The North County Times reports that there is a “convergence in values” between Mexican and American people:

In fundamental attitudes about work, religion, sex, politics, the free market and the like, we are becoming more like each other, according to polls during the last 30 years, and the melding is only likely to continue. The growing economic integration under the North American Free Trade Agreement, an explosion in travel and communication, and the fact that 10 percent of Mexicans now live here and that many Americans are retiring there help push the trend.

Recent survey and poll data provides insight:

Half of all Mexicans in 2005 supported actually abolishing the border, a doubling since 1980, according to the latest World Values Surveys, done by a global association of sociologists.

This is consistent with a September Pew study showing that a third of Mexicans would “say yes” to moving to the U.S., and 18 percent would do so “without authorization.” They are pulled by jobs and relatives here, helping reverse what historically had been a deep suspicion of the U.S.

Indeed, the World Values survey finds that the number of Mexicans who distrust Americans as a people plummeted from 52 percent in 1990 to 31 percent, while those who trust us grew. Mexicans overwhelmingly look favorably on President Barack Obama, Gallup and other polls show, but that is a more fickle political measure.

Far fewer Americans —- 18 percent in the World Values survey —- favor union with Mexico. But until the recent drug violence along the border, nearly two-thirds of Americans have supported closer ties and had favorable views of Mexico, according to various polls from the last 20 years.

Americans remain righteous about maintaining national identity, but so do Mexicans. In fact, the World Values survey shows that Mexicans have more national pride than Americans, by a margin of 83 percent to 66 percent.

Even the gap between individualist versus collective orientations seems to be narrowing:

In the 1950s, the celebrated sociologists David Riesman and William Whyte lamented the decline of individualism in America, and they were partially right, as Americans have steadily placed higher emphasis on what polls coincidentally show are Mexican values oriented toward community, family and group.

At the same time, Mexicans in 1980 placed little emphasis on encouraging children to be independent, imaginative or determined, but now do so almost as much as Americans, according to World Values.

So…

The list goes on, and what such convergence on broad values means, at the very least, is that mutual understanding becomes easier.

The Boston Globe also picked up on Devah Pager and colleagues’ findings about the persistence of racial discrimination in hiring:

The study was run by sociologists at Princeton who recruited and trained white, black, and Latino “well-spoken, clean-cut young men” to apply for real entry-level jobs throughout New York City with fictitious, but essentially identical, resumes. The results were stark: “Blacks were only half as likely to receive a callback or job offer relative to equally qualified whites; moreover, black and Latino applicants with clean backgrounds fared no better than a white applicant just released from prison.” Even worse, the minority candidates were often channeled to positions inferior to those advertised, while the white candidates were often channeled to superior positions.

The Boston Globe explores the economic effects of religion, and reports:

The Chicago Tribune reports on recent research by University of Chicago sociologist, Mario Small, who studies mothers with young children in high-quality child care centers. He reports that “Parents come to school to find someone to care for their children. But they end up finding ways to take care of each other.”

Further:

What he found was that, after their children’s enrollment, the women were able to access information they didn’t have before — the same kind of resources that can be so essential to career and financial success, but can also help build strong and stable families. He also found that women with children in day care had more friends and lower incidence of depression than those with children at home.

Small calls it “social capital” and says that the ties forged between parents can be as valuable as more formal networks, such as alumni groups, country clubs and fraternal organizations.

Small finds this to be consistent across class and race:

In 2004, he surveyed 300 randomly selected child care centers and preschools, located in four ethnically distinct neighborhoods, along with data from the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study of 3,500 parents in the nation’s 20 largest cities. He found that the benefits cut across class and racial lines. But for low-income parents, the payoff was even more significant, said the sociologist. Those who had no clue about how to access elite private schools, for example, were able to learn the admissions game, from interviews to scholarships.

This sociological finding isn’t necessarily surprising to parents and service providers:

There’s much that child care providers can do to facilitate these links, according to Celena Roldan of Erie Neighborhood House, which has four Chicago sites that offer a range of services for children, including day care. Ties are strengthened through book fairs, field trips and a parents’ council.

“We expected to educate parents about their kids … but what we didn’t realize was how much of the parents’ own mental health and sense of well-being would be affected,” Roldan said. “And when our parents feel better about themselves, it impacts their children.”

Marisol Rodriguez, 35, said that while Erie House parents may inquire about play dates and carpooling, she’s also found herself offering advice on life issues, such as going back to school.

“With all the outings and things, it’s easy to become friends with the other moms,” said the Southwest Side resident, who has a 3- and 5-year-old in Erie House’s child care, as well as two older kids in the after-school program.

Increased social capital may, it seems, be an added parental perk of child care.

In 2007, Paris initiated a bike-sharing program to  provide “an inexpensive, healthy and low-carbon alternative to hopping in a car or bus”. The program purchased 20,600 specially-made bicycles, 80 percent of which have now been vandalized or stolen. The New York Times reports:

“The symbol of a fixed-up, eco-friendly city has become a new source for criminality,” Le Monde mourned in an editorial over the summer. “The Vélib’ was aimed at civilizing city travel. It has increased incivilities.”

The heavy, sandy-bronze Vélib’ bicycles are seen as an accoutrement of the “bobos,” or “bourgeois-bohèmes,” the trendy urban middle class, and they stir resentment and covetousness. They are often being vandalized in a socially divided Paris by resentful, angry or anarchic youth, the police and sociologists say.

A sociologist comments:

Bruno Marzloff, a sociologist who specializes in transportation, said, “One must relate this to other incivilities, and especially the burning of cars,” referring to gangs of immigrant youths burning cars during riots in the suburbs in 2005.

He said he believed there was social revolt behind Vélib’ vandalism, especially for suburban residents, many of them poor immigrants who feel excluded from the glamorous side of Paris.

“It is an outcry, a form of rebellion; this violence is not gratuitous,” Mr. Marzloff said. “There is an element of negligence that means, ‘We don’t have the right to mobility like other people, to get to Paris it’s a huge pain, we don’t have cars, and when we do, it’s too expensive and too far.’ ”

Despite these setbacks, the bike-sharing will continue:

Still, with more than 63 million rentals since the program was begun in mid-2007, the Vélib’ is an established part of Parisian life, and the program has been extended to provide 4,000 Vélib’s in 29 towns on the city’s edges.

The recently released 2008 American Community Survey (from the U.S. Census Bureau) finds about 4 million “multigenerational” American households, reports the Houston Chronicle. This trend seems to be enjoying renewed popularity, sociologists note:

While the number of multigenerational households has remained steady since the 2000 Census, sociologists and demographers say they expect to see an increase. Immigration and out-of-wedlock childbearing generally spur high rates of multigenerational households in certain geographical areas, and they will continue to be factors, experts said.

What’s pushing the trend now is the recession and baby boomers. With layoffs and furloughs, people are moving back in with their parents or other family members to save money. Also, many baby boomers are taking care of their elderly parents as the cost of long-term care soars. Baby boomers themselves are growing old, too. Their children will be preparing to take care of them, experts said.

“People are going back to living the way they did in the beginning of the 20th century,” said Ray Eve, head of the sociology department at the University of Texas at Arlington.

Eve said economics was a driving factor then, just like it is now.

This illustrates how the idea of “family” shifts over time:

Society has had a long fascination with the idea of the traditional family — father, mother and children — but the reality is it has never really existed, said Holly Heard, a sociology professor at Rice University.

People often have lived with extended family members, and they do more so now than 20 years ago, Heard said.

For the early part of the 20th century to the 1950s, multigenerational households were fairly common. After World War II, people became more affluent, and family members moved out because they could afford to live on their own. A shift began to occur in the 1980s, when the recession hit, sociologists said.

Despite the day-to-day challenges that may come with three or more generations sharing one home, sociologists note benefits, as well:

Studies show some physical and psychological benefits for multiple generations living together, sociologists said.

People who live with relatives tend to have better health and are less suicidal. Children are also less likely to be delinquent because they have additional family members to nurture and take care of them, they said.

Explore more housing data from the American Community Survey.