing unwanted pregnancies - I agree it's a good goal but the language he used made me uncomfortable: "the key is to ensure that the liberalization of attitudes toward sex does not lead to a liberalization of attitudes toward the moral responsibility to plan when, how, and with whom we bring children into the world. Causal sex is fine. Casual childbearing is not". YIKES.he didn't adequately address the extent to which reproductive justice is threatened in this country. Ridiculous to act as if this is an issue of "casual childbearing" (wtf) and not an issue of states literally mandating scientifically inaccurate sex ed, funding crisis pregnancy centers that mislead women in order to get them to continue their pregnancies, limited access to contraception, etc. Notably, he did not advocate for increased abortion access at all, just increased contraceptive access. Also, he didn't clearly link how unwanted pregnancies related to the topic of his book (opportunity hoarding). For those reading this section, I'd recommend just reading The Turnaway Study or work by that author instead
- he cited some old, outdated studies (e.g., the "conversation gap" between poor and wealthy children) whose methodology has been criticized (https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2018/06/01/615188051/lets-stop-talking-about-the-30-million-word-gap)
some thoughts:
- really glad he talked about nimbyism as a form of opportunity hoarding. would have loved if he'd gone more in depth
- despite the title, the book doesn't focus that much on opportunity hoarding. mostly focuses on diagnosing the problem (lack of true meritocracy)
- frustrating how often he referenced j.d. vance, said things like "many conservatives have authentic, deep, often religiously based views about sex and contraception", said he was optimistic that trump would continue obama era policy to increase equity (lol)
- his section on reducing unwanted pregnancies - I agree it's a good goal but the language he used made me uncomfortable: "the key is to ensure that the liberalization of attitudes toward sex does not lead to a liberalization of attitudes toward the moral responsibility to plan when, how, and with whom we bring children into the world. Causal sex is fine. Casual childbearing is not". YIKES.he didn't adequately address the extent to which reproductive justice is threatened in this country. Ridiculous to act as if this is an issue of "casual childbearing" (wtf) and not an issue of states literally mandating scientifically inaccurate sex ed, funding crisis pregnancy centers that mislead women in order to get them to continue their pregnancies, limited access to contraception, etc. Notably, he did not advocate for increased abortion access at all, just increased contraceptive access. Also, he didn't clearly link how unwanted pregnancies related to the topic of his book (opportunity hoarding). For those reading this section, I'd recommend just reading The Turnaway Study or work by that author instead
- he cited some old, outdated studies (e.g., the "conversation gap" between poor and wealthy children) whose methodology has been criticized (https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2018/06/01/615188051/lets-stop-talking-about-the-30-million-word-gap)