The Haves and the Have Mores

[Starving Steve]

Re: The Haves and the Have Mores

"Engineering elite," is a hilarious term.

Yes, sure, we could absolutely employ millions in rudimentary construction jobs like China. However, in order to do it like China, we'd need to pay Chinese wages, meaning all $10 per hour jobs turn into $0.50 per hour jobs, and so forth. And all those people currently living in those housing areas to be rebuilt? Who cares about them, let them be displaced and disappear like they always do. Let's also try to improve the track record which is currently negative when it comes to adding places to live.

Why not have public tree-planting brigades in public parks and in public schools? The workers would be paid 50cents in silver coin for each hour of work.

I recall organizing a tree-planting brigade in the San Jose Unified School District. Our brigade of kids---- the kids loved spending a school day doing this--- planted 120 native redwood and oak trees in their schools.

Such a tree-planting brigade could be part of a public-works programme. And yes, the workers (or students) could be paid 50c in silver coin for each hour of work.

Other public-works projects that could be done: forest-thinning, forest fire-break construction, ground-cleaning in forests, planting of wind-breaks on the Great Plains, construction of water projects and aqeducts in the South-west, sea water de-salinization plants especially in the South-west, passenger-railroad construction, road improvements especially in Canada, LRT projects, traffic-engineering improvements such as synchronized signal-lights, among many other such public works projects.

Aside from the failure of the Obama Administration to use stimulus money for meaningful public works projects, we have the other great failure of the Obama bunch: the failure to pass Medicare, even the failure to propose a simple Medicare plan in one or two paragraphs that everyone in the Congress could understand.

What has happened to liberalism, especially in America?

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: The Haves and the Have Mores

The difference between a "liberal" and a "conservative" in this case is that the "liberal" looks at the world as say "why-not?" and the conservative says "it is not my concern".

No, I think you misunderstand conservatives.

Many of them, through their personal acts or perhaps through their churches and other organizations take deep concern in the well being of others in the world about them.

Please learn to distinguish between what is the proper concern of a person (much) and what is the proper concern of a large government (little.)

[c1ue]

Re: The Haves and the Have Mores

As an example, even among US immigrant groups, ethnic Chinese, for example, earn far more than ethnic Mexicans (actually several times). Neither group arrived in the US with an advantage of language or similar culture.

Many of the ethnic Asians who arrived in the US are far better educated than their Mexican counterparts.

These are the bureaucrats, professors, engineers and government officials who fled China, Vietnam, and other nations who turned to Communism in the post WW II era.

If you actually look at the ethnic Chinese who came over during the railroad era, the differences vs. the Mexicans are significantly less.

In fact one might argue that the proximity of Mexico means the difficulty for lower educated (and determined) individuals to reach the US from Mexico as opposed to say, Vietnam is another winnowing factor.

Either way your assertion that diversity leads to greater income disparity is a hypothesis which is not well founded.

Russia, for example, is also very homogeneous, yet has massive economic disparity.

Africa is another example of high homogeneity yet poor economic disparity.

In Asia for example (South East Asia) - in Malaysia, Indonesia and Philippines, the overseas Chinese are a hated minority (like Jews in an earlier time in Europe) but they virtually own those countries despite having arrived with almost nothing just a century or so ago and having regularly faced rampant bigotry and discrimination.

Again, the question is whether the education levels were also taken into account. On top of this the existence of the 'bamboo network' is well documented; Chinese trading clans sending offshoots into SE Asia. These immigrants are hardly ones which showed up with no skills, no money, and no backing.

Just as with the analogy of the Jews - higher levels of education can explain a great deal. Similarly it would be enlightening if the tax farming practices in Europe were replicated by the ethnic Chinese in SE Asia, or if religious prohibitions on moneylending also have an effect.

[Ghent12]

Re: The Haves and the Have Mores

Russia, for example, is also very homogeneous, yet has massive economic disparity.

Africa is another example of high homogeneity yet poor economic disparity.

I don't agree with hayekvindicated's hypothesis in its entirety, but I do disagree that these examples you post are refutations of it. Russia is not necessarily homogeneous, unless you are talking specifically about the western half of it. The further east you go, the more "Asian" the lineage and appearance.

In Africa it depends entirely on which country you are citing, but in general, they are also not highly homogeneous especially where there are large minorities of the descendants of European colonists. I'm sure you remember apartheid in South Africa. Other African nations face similar "crises of diversity" or whatever term you can choose to use to describe their issues with diversity. Even when the populations are "all African," there is usually a very low state of homogeneity. Various tribal and religious divisions serve to separate the populations, even providing catalysts for numerous genocidal campaigns.

[Starving Steve]

Re: The Haves and the Have Mores

The new China gives us a model for what could be done here (Starving Steve).

Sure thing, Steve. We could adopt the model, but are we ready for the massive air, water, and land pollution and general environmental degradation that resulted from the Chinese growth model? An estimated 750,000 Chinese die prematurely each year because of pollution.

And who did this estimate that 750,000 people die prematurely in China because of China's economic growth policies? The EPA? The Sierra Club? Greenpeace? The Union of Concerned Scientists in Toronto? Dr. David Sazuki? Dr. Al Gore? The BBC? The CBC in Canada?

Don't get me upset, but go tell your pot-head ecologists to f-off. :rolleyes:

Would you care to look at what poverty and unemployment does to the human life-span? How about a look at the health and life-spans of people in undeveloped (turd world) nations in Africa? :rolleyes:

Would you like to see what a little hyper-inflation does to life-spans? Maybe start your economic and public health research with Zimbabwe?

[tofu2u2]

Re: The Haves and the Have Mores

from Ghent12

"Engineering elite," is a hilarious term.

Engineering is so trendy these days that everybody wants to be one. The word "engineer" is greatly overused. If there's somebody in your life who you think is trying to pass as an engineer, give them this test to discern the truth.

ENGINEER IDENTIFICATION TEST

FASCINATION WITH GADGETS

To the engineer, all matter in the universe can be placed into one of two categories:

(1) things that need to be fixed, and (2) things that will need to be fixed after you've had a few minutes to play with them. Engineers like to solve problems. If there are no problems handily available, they will create their own problems. Normal people don't understand this concept; they believe that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Engineers believe that if it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features yet.

No engineer looks at a television remote control without wondering what it would take to turn it into a stun gun. No engineer can take a shower without wondering if some sort of Teflon coating would make showering unnecessary. To the engineer, the world is a toy box full of sub-optimized and feature-poor toys.

FASHION AND APPEARANCE

Clothes are the lowest priority for an engineer, assuming the basic thresholds for temperature and decency have been satisfied. If no appendages are freezing or sticking together, and if no genitalia or mammary glands are swinging around in plain view, then the objective of clothing has been met. Anything else is a waste.

SOCIAL SKILLS

Engineers have different objectives when it comes to social interaction.

"Normal" people expect to accomplish several unrealistic things from social interaction:

--Stimulating and thought-provoking conversation
--Important social contacts
--A feeling of connectedness with other humans

In contrast to "normal" people, engineers have rational objectives for social interactions:

--Get it over with as soon as possible.
--Avoid getting invited to something unpleasant.
--Demonstrate mental superiority and mastery of all subjects.

http://www.unixnerd.demon.co.uk/engineer.ht

[Verrocchio]

Re: The Haves and the Have Mores

"Engineering elite," is a hilarious term.

Yes, sure, we could absolutely employ millions in rudimentary construction jobs like China. However, in order to do it like China, we'd need to pay Chinese wages, meaning all $10 per hour jobs turn into $0.50 per hour jobs, and so forth. And all those people currently living in those housing areas to be rebuilt? Who cares about them, let them be displaced and disappear like they always do. Let's also try to improve the track record which is currently negative when it comes to adding places to live.

And who did this estimate that 750,000 people die prematurely in China because of China's economic growth policies? The EPA? The Sierra Club? Greenpeace? The Union of Concerned Scientists in Toronto? Dr. David Sazuki? Dr. Al Gore? The BBC? The CBC in Canada?

Don't get me upset, but go tell your pot-head ecologists to f-off. :rolleyes:

Would you care to look at what poverty and unemployment does to the human life-span? How about a look at the health and life-spans of people in undeveloped (turd world) nations in Africa? :rolleyes:

Would you like to see what a little hyper-inflation does to life-spans? Maybe start your economic and public health research with Zimbabwe?

A Wikipedia article cited the World Bank as the source.
I don't have any pothead ecologists to tell anything. :rolleyes:
The negative effects of poverty on the human lifespan is acknowledged but is not relevant unless you believe that economic development cannot possibly occur without massive pollution.

Actually, 750,000 don't die because of China's growth policies. Many died before the China Boom began because of the tons of coal burned as primary energy source in China. So, to be fair, we would want to subtract the number that were dying before the boom from the number dying now. The remainder is the number dying as a result of the Chinese "model."

Nonetheless, Steve, your contention that China offers a model for what can be done here borders on the absurd. People want to maintain or improve their living conditions but they want to do so without breathing polluted air, drinking polluted water, and so forth. Can't you be pro-growth and also against pollution?

[c1ue]

Re: The Haves and the Have Mores

I don't agree with hayekvindicated's hypothesis in its entirety, but I do disagree that these examples you post are refutations of it. Russia is not necessarily homogeneous, unless you are talking specifically about the western half of it. The further east you go, the more "Asian" the lineage and appearance.

True, but each contiguous stretch of inhabited territory is fairly homogeneous. Yes, Irkutsk's homogeneity is different than Lvov, but within each region is very even. So again I am unclear what the point you are trying to make is.

For that matter, there is China. Yes, there are Uighurs in the North and Tibetans in the South, and Miao in the SW, but is China homogeneous or not?

In Africa it depends entirely on which country you are citing, but in general, they are also not highly homogeneous especially where there are large minorities of the descendants of European colonists. I'm sure you remember apartheid in South Africa. Other African nations face similar "crises of diversity" or whatever term you can choose to use to describe their issues with diversity. Even when the populations are "all African," there is usually a very low state of homogeneity. Various tribal and religious divisions serve to separate the populations, even providing catalysts for numerous genocidal campaigns.

Again your definition of homogeneity is very unclear. Certainly South Africa is a good example of not homogeneous, but are you trying to tell me there are large groups of white settlers in the rest of Africa? Chad? Congo? Zimbabwe? Ghana? etc etc

As for pointing out the different tribes, again I fail to see how Finland with its large Lapp population is somehow more homogeneous despite this tribe.

For that matter, Norway is only about 75% Lutheran; the remainder is not insignificant.

If anything is to be learned from human behavior, it is that differences no matter how large or small can be either amplified or smoothed over by the overarching society.

The college experiments with students as jailers vs. students as prisoners is a fine example of an otherwise completely random and homogeneous group finding ways to differentiate from each other and more importantly act upon it.

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/US/05/03/ritz.cnna/

There was an experiment in 1971 that Stanford University did in the psychology department. They took students, half of them were made guards in a mock prison and the other half were made prisoners.

It was supposed to take place for the period of two weeks to see what was the psychology involved in that and within six days they cut it short, because those students, regular college students, were already starting to behave in a bit of a sadistic manner toward those prisoners. So they had to end the study altogether.

[Starving Steve]

Re: The Haves and the Have Mores

Im only stating facts as they are. Studies have been done on this.

By definition, when a population becomes more diverse, you have more competing "cultures". And, all "cultures" do not excel economically to the same degree - we can argue about the causes but those are simply facts. As an example, even among US immigrant groups, ethnic Chinese, for example, earn far more than ethnic Mexicans (actually several times). Neither group arrived in the US with an advantage of language or similar culture.

In Canada, I'd like to see county by county breakdown of inequality today. I will bet you my bottom dollar that counties that are the least diverse have the least inequality and vice versa. The same is true of the US - that article clearly shows that. I would bet my bottom dollar that California (which is very progressive and with a much greater welfare state) has much greater inequality than Iowa or Kansas (for example).

Now one can face this fact honestly and accept it or we can engage in lies and distortion (like our leaders and media do). I am not saying that diversity is the only factor in creating inequality. But it is a major factor. Most people will never say it for fear of being called racist.

Just observing Mexicans in California, they value kids more than they value granite counters. They spend their time and energy enlarging their family, and maybe putting "a bun in the oven", rather than playing around in the markets.

A dinner at 6 o'clock in a Mexican family may be more important to their happiness and spiritual well-being than any good divorce or financial strategy ever would be. It's a cultural thing.

[Ghent12]

Re: The Haves and the Have Mores

Again your definition of homogeneity is very unclear. Certainly South Africa is a good example of not homogeneous, but are you trying to tell me there are large groups of white settlers in the rest of Africa? Chad? Congo? Zimbabwe? Ghana? etc etc

There need not be large white populations in an African nation for it to be considered non-homogeneous.

My only point was clearly stated in my post. The examples you posted were not good refutations of hayekvindicated's hypothesis. My definition of homogeneity was as specific as your definition was (i.e. never stated).

I think there is no specific correlation between broad standards of diversity and broad standards of equality. You can absolutely find historic and present correlations between, say, race and political equality, religious divisions and economic status, etc., but when combined I do not believe there is an apparent, relevant overarching trend.

[Rajiv]

Re: The Haves and the Have Mores

Elaborating on the first of the two curves above, Dave Pollard wrote

NOW THAT'S POWER

Clay Shirky's much-cited Power Law for Blogs is the latest incarnation of the age-old '80-20' rule (the top 20% have 80% and the remaining 80% have 20% -- of hits, links, popularity, 'wealth of audience' etc. Recently, Alternet has cited some US income statistics from 2000 (latest available year), statistics that put the blogosphere's inverse curves to shame. I've plotted this data in red on the chart above. Read it and weep.

Here's the data that is plotted: The top 400 households in the US had a median income of $175 million per year. They're the ones that will primarily benefit from the Bush tax cuts. The top million households had a median income $1.1 million and all earned over $314 thousand. The top five million households had income in excess of $150 thousand. The median income for all households was $43 thousand, a little over twice the poverty level that about one fourth of households fell below. Put another way, the richest 2% of American households have over 50% of the country's disposable income.

It looks like two straight lines, but it's actually an astronomically steep curve that shows just how inequitably income, and power, are distributed in the US. And Alternet reports that the curve for wealth (accumulated income) is much steeper even than the income curve shown above. Five million US households possess over 60% of the nation's total wealth.

Power in our society is shifting quickly and inexorably from the one-man-one-vote ballot booth (where we all have, at least in theory, equal influence and power) to the one-share-one-vote boardroom (where the distribution of power is roughly as diagrammed above).

Kinda sobering, isn't it?

[Starving Steve]

Re: The Haves and the Have Mores

A Wikipedia article cited the World Bank as the source.
I don't have any pothead ecologists to tell anything. :rolleyes:
The negative effects of poverty on the human lifespan is acknowledged but is not relevant unless you believe that economic development cannot possibly occur without massive pollution.

Actually, 750,000 don't die because of China's growth policies. Many died before the China Boom began because of the tons of coal burned as primary energy source in China. So, to be fair, we would want to subtract the number that were dying before the boom from the number dying now. The remainder is the number dying as a result of the Chinese "model."

Nonetheless, Steve, your contention that China offers a model for what can be done here borders on the absurd. People want to maintain or improve their living conditions but they want to do so without breathing polluted air, drinking polluted water, and so forth. Can't you be pro-growth and also against pollution?

I am pro-growth, and I am also against-pollution. OK? Does that sound politically-correct enough for you?

But if growth can not occur without pollution from coal, then I would close my eyes to the burning of coal and let it happen. Not to do so, would not only be elitist, it would condemn people to live in poverty. And poverty shortens the human life-span.

Yes, nuclear and hydro-electric and natural gas are better alternatives for China and India than coal. But China and India need the energy now, so coal-burning is what has to be. Better coal-burning than poverty.

In a short period of time, both countries will be nuclear, natural gas, and hydro-electric powered. That is going to happen, so coal is the transition fuel that makes nukes and hydro and nat-gas fuels possible to use in future.

Finally, coal can be almost "clean". It can be scrubbed with water in the smoke-stacks to cut-down on particulat pollution in the smoke. Also low-sulfur coal could be burned rather than high-sulfur coal. Low-sulfur coal reduces sulfur-dioxide emissions, and that reduction cuts-down on hydrogen-sulfide emission. That reduction, in turn, reduces sulfuric acid in the emissions from the stack. So coal can be almost clean, hence the term: "clean coal" that we hear to-day from the coal industry. ;)

Plusses from coal: cheap, plentiful, easy-to-use, available, sometimes almost clean, labour-intensive, and the pollution from coal-burning makes fog and cloud which reflects the sun's light back to space and cools the world.

[sunskyfan]

Re: The Haves and the Have Mores

You know I have heard that rhetorical defense for conservatives visa vi social responsibility for most of my life and after 50 years of modern conservatism I see little evidence that such notions have true impact or that much energy or resources are mapped to social problems that way.

[dcarrigg]

Re: The Haves and the Have Mores

As an example, even among US immigrant groups, ethnic Chinese, for example, earn far more than ethnic Mexicans (actually several times). Neither group arrived in the US with an advantage of language or similar culture.
...
I am not saying that diversity is the only factor in creating inequality. But it is a major factor. Most people will never say it for fear of being called racist.

Hayek,

C1ue already mentioned disparities in education, but I would like for you to also consider that many within ethnic immigrant groups have offspring that become homogenous with the 'primary culture.'

For instance, compare the earning power of ethnic immigrant Italians, Germans, and Irish in the United States 120 years ago (Gaelic speakers from the western fringes for the sake of argument).

Now speak of the disparity today (there is likely to be some due to inheritance, etc. with the first Anglo/Scotts-Irish on the continent, but not nearly so much as when compared with first-generation immigrant groups).

The same type of thing happens elsewhere.

Economic equality is a policy matter as is the level of diversity a nation will tolerate, but I do not think they are necessarily inversely proportional. An example I am familiar with is that of Germany.

Germany is a good example because it has approximately the same percentage of population of immigrants as the United States. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ant_population.

As this is the case, and the largest minority group in Germany are non-German speaking, one, by your measure, should expect as much inequality as the United States. But alas, this is not so.

Interestingly, the single biggest difference in rates of immigrant poverty between the two countries was that of single parents, who are generally taken care of by the larger safety net in Germany. Couples with children who stay together in the US tend to fare much better - in Germany it does not seem to matter so much.

I read a few papers on the topic some time back - one can be found here.

[hayekvindicated]

Re: The Haves and the Have Mores

Many of the ethnic Asians who arrived in the US are far better educated than their Mexican counterparts.

These are the bureaucrats, professors, engineers and government officials who fled China, Vietnam, and other nations who turned to Communism in the post WW II era.

If you actually look at the ethnic Chinese who came over during the railroad era, the differences vs. the Mexicans are significantly less.

In fact one might argue that the proximity of Mexico means the difficulty for lower educated (and determined) individuals to reach the US from Mexico as opposed to say, Vietnam is another winnowing factor.

Either way your assertion that diversity leads to greater income disparity is a hypothesis which is not well founded.

Russia, for example, is also very homogeneous, yet has massive economic disparity.

Africa is another example of high homogeneity yet poor economic disparity.



Again, the question is whether the education levels were also taken into account. On top of this the existence of the 'bamboo network' is well documented; Chinese trading clans sending offshoots into SE Asia. These immigrants are hardly ones which showed up with no skills, no money, and no backing.

Just as with the analogy of the Jews - higher levels of education can explain a great deal. Similarly it would be enlightening if the tax farming practices in Europe were replicated by the ethnic Chinese in SE Asia, or if religious prohibitions on moneylending also have an effect.

You're not contradicting what I am saying by admitting that there are massive income disparities between ethnic groups. Since the INS doesn't control what class of society Chinese or Mexican immigrants come from, you will get greater inequality with greater diversity.

Russia is a counter example people have given. But for every Russia there is virtually every country in Latin America (with the exception of homogeneous Chile or Uruguay) that one could cite.

I should, for the record, clarify that I don't have a diversity fetish or an equality fetish - I have no problem with high diversity as long as this does not degenerate into what Los Angles has become (the Singaporean variety is preferable); I also have no problem with inequality as long as there is a fairly high threshold in terms of income and quality of life. One of the dumb things about the article quoted above was to show how horrible inequality is in the US by comparing the ginni coefficient with some sub-Saharan African countries. That's a good example of the insanity of the left and its obsession with equality. What is the average lifespan and standard of living of the poor in America versus the average in Burundi?

There is a lot of data on diversity and inequality but I don't have it to hand as I haven't looked at it for some time. Ill dig around for it and post more info on this when I get time.