FIG. 3.-Expenditure for education in 1910 per capita of population 5 to 17 years of age, and income in 1919 per capita of total population of rankings by total income in 1919 with total population in 1900 is 0.9139, with 1910 population 0.9470, and with 1920 population 0.9529. This close relationship, however, does not hold in the comparison of per capita income rankings with the rankings in total population-the correlation coefficient being 0.1096 for 1900, 0.0285 for 1910, and 0.0804 for 1920. From these correlations it would appear that a State may rank very high in total income and yet not compare very favorably with other States in per capita income, just as a large factory might have a much larger total pay roll than a smaller one near by and yet the average wage of the employees of the large plant be much lower than the average wage received by the employees in the smaller factory. A large total income does not imply a high per capita income any more than does a large factory pay roll indicate high wages for all employees, nor does the total expenditure for education show in any better way the economic condition of the schools. The correlation between total income in 1919 and the per capita income for the same year is only 0.1531 (by rankings), but there is a good correlation between the rankings in total expenditure for education and total population the same year (0.8138 in 1900, 0.8476 in 1910, and 0.8209 in 1920). This seems to substantiate the studies of the State per capita expenditures by showing that some States rank high in total expenditure merely because of large population. Table 2 shows the close relationship between total income, total expenditures, and total population. The two groups are the 12 highest and 12 lowest States in total expenditure for education in the years indicated. The same States appear in the first group for both 1900 and 1910, but in the lowest group of States there was some change during the decade from 1900to 1910. This table offers a good illustration of the "total payroll" type of comparisons. In this table, however, there is evidence of the effect of high and low per capita expenditures, since it is evident that the rankings for total income follow the order of total expenditure for education more closely than they do the rankings of the States in total population. In itself, and for this table only, this fact would have little significance; but when the results of the study of the per capita relationships are considered, this tendency appears to be still further evidence of the effect of educational expenditure upon income. This relationship is worthy of careful consideration because the very considerable difference between the order of States when arranged according to total income and the rankings in per capita income causes an entirely different arrangement of the States. If the rankings were exactly the same for 1900 and 1910, then the means of the rankings would be the same. The minimum mean for the first group is 6.6 and for the last group 43.6. The mean ranking TABLE 3.-Total population and expenditures for education, 1922 in total income is the same (7.1) in both 1900 and 1910 for the first group because the same States compose both groups. Since 7.1 is nearer 6.6 than is either 8.8 or 8.1, it is evident that the rankings in total income more nearly approach the rankings in total expenditure for education than they do the rankings in total population, as indicated in the previous paragraph. The same condition appears for the lower group in both years. The change of three States is responsible for the difference in the means of the rankings in total income. Chapter III EDUCATION AND WEALTH To know the financial strength of either an individual or a State we need to know not only the current income but also the total accumulated wealth of the individual or of the State. Because the wealth of the State includes so many things other than accumulated income, the effect of educational expenditure should be much less evident than in the case of comparisons with income. Natural forces and resources constitute a very considerable part of the accumulated wealth of some States, and these are influenced only indirectly by educational expenditures, although their usefulness and value are due largely to the development of their possibilities by men who have received the benefits of education. Again, the accumulation of wealth within a State extends over a considerable period of time, and we should not expect to find such immediate influence upon the comparative figures as would take place with incomes which change from year to year. A sudden change in the educational policy of a State might greatly increase the relative earning power of its students who become wage earners a few years hence, but it would require a number of years longer before the increased earning power of these same students would add a very material percentage of increase to the total of accumulated wealth. within the State. This is especially true as only a relatively small portion of the circulating capital known as income becomes transferred into a fixed form of wealth. Another source of difficulty is introduced into this study by our national tendency to migrate. The boys and girls educated in the Eastern States often go west to newer lands; farmers educated in the North may go south to take up work in a climate which they consider more satisfactory, and within the past few years there has been a noticeable migration of the Negro northward. These interstate movements, together with foreign immigration, are factors which must be kept in mind when considering a study of wealth accumulation over a period of years. In some States change in the character and number of inhabitants may have been sufficient to change considerably the normal rate of increase of wealth. In 1920 there were 22.2 per cent of the total native-born population living in other than their native States. |