This is a 16 minute * lecture by
Richard Wilkinson. It is posted at TED. I am posting it here, as I can not believe this information has not received more attention now that the US is awakening from the decades long delusion of prosperity which did not and as shown in the lecture could not lead to greater justice (which implies equality) via the model of economics we have been using.
The model known by many aliases (Chicago School, Friedman, etc) has resulted in the thought that people are drowning in debt and that we have privatized the profits but socialized the losses. These are inaccurate metaphors. They are the results of the language of the delusion we have been living for 3 decades and thus by definition can not capture the truth of our condition. As the science presented in the lecture shows, if our all encompassing concern should be equality, then people are not drowning, they are
dehydrating.
The dehydration is the results of privatizing security in life and socializing the risks in life. We are not “drowning” in risk or losses. We of the 99% are lacking in the substance that reduces risk. One can certainly drown from too much water, but the natural risk in life is not having too much water, it is having too little. Thus is the realization of the delusional statement “drowning in debt” and “socialized the losses”.
The lack of reduction of life’s risks is the inequality, the social injustice…the diversion from the purpose expressed in the preamble to our Constitution. “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
The following
concluding statement from a different lecture by Professor Wilkinson summarizes the TED lecture. As you watch the lecture keep in mind the 4 goals I highlighted of the preamble and consider that they were put into a document that created an government 223 years ago this year (based on ratification). I have a greater respect for the intellect and their insight into the human experience of those who wrote and ratified our Constitution.
“For thousands of years the best way of improving the quality of human life has been to raise material living standards. We are the first generation to have got to the end of that process. No longer does economic growth improve health, happiness, or wellbeing. If we are to improve the real quality of life further, we have to direct our attention to the social environment and the quality of social relations. But rather than continuing to tackle each problem separately, by spending more on medical care, more on police, social workers and drug rehabilitation units, we now know that it is possible to improve the psychosocial wellbeing and social functioning of whole societies. The quality of social relations is built on material foundations – on the scale of the material inequalities between us.”
With information such as this research and that of the
2005 World Bank paper on what produces wealth , considering our Constitution’s preamble, we should not be struggling looking for guidance as to what direction, what path, what solution we need for our self (our self as in We the People).
*I tried to embbed the video, but for some reason all that happened was all the code being published and not the video.
(Dan here, h/t to rjs for the embed…
High economic inequality is a tool used to achieve Conservative ideals of social relations. Having large swaths of the populace living in fear of economic hardship will, they think, make people act more conservatively. Thus inequality has become a goal of our system. Make no mistake, Conservatives don’t really care about macro economics very much to the extent that the quote notes economic growth is no longer the road to improving human life in developed nations. Conservatives would be perfectly happy with 1979 tax rates if the majority of the populace would just act better, not drink, act up and screw so much, and give their bettors proper deference.
The case is layed out best here by John Holbo in the greatest of blog posts from 2003.
Dead Right
http://examinedlife.typepad.com/johnbelle/2003/11/dead_right.html
I will note that the financial and corporate elites could care less about this social stuff. They just want the money and power. However ‘Conservatives’ are their close allies in maintainiing that wealth and power for the reasons stated, inequality will lead to a more ‘conservative’ society.
“It’s not how rich we are, it’s how equal we are.”
Our nation’s greatest inequality is in the educational system. Public schools in affluent areas provide top tier services for children and young adults to pursue their interests and gain knowledge. The poor and minorities attend public schools staffed overwhelmingly by people uneducated in the subjects they teach.
Liberals embrace this inequality in our society. The Left knows full well that if a math student is taught by a teacher who didn’t have enough interest to seek a degree in the field, the student is far less likely to pursue whatever talent/passion they had in mathematics/science/engineering. Referencing NYT’s work in class/education/occupation, earning just a bachelor’s degree in engineering/arch or math/comp sci makes it likely that one will be in the top fifth of income earners (60%). http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/national/20050515_CLASS_GRAPHIC/index_02.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1320494880-jKodj8YgzxH6DrsR+VtWdg
We know the inequalities in public education and government’s role in it, yet the Left does little to correct the system.
“Liberals embrace this inequality in our society.”
And conservatives produce it. Indeed, this is the best of all possible worlds. 😉
Conservatives produce the inequalities in public education? I thought they championed private education…
Ah yes. Elite prep schools: The Great Equalizers!
I never looked at it that way before, Min. Now I see the light! /snark/NancyO
amateur socialist,
Criticize the ‘elite prep schools’ if you want, but last time I checked they weren’t costing the state 15k per student a year. I guess defending affirmative action and a two-tier system of education under the guise of ‘noble and equal public education’ is all you have when you get these results.
well,
i think the article is right, but in danger of losing its own point by reliance on a poor slogan.
demanding “equality” sounds like calling for tax transfers: take away from the rich and let the poor live on welfare.
we need something better than that. and yes we need better schools, but that doesn’t mean schools that try to make engineers out of kids who have neither the talent nor the interest. we need schools that try to find ways for each student to actualize his human potential for a decent and meaningful life. and yes, i shudder to think what the bureaucracy would do with a mandate like that.
the problem with the “inequality” that we have today is that much of the wealth is ill gotten, and it is used to subvert democracy, which in conjunction with schools that haven’t got a clue what “education” means, tends to produce a life not worth living for both the have nots and the almost haves.
and i am sorry that Kevin’s cartoon version of the world will not help a bit. neither with the real problems, nor with his own happiness.
we don’t need a “class war,” we need to find a way to reduce the crimes committed by some of the rich so that we have a hope of raising the poor to a life worth living… which is not the same as making them rich, or half rich.
Simple truth: Okun was wrong. Inequality doesn’t produce a more efficient economy, it doesn’t produce faster growth, and it doesn’t produce more well-being.
Exactly the opposite is true.
(All within limits, of course. Righties please spare me the PRC “fallacy of the extremes” argument.)
Guillotine meet estate tax. End of problem.
I’m tired of these losers, yes, they have the right to protest, they’ve done it, move on.
When they say, “We are the 99% of Americans who don’t have as much as the 1%, so we’re mad and think the government should take their wealth and property away so that we can have a piece of it. Wealth inequality is a moral breakdown! We should all spread the money around so everyone gets a fair share!” Then I say, you’re wrong on so many fronts, not the least of which is you’re showing nothing (more or less) than envy. And that’s not the same as jealousy. Jealousy just says, “I want what you have.” Envy is a different beast. Envy says, “I don’t think I can ever have what you have, so you shouldn’t have it either.” Decades of horrible economic teaching and the politics of envy have kept this monster alive and growing and moving forward.
This way of thinking makes you assume that all rich people are evil and have scammed their way into wealth. That may be true in the tale of Robin Hood, but I choose to live in the real world. Sure, there are some scoundrels, but the vast majority of successful men and women got that way by working hard and serving people—lots of people. Steve Jobs and Bill Gates changed the world in ways we’re just now starting to realize. Their positive impact on the world has helped all of us live better lives, and they made fortunes for themselves by doing so. Why is it that you’re holy if you help one person but evil if you help a million?
Yes, there are jobs out there. There are jobs out there that haven’t even been invented yet. Go create the next Facebook or Weed Eater. Go pick up so much dog poop that you can start your own fertilizer company. And stop complaining that companies are TOO RICH while also complaining that they aren’t RICH ENOUGH to hire you! I’ve seen a lot of you guys. I wouldn’t hire you, either. But if you take all of that energy and excitement and pour it into something new and creative, you’ll get the chance to serve a whole lot of people really well, and over a decade or two, you’ll get to become the very thing you’re now protesting: rich people who actually earned their money.
MMMarvel,
You must be new to our blog. Welcome.
One question, are you taking to me, the author of this posting or are you talking to those who you believe are as you discribe and might be reading this posting?
Neither Daniel. He’s just shooting off his mouth in order to hear himself talk and impress himself with his own ideas. No one else would take seriously the simplistic ideas that he seems to hold as truths.
Kevin,
If you think education is a cost, what do you think an investment, an F-35?
The US spends more for war, needless welfare for war profiteers than it spends on each of the following: Medicare, medicaid, education, food and drug safety.
But I digress public education is an investment.
I competed with and surpassed a number of “prep schoolers” with my public schooling.
MMMarvel,
Do you think the crooks on wall st produced anything like Jobs or Gates?
“I’m tired of these losers, yes, they have the right to protest, they’ve done it, move on.”
Go to your local occupy site and express yourself.
The folks there will be more interested in your blither than I. One or two might engage you in conversation and educational transaction.
Which you expressly need.
Hi Kevin:
So, public schools cost $15.000/pupil annually? Compared to an average $24,000 average annual cost to house a prison for 20 years; the $15,000 is a deal. When compared to inner city schools prisons also rarely produce the desired result; but then, few inner cities receive $15,000 per student.
But why is this the case? Lets do a quick comparison of funding for one of the worst school districts in the nation and its neighbors for 2009:
– Detroit: $7,580/$7660
– Ann Arbor: $9,732
– Grosse Pointe: $10,382
– Bloomfield Hills $12,443
– Birmingham: $12,310
Not one of them are at $15,000 and the state pays ~$24,000 to house prisoners. ~50% of he prisoners are non-violent. Since the seventies, prison population has risen 474%. In comparison, the state places a bigger emphasis on prisons than it does education.
Detroit itself is the biggest port of entry for Canada (our largest trading partner) and yet the fools refuse to fund another bridge to foster greater growth. Without Detroit, the rest of the tate would be vegetable farms. Like the rest of the nation, the state places an emphasis on imprisoning its population, allocating the funds, at the expense of education and inner cities. It is a business. But then, this is the way of the Neocons and fools like you.
Upward mobility is yet another topic which you also do not understand and would take many words more.
In other words, mmmarverl, they have the right to protest but only until you say they should stop? And your post reveals that you have put no thought at all and no research into the real problems of income inequality. Believe me, you have completely missed the point. There are several posts here at Angry Bear that will explain things to you, if you are really interested in learning something, rather than simply shreiking about things you think you already know.
Thanks for the linked TED talk. This issue of inequality is, hopefully, becoming the focus of serious discussion around which it is possible to construct policy prescriptions that have a real chance to make a difference.
For those unsure of what the mechanism is for how inequalities manifest themselves in different outcomes for people in society then I’d point them towards this paper by the authors of ‘The Spirit Level’, one of whom is Professor Wilkinson who gave that talk above.
http://www.equalitytrust.org.uk/docs/social-dysfunction.pdf
Social status is a well-recognised sociological explanation for the stratification of societies and Wilkinson and Pickett have very adroitly shown just how increasing stresses caused by widening inequality through the mechanism of status competition are the main explanation for all sorts of worsening outcomes in those issues with a social gradient. They show very clearly that the most important criteria for inequality is NOT the absolute wealth of a society but rather the comparative differences in it. Trying to live on $40 per week in New York is a very different and debilitating experience compared to trying to live on $40 dollars a week in rural India or Ethiopia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_attainment
Put simply, the wider apart the rungs of the ladder become and the less chance people perceive of being able to fairly climb that ladder, the more bleak the results for everyone in that society. Teen pregnancies, crime rates, prison populations, levels of trust, levels of lawlessness all worsen for everyone not just those at the bottom. Of course those at the bottom suffer more but everyone actually suffers; just ask the white South Africans of the Sixties whether they felt secure. The same goes for those hiding behind the formidable security of gated communities compared to their peers in Sweden or Japan.
By understanding the mechanism now we may be able to sift those policies that worsen inequality from those that lessen it and start to actually deal with the problem not haphazardly or maliciously worsen it. Everyone benefits in that case.
And just to answer Daniel’s first point about exposure of these ideas, I’d point out that the popular book that was written to make the research findings of the academics more widely available, ‘The Spirit Level’, has been in print since 2009 in most developed countries, was accepted as an important contribution to public policy by all political parties during the election campaign in the UK in 2010 and has been presented many times in the US and around the world by its authors at respectable conferences.
What these ideas have done is draw-out the more obvious demagogues of inequality in attempts to demolish the basis for the findings. None have been successful so far if one is open to evidence rather than being contrained by ideology.
Kevin: “Conservatives produce the inequalities in public education?”
The main factor in inequality in education, both within schools and across schools (i.e., school districts), is poverty. And yes, conservative policies produce and maintain poverty.
The poor dear doesn’t understand the difference in being motivated by envy or outrage. Cheaters who prosper and are not brought to account are an outrage. A powerfully motivating one, as it turns out.
Thanks for your input Allan.
” Trying to live on $40 per week in New York is a very different and debilitating experience compared to trying to live on $40 dollars a week in rural India or Ethiopia. ” This is most pertinent as it is the difference of the two theaters (US and Ethiopia in this example) that the current economic ideology has been working to erase from the minds of the mass. This effort to erase the difference, first in the individual’s perception of their position and second for real is part of the globalization model as implemented. Yet those of the upper class in New York city never fail to note how little $250k/yr is relative to the cost of living in NY City.
coberly: “we don’t need a “class war,”
Right. And we have had one for decades. 🙁
coberly: “the problem with the “inequality” that we have today is that much of the wealth is ill gotten, and it is used to subvert democracy,”
I submit that high inequality (and we really do not need the quote marks, it’l real), no matter how it was produced, is bad for society, both socially and economically. It is the enemy of democracy. Wealth generates power to accomplish things, it also generates power over people. I have not read Plato’s “Republic”, but I hear that he said that democracies become plutocracies. Arguably, the U. S. already has a plutocracy.
For many years I have heard the rhetoric about how we do not live in a democracy, we live in a republic. (The constitution guarantees to the states a “republican form of government”.) That rhetoric puzzled me, because I had been taught that a republic was the same as a representative democracy. (In Latin it means “thing of the people”.) Well, of course, we are both — at least, ideally we are both: government “of the people” (a republic) and “by the people” (a democracy). I have since come to realize that the constitutional guarantee meant that if a state were taken over by a king or dictator, the U. S. would go to war to oust him. In the days when a republic or a democracy was something new and unusual in the modern world, people understood them somewhat differently than we do today. To the point, they recognized two forms of republics, democratic republics and aristocratic republics. (These United States being democratic republics.) The democratic revolution that was, and is still sweeping the world is an attack against kings, dictators, and aristocrats. At the same time we have the creation of new aristocracies by means of wealth. (We also have the concentration of power in corporations, which is new, if you don’t count the Tongs, the Yakuza, and the Mafia.) Great inequality is self-sustaining, and it is, as you say, the enemy of democracy. That is so regardless of how it came about. The peaceful way of fighting back is through taxation.
Exactly so. As Wilkinson and Pickett point out in the very first data in ‘The Spirit level’, we are the first generation or so which is butting-up against the limit for what material wealth can do for all sorts of outcomes. In a developed country which has more than a certain level of income or wealth, the life outcomes of an individual citizen are vastly influenced by their status position in that society rather than the absolute level of their income or wealth. You really can live an awful life in a civilized society and that is due not to your income or wealth level (which by that measure would make you a prince elsewhere in the world) but to inequality within that society.
You and everyone around you achieve better outcomes for health, mental health, trust, lawfulness, education and all factors which have a social gradient in societies that are more equal than those that are not. Everyone does whether they are at the top of the distribution of income and wealth or at the bottom. The poorest, the middle and the very top people in Japan, Sweden and Norway all achieve better lives than their counterparts in the UK and the USA and now we know why.
And can do something about it. And no, mmmarvel, despite your obvious ignorance of the issue, that does not imply in any way whatsoever that we should be aiming for an equal distribution. Merely that a less unequal distribution would have markedly beneficial effects for everybody. Why wouldn’t you want that to happen? Hmm?
Min
pardon my use of quotes around “inequality,” they don’t mean what you take them to mean. and yes we have a class war, it has always been the people who have the power against the rest of us. that’s why it does no good to get out our slogan boards and chant for “equality.” (there’s those quotes again.)
the rich will never permit that kind of equality. they might be persuaded that a decent investment in the welfare of “the least of these” is in their own interest. the rich have more money than they know how to spend. they want it mostly for the power it gives them. convince them that spending the money on, say, real education for the poor, real jobs, and real housing… and they might just go for it. as long as they don’t hear you saying “give me all of your money and i will give it to the poor.”
meanwhile, we do not have an enlightened rich making policy in this country. we appear to have a class of criminals who have gotten power by preaching low taxes and no gummint interference. and these criminals are funded in the first instance by a smallish group of rich people who are either deranged or essentially criminals themselves.
i don’t see any possibility of coming to an understanding with them. if the levers of democracy still work, we might get power back, but we won’t get it by frightening the honest rich, or the honest poor.
and yes, all that garbage about the US being “republic not a democracy” was just crap they made up when it served their interest. they will take the opposite line tomorrow when that serves their interest.
and i think the corporations are the mafia etc. same principle. they organize against us and then call us communists when we try to organize against them.
whether concentrations of wealth automatically generate evil power is of course a question. you may be right about that. but if so, the only answer i see is countervailing power which will ultimately concentrate wealth and become evil in turn. maybe the churning will be good while it lasts, but it usually gets bloody.
so far i think that would be worse. and in the long run i don’t think that coveting wealth is good for people. what you want is to imagine what a decent life would be… and see how much that depends on mo’ money. for most of us i think not at all. for some of us… it’s a good start.
which would mean using government money to create whatever institutions raise the poor out of degradation. it does not mean handing money to the poor so they can buy a sexier car.
steve
in spite of what most people appear to think i am saying, i agree with you.
jack
you took the words out of my mouth… in spite of what people think i have been trying to say.
it’s one thing to council against the politics of envy, and another to just embrace the results of criminal activity. the wall streeters are NOT bill gates. and poor bill gates made most of his money not from his own creativity, but from suppressing the creativity of his competitors.
so there is room here for some finer distinctions than captain marvel appears ready to make.
AllanW
i think you mistake the difference between absolute poverty and relative poverty. 40 dollars per week in NYC is absolute poverty and does not depend on the perception of difference between your 40 dollars and someone elses 4000 dollars.
part of the problem with “relative wealth anxiety” is the neurosis of envy. it is true that people need sufficient wealth to partake in the ordinary wants and needs of their society, but it becomes neurosis when it becomes a need to always have “more” because someone else you know does.
in America today something that looks like “more equality” would be a good start. but that’s different from “demanding equality.” and probably the focus today needs to be on stopping the crimes committed in the name of “pfree enterprise” by in fact those who have more wealth than they earned by any honest contribution to the economy.
AllanW
i think you are mostly right, but you go off the rails when you start thinking that you are “open to evidence” and the other guy is “constrained by ideology.” evidence is selective… a normal and natural fact of cognition… and most of those other guys think they have evidence and you have an ideology.
most of them. the congress and the press and the think tanks are professional liars and they probably do know the difference between facts and ideology. their business is to distort the one and sell the other… that is use whichever ideology suits their power needs at the moment.
My reply was to the post in general. I have posted here before, but it’s been a while, I visit and read all the left wing talk, usually laugh and drop by a week later.
As for the protesters, they have a right to protest UNTIL that protest infringes on my rights to move about freely (in the area that they decide to ‘occupy’), until thier actions make it difficult or impossible to carry on normal business, until thier actions cost my city extra time, manpower and money to try to help keep everyone safe. In the vast majority of the ‘occupy’ cases, they have assembled without a permit, where I come from, that in and of itself is reason to dispurse these folks.
As for income inequity, do something (besides bellyache) to make your situation in life better. Just because a lawyer or doctor or even stockbroker makes more money than you … so what? Do what it takes to become a lawyer, a doctor or a stockbroker if you want to make that kind of money. I have a brother-in-law who was born and raised in Germany, the government there, based on testing decided that he was fit for/needed to be a horticulturist. Nothing wrong with that, but HE wanted to be a doctor. So he took all the courses, did all the tests and became a horiticulturist, he worked in the industry for a while, then he immigrated to Canada. He worked hard (as a horticulturist), saved his money, went to school at night and put himself through medical school (in Canada). He got his license but didn’t care for the way Canada did it’s healthcare or paid it’s doctors. He immigrated to USA and has been here for over 30 years and has done quite well. He DIDN’T sit around and whine that things weren’t going the way he wanted them to, he did something about it.
I was laid off my job in 2009, I KNEW there were no jobs in my area. I scoured the entire country in search of another job. Within five months, I’d found another job. As it turns out this job pays more than my last job did, I did have to move 2600 miles to take the job, but I knew I couldn’t make it where I was – oh, did I mention I turned 55 in 2009?
As for going down to the ‘occupy’ rally, sorry, if I want to hear meaningless whinning I’ll have my grandchild over. They just blather and want whatever they want (the wants vary). Newsflash, I’m NOT responsible for you. I learned long ago that I can only control myself and I’M responsible for me and MY actions. I play by whatever rules are in effect and I try to play to win, without cheating. If I play with cheaters, I try not to play with them again (I take my business somewhere else). The only place that I can’t take my business elsewhere is with the government, in many instances they have made it so that they are the only game in town. Like many other citizens my only recourse there is to look at the candidates (as best I can), inform and educate myself (as best I can) and participate in the elections; try to get folks I don’t like out of office (and hopefully replace them with someone who is honest and thinks a little more like I do).
I refuse to be a victim, you can kick me, you can trip me, you can push me down. Bottom line is that I’m a bigger man than you (inside) and I’ll just keep getting back up and doing whatever I can until God takes my last breath from me. I’ve made choices (good and bad) in my life and lived with the consequences. What I think I’m seeing in the 99% group are folks who don’t like the consequences of thier choices. Life is a gamble, you take a job, you go in debt for an education, you buy a house with the expectation that it will improve your life, your living situation. It’s a gamble, no better or worse […]
Hey inequity applies to self righteous blathering bullshit too. Kudos on your surplus I guess. Good luck with that condescension thing.
“But I digress public education is an investment.”
An unequal investment, depending on the type of neighborhood/community. Yet liberals like you defend the fact that the poor and minorities receive inferior service. It’s sad.
“I competed with and surpassed a number of “prep schoolers” with my public schooling.”
I thought nobody did it on their own? That they owed it to others for their success? If so, your statement has one too many I-s in it. Better correct it.
“The main factor in inequality in education… is poverty.”
Min, it isn’t. The main factor is quality. As in the quality of the teachers, the quality of the materials, the quality of the building, the quality of the safety.
Students from low income houses are better off when they attend good quality schools. It’s why many poor families move house to districts with better schools. A wealthy student attending a school of inferior quality is being poorly provided by public education. That’s why wealthy families often send their students to private schools.
“And yes, conservative policies produce and maintain poverty.”
You can’t look at the two tier public education system in Chicago and blame conservatives if you look back at Chicago’s political past. Look at the differences between Deerfield High School and Fenger High School in the Chicago area. You blame conservatives for this? Really? The difference in the quality provided by the two schools should NOT be acceptable and I don’t know why liberals like you continue to defend the two-tier system of public education.
Your statement is just a rant by a sycophant. Hopefully you stole it and don’t consider it your own.
coberly; ‘i think you mistake the difference between absolute poverty and relative poverty. 40 dollars per week in NYC is absolute poverty and does not depend on the perception of difference between your 40 dollars and someone elses 4000 dollars.’
Me; No, I don’t mistake that difference. Plainly I haven’t been clear enough for you to understand the points I made. The first one was that $40 per week is NOT absolute poverty; it would allow one to live handsomely in Ethiopia. Yet it IS relative poverty compared to the society in which NYC is situated. You see, I DO understand the difference between ‘absolute’ and relative, don’t I?
The other point I was unsuccessfully trying to make (or you wouldn’t have misunderstood it so completely) was that the findings that Wilkinson and Pickett present really DO depend to a large extent upon the actuality and perception of difference between the stratified ‘levels’ of the society in which any individual lives. This is the absolute essence of what they have shown to be true; an individual is able to achieve only worse outcomes to their life (by and large) in a more unequal society than those achieved by an equally-positioned person in a more equal society.
coberly; ‘it is true that people need sufficient wealth to partake in the ordinary wants and needs of their society,’
Me; Aha! You see, when you make simple, clear points like that you are far more on the mark. You are entirely correct here. Just for emphasis; the fact that you and your family may not have had a Caribbean holiday this year is of no consequence should you live in a strata of society where doing so would be exceptional yet is of excruciating moment amongst a strata where it is ‘expected’ or you did so last year.
Once you have gone through the available research on group dynamics and status you will understand that the pressure and categorisation (and hence stress created in BOTH directions) is vital in understanding that it is stress-anxiety that is the major cause of consumerist behaviours. By the way, it goes to explain the phenomenon of overextended borrowings that lies at the root of the catastrophic personal debt mountain that fuelled the mortgage bubble but that’s another post.
Coberly; ‘in America today something that looks like “more equality” would be a good start. but that’s different from “demanding equality.” and probably the focus today needs to be on stopping the crimes committed in the name of “pfree enterprise” by in fact those who have more wealth than they earned by any honest contribution to the economy.’
Me; Couldn’t agree more. See, we ended up friends.
“Upward mobility is yet another topic which you also do not understand and would take many words more.”
run75441,
Sorry, but I know it firsthand. I’m an immigrant (or former immigrant as I have naturalized) who went to the college of my choice even though the system of affirmation action worked against me.
I like how you address inequality in education by bring up prisons. Doesn’t really apply. 15k per student isn’t much if it provided a good quality education for a student. Too often, though, students of a disadvantaged background are provided inferior schools and teachers where 1,000 would be too much to pay.
In Chicago public schools, only 3% of its african american or latino male students will earn a degree by age 25. That’s a sad statistic. Too much potential is wasted by a system liberals defend just to try to score some points against conservatives. It’s a horrible situation.
coberly; ‘i think you are mostly right,’
Me; I’m so relieved I have your approval.
Coberly; ‘but you go off the rails when you start thinking that you are “open to evidence” and the other guy is “constrained by ideology.” evidence is selective… a normal and natural fact of cognition… and most of those other guys think they have evidence and you have an ideology.’
Me; That would be true if and only if I were attempting to be the arbiter of truth against that other person which I’m not. Your relativistic point about evidence might be true for me as an individual but falls flat on its face when you realise that when my proffering of evidence is aggregated with all others engaged in the same search, the scientific process gradually approaches a point where one CAN say that certain things are, ceteris paribus, more likely to be ideology whereas others are far more likely to be objective evidence. Wilkinson and Pickett have produced just such a piece of research which is built upon more than forty years worth of epidemiological research workings.
In the same way that ignorant people will cling to their delusions waaaay past rational points like in climate denial or creationism, at some point I’m afraid we are allowed to say ‘I’m terribly sorry old chap but you’re wrong.’
coberly; ‘most of them. the congress and the press and the think tanks are professional liars and they probably do know the difference between facts and ideology. their business is to distort the one and sell the other… that is use whichever ideology suits their power needs at the moment.
Me; Once again we agree completely.
mmmarvel,
Thanks for sharing. I hope some can learn from your post that it’s about what an adult does to change their situation that is so important in where they are in life and how they perceive inequality. This is especially true in the United States, where a person is more able to affect their lot in life by effort than in so many other countries.
My point on public education and correcting its inequalities is due to how its children and young adults, who have trouble changing their course in life. How can a kids with natural talent in math and science have their gifts nurtured when they are never attend classes with teachers who took the effort to study calculus, diff EQs, physics, chemistry? This is the situation in too many schools that serve the poor and minorities. We shouldn’t accept this system of public education.
“Kevin, I’m sorry to pop your bubble…”
AllanW,
Don’t worry, no bubbles were popped.
From the U.S. Department of the Treasury:
–From 1996 to 2005–
1-Nearly 58 percent of households in the lowest income quintile in 1996 had moved to a higher quintile by 2005. About 5% moved from the bottom quintile to the top quintile.
2-A much larger portion of the middle quintile moved up to a higher income quintile, 42.1%, than dropped to a lower quintile, 24.6%.
3- 56% of households moved to a different income quintile from 1996 to 2005.
4- More than 57%of the top 1 percent of households in 1996 had dropped to a lower income group by 2005.
Income mobility vs social mobility. I read through the link you provided, which refers to “social mobility”, which is measured and defined in a variety of ways. Some studies put more weight in educational mobility (ex: how likely will a person earn a college degree if their parents did not earn a high school diploma?). Such a study would grade the U.S. lower, since the system of public education is so unequal, as I have originally stated.
When you are more likely to provide top tier teachers to wealthy kids and undereducated teachers to poor kids, you will have less educational mobility. This should be common sense. This is why we need to put serious reform into public schools. Let’s stop arguing about it and defending the two tier system, and start working to make it better.
Kevin
in the first place your constant reference to “liberals” betrays that you are an ignorant person blinded by some ideological stupidity.
and for what it’s worth, i went to a grade school in chicago back in the old days when all we had was a blackboard and some books without pictures or colored inks. i will back my education against any Harvard graduate you care to name.
and just as a matter of “logic” it is not “liberals” who defend two tier public schools. it is conservatives who don’t want to spend money on “poor” schools.
and as another point, from what i can see the money does not go to the teachers but to the politicians and their friends.
and it is not state of the art laboratories or teachers with advanced degrees that make a good school… but an attitude of honesty and caring… which can get lost in an overpopulated school that is falling down and a health hazard in a neighborhood where the kids don’t get enough to eat or whose parents are working three jobs or selling drugs.
there are hard problems here, not likely to be solved by calling people you don’t even know “liberals.”
please go away. you are too ignorant to talk to.
kevin
glad you found the career of your choice, but your education doesn’t seem to have made you any smarter.
what you or anyone knows “firsthand” is a very very poor basis to judge the experience of millions of others.
—
The only place that I can’t take my business elsewhere is with the government, in many instances they have made it so that they are the only game in town.
—
In the same way I have a ‘choice’ between AT&T and Verizon, you have a choice among governments. Just like your BIL.
AllenW
probably i should leave it there. but a new yorker who moved to ethiopia would end up in absolute poverty there, even relative to the absolute poverty almost everyone else lives in. you shouldn’t be so anxious to make your point that you don’t listen to the point the other guy is trying to make.
i do not know if status anxiety condemns the world to a rat race of keeping up with the Jones’s. I do know that some people manage to live pretty fulfilled lives without too much money. The difference is in the luck or skill by which they avoid the poverty… absolute poverty… traps society sets for them, and avoid the “relative poverty” traps that neurotic (normal?) thinking sets for them.
i do not disagree at all that perception of relative differences in “wealth” are what determines the sense of being poor. i do disagree that the answer to that, after a certain point, is to encourage either “more more more ever more growth in the economy” or “redistribution of wealth.”
i don’t deny that there is a problem with absolute poverty in this country… living in a ghetto is more absolute poverty than living in a rural village subsistence farming… but i don’t see much hope addressing that with simple minded solutions.
i have no sympathy with people who need a Caribbean holiday to avoid the excruciating pain of not keeping up with their peers.
Allan said
“Me; I’m so relieved I have your approval.”
Allan, try not to be an ass.
captain marvel
“life is a gamble.” glad you won. so far.
but it is impossible for everyone to win at gambling. fortunately about a million years ago people learned how to cooperate and improved their odds enormously.
since about the time of the industrial revolution the “house” has been telling the people they have to give up that cooperation stuff and play by the house rules.
and they always need a big winner to lure the suckers in.
—
the “house” has been telling the people they have to give up that cooperation stuff and play by the house rules.
—
Of course corporations prefer cooperation (collusion!) over competition. Higher margins.
Competition is only for the little people.
“You must surely realise that any statistical analysis that involves quintiles results in a zero-sum total. Yes?”
The use of quintiles is used in static AND dynamic data sets. In this case, populations fluctuate. People enter the workforce through immigration, graduation, decisions, etc. If an immigrant moved to this country last year, shouldn’t their change in income be counted? I don’t know why you would want to exclude them. If I fall into a lower quintile, should it be discounted if the reason is due to new workers entering the labor force? Maybe I don’t get your point.
“our view that social mobility is higher in the US than anywhere else (the actual text of your comment); why is that?”
I commented on the what I perceive to be the ‘opportunities to improve one’s life’. A vague concept as is the term ‘social mobility’ (I believe I didn’t use that term until you brought it up). You could very well be correct that the U.S. scores poorly in social mobility, but it’s about how it’s defined. If a man is in a higher income quintile than his parents, but didn’t achieve the same level of education, did he improve on the social mobility scale? It depends on how it was measured and I don’t want to judge whether one scale is better than another. Does social mobility depend on whether a person owns their home or rents?
The fact is, education is the biggest inequality in the United States of America. We could take the entire wealth of the top 10% and distribute it to the other 90%, but if the system of public education remains the same, the huge inequalities we witness today will still manifest themselves in the future.
Perfect!
“in the first place your constant reference to “liberals” betrays that you are an ignorant person blinded by some ideological stupidity.”
My use of liberals in this post is due to the first comment’s use of ‘conservative’, which you didn’t make an issue, son. You, as evident in all your sycophantic posts, convey yourself to be a myopic fool.
“and just as a matter of “logic” it is not “liberals” who defend two tier public schools. it is conservatives who don’t want to spend money on “poor” schools.”
In Chicago? You’re really blaming conservatives for the two tier system in Chicago. Maybe lifeguards in Florida are to blame for the Inuit lifestyle as well.
“and it is not state of the art laboratories or teachers with advanced degrees that make a good school… but an attitude of honesty and caring”
You really can’t be serious. You are arguing for less educated teachers now. Geez. The system won’t change due to attitudes like this. When people really ‘care’ to become good teachers, they study the subjects they want to teach. A math teacher doesn’t become better by attending ‘feel-good’ seminars, but by taking mathematics and math instruction courses. Staff a school with ‘feel-good’ and ‘caring’ teachers, but if none of them studied math or science in university, then your kid is FAR LESS LIKELY to take and pass AP exams in Calculus, Physics, Chemistry, etc.
“in an overpopulated school that is falling down and a health hazard in a neighborhood where the kids don’t get enough to eat or whose parents are working three jobs or selling drugs.”
Do you know what you’re talking about or is this something you gleaned from an article? You better check first whether the person you’re discussing this with has experience in the situation, otherwise you’re the ignorant one.
“there are hard problems here, not likely to be solved by calling people you don’t even know “liberals.”
Again, check the first comment. THEN come back to me. If you don’t like it, ignore my post and go back to your narrow minded view of the world, son.
“what you or anyone knows “firsthand” is a very very poor basis to judge the experience of millions of others.”
coberly,
I’ve used and can provide plenty of statistics on the inequality in public education and income mobility in the United States. I also couple that with my own personal experience. I’m sorry that you lack the ability to interpret either one.
“glad you found the career of your choice, but your education doesn’t seem to have made you any smarter. “
Education, degrees, speaking multiple languages doesn’t make one more intelligent. It’s the ability to grasp concepts, understand cause and effects, and interpret new ideas. You don’t understand the public education usually provided to the poor and minorities. I suggest you look into it before casting judgement about inequalities in this country.
“what you or anyone knows “firsthand” is a very very poor basis to judge the experience of millions of others.”
coberly,
I’ve used and can provide plenty of statistics on the inequality in public education and income mobility in the United States. I also couple that with my own personal experience. I’m sorry that you lack the ability to interpret either one.
“glad you found the career of your choice, but your education doesn’t seem to have made you any smarter. “
Education, degrees, speaking multiple languages doesn’t make one more intelligent. It’s the ability to grasp concepts, understand cause and effects, and interpret new ideas. You don’t understand the public education usually provided to the poor and minorities. I suggest you look into it before casting judgement about inequalities in this country.
“In the same way I have a ‘choice’ between AT&T and Verizon, you have a choice among governments. Just like your BIL.”
That is a choice. A real choice. GSM vs CDMA. One company’s phone offerings vs the other’s phone choices.
Another area, besides government, where you don’t have a choice is with your electric utility. It’s one of the reasons why utilities, whether they are non-profit or investor owned, are usually amoung the most hated organizations in a state/community (co-ops seem to be an exception from my experience as most people I know have a favorable opinion if served by one).
Kevin:
You being an immigrant tells nothing. The vast majority of prisoners have little if any education. The largest percentage of an ethnic population is black or African. Are you black or African? If not, than your anecdotal observation is “meanigless.” You have yet to cit a statistical observation and I have cited at least one. Here let me cite another before I discuss Chicago schools.
Tom Hertz in his “Understanding Mobility in America” study cited the following:
– Children from low-income families have only a 1 percent chance of reaching the top 5 percent of the income distribution, versus children of the rich who have about a 22 percent chance.
– Children born to the middle quintile of parental family income ($42,000 to $54,300) had about the same chance of ending up in a lower quintile than their parents (39.5 percent) as they did of moving to a higher quintile (36.5 percent). Their chances of attaining the top five percentiles of the income distribution were just 1.8 percent.
– Education, race, health and state of residence are four key channels by which economic status is transmitted from parent to child
– African American children who are born in the bottom quartile are nearly twice as likely to remain there as adults than are white children whose parents had identical incomes, and are four times less likely to attain the top quartile.
– The difference in mobility for blacks and whites persists even after controlling for a host of parental background factors, children’s education and health, as well as whether the household was female-headed or receiving public assistance.
– After controlling for a host of parental background variables, upward mobility varied by region of origin, and is highest (in percentage terms) for those who grew up in the South Atlantic and East South Central regions, and lowest for those raised in the West South Central and Mountain regions.
– […]
Another data-driven study indicates income mobility is down at the same time that inequality is up, saying “Overall, the evidence indicates that over the 1969-to-2006 time span, family income mobility across the distribution decreased, families’ later-year incomes increasingly depended on their starting place, and the distribution of families’ lifetime incomes became less equal.” http://www.bostonfed.org/economic/wp/wp2011/wp1110.pdf Check out the charts/data in the back (I wish data went further back in time, but this is pretty good). Some of the charts, and good commentary, is at http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/income-mobility-a-warning/
kevin
there is a difference between referring to the conservative agenda and just attaching “liberal” to anything you don’t like.
i haven’t been in chicago for many years. back in the old days the Republicans were the seemingly sane party and the dems the party of corruption. maybe nothing has changed. but as for natioinal policy, it does seem to me that conservatives want to defund the schools and send their kids to private schools.. which would produce exactly the inequality you say you are against.
and no, i am not exactly arguing for “less educated” teachers. but i am saying that an advanced degree in math does nothing to make a good teacher… except of advanced math, and then only if the teacher is also a good teacher. mistaking paper credentials for competence is … an indication that you don’t understand the problem.
i passed all my math tests without help from teachers with advanced degrees. and when i look at the AP kids and college graduates it strikes me that they know some circus tricks, but they never learned to think about what they know.
as for narrow minded… well, how would you know?
Kevin
this is all bluff and bluster.
no Allen
I just wish you’d slow down a little and think harder. I have watched too many “solutions” based on the intuitions and research of both the right and the left come to nothing but added aggravation for the real people fighting on the front lines.
Allan
no, you are projecting.
i was agreeing with you about some part of your argument, and instead of being reasonably glad that some basis of agreement had been reached you said.. i don’t need your steenkin approval.
well, fine. be an ass.
Thank you very much for those links. Much appreciated.
Kevin,
Sad?
You know sad?
Go tell this to anyone you see at OWS.
I assure you someone there has more patience with your line, than I.
The US spends 20% of its outlays on War, far more than any other nation, the next level modern warfare states spend about one fifth the part of GDP the US does.
The US spends more on war than education……………….
Better a police state than a humane state.
Kevin,
“Adult”.
I aspire not to meet your definition of “adult”.
I am a veteran, with a non disability retirement and a couple of NDSM’s, I saw the waste and fraud in the military.
Just like the waste and fraud on wall st.
And the ancestors of rising inequality.
“You know sad? Go tell this to anyone you see at OWS.“
If you think OWS is sad, you need to experience other parts of the world. Maybe you should visit a public school in a poor area.
For all this talk about how it takes a village to raise a kid, you sure make it sound like you’re a self-made, self-educated person. It’s the wrong mentality for a nation that needs to improve its public education.
There used to be a thing called the Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) which tracked a variety of aspects of well-being, not just income, and produced an index of how well we are doing overall. It was produced by an outfit called Redefining Progress in California. The concept has been used also for specific studies outside the US. Unfortunately the Redefining Progress website seems to be unavailable – maybe they’ve folded? I used to like the GPI as a mind-expanding device for people who were fixated on GDP per capita and such things. Pity if it’s no longer being produced.
The Wikipedia article is still there:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genuine_progress_indicator
“ but as for natioinal policy, it does seem to me that conservatives want to defund the schools and send their kids to private schools.. which would produce exactly the inequality you say you are against.”
Produce? Coberly, the two tier system already exists. When only 3% of African-American or Latino males in Chicago public schools will graduate from college, something is wrong. All that potential is wasted. It’s not only the number of engineers that could be produced from those underserved demographics, but the number of technicians, writers, programmers, artists, entrepreneurs.
“but i am saying that an advanced degree in math does nothing to make a good teacher.”
I feel sorry for you if you really feel that way. Most people who are passionate about a subject want more knowledge in it. You look at the teachers who staff magnet schools and advanced degrees are the norm. Top tier teachers depend on passion, experience, AND education.
“i passed all my math tests without help from teachers with advanced degrees. and when i look at the AP kids and college graduates it strikes me that they know some circus tricks, but they never learned to think about what they know.”
I am sorry if you’ve never been influenced by a great teacher. When a person is passionate about a subject, they not only seek more knowledge in it themselves, but want to help develop others who share their same passion. Advanced degrees don’t make a person, nor does it make a person more of an expert. However, if one takes the effort to spend extra years in university learning about a subject and then enter into teaching, their affection and devotion often translates in the classroom.
My experience with college graduates and AP students is very different then yours. Most of those young adults know about the learning process, about the journey. They don’t ask “Will this be on the test?” anywhere near the rate that other students do, but do ask “How is this idea used in the real world?”. If you have any passion about any subject, you should look into volunteering at a school, atelier, youth center. It’ll change your view.
“You being an immigrant tells nothing. The vast majority of prisoners have little if any education. The largest percentage of an ethnic population is black or African. Are you black or African? If not, than your anecdotal observation is “meanigless.””
Being an immigrant let me experience what it’s like growing up as an outsider (I was the only Asian in most of my grades, let alone classes), what it is to be a member of a family without any wealth (inherited or earned), and what it took for my parents to improve their lives as well as their children. If you think this experience is meaningless, then I won’t bother with you. Solving whatever problem you see in prisons will do little if the inequalities these individuals had earlier in their lives aren’t addressed.
“And you also accept that I might be correct in the US scoring poorly in metrics of social mobility, thanks again”
Social mobility is a vague term. You might as well talk about the metrics to develop the Communal Respect Barometer. The fact that you have to refer to such vague concepts and confuse them with income inequality belies the weakness of your argument.
“in support of your steadfast and repeated view that ‘ social mobility is better in the US than almost anywhere else. Can you see why I might not place much confidence in your position, Kevin? “
I never mentioned anything about “social mobility” except in reference to your use of it. I do not like to use unexact terms like it since its variables can be weighted in ways to produce whatever outcome one wishes to produce. Do you know the metrics of the “social mobility” indicator? If so, please share. And please give us your preference on how much education mobility should be weighed in your “social mobility” index.
“The quality, duration, style and content of an individuals’ education is important … but I’d be reluctant to assert that it is the biggest causal factor of status without a lot more robust data upon which to rely. You seem to have no such qualms. Or have you the data? If so I’d love to see it …”
http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/p23-210.pdf
http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/press/cost05/education_pays_05.pdf
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/national/20050515_CLASS_GRAPHIC/index_02.html
If you lack the ability to understand the cause and effect relationship between income and education in the hard sciences, then there is little I can do for you except recommend a return to the educational process, whatever form that may take.
I am glad that you abandoned your theory about ‘quintile statistics only applying to static data’. It was a contrived and horribly thought out. The inability to hear and understand your own claim doesn’t say much for your intelligence, but giving up on it keeps you out of the lowest tier. Congrats.
Kevin,
Been in several fine parts of the serfdom you espouse, been out there seeing what it is like. The part of it you cause is your dharma.
Go off and read something of value:
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/big-lie.pdf
Then think kharma and where your’s is.
Coberly I guess both of us need to revisit Chicago to see the changes. Apparently Deerfield H.S. is in the two-tiered Chicago Public School system nowadays. It’s quite generous of the city of Chicago to pay teachers at that school an average salary average of over $100,000–maybe they should do that within the city borders, where they pay closer to $60,000 on average. I’m wondering if St. Albans School also has joined Chicago’s system. (If you don’t know that last school, it’s an exclusive private school in D.C. and just about as qualified to be a part of the Chicago Public School system as suburban Deerfield H.S.)
If someone is serious about addressing inequality among schools, MONEY for teachers and facilities is one major issue. And money means control. Washington is not about to take control of poor public schools in Mississippi and well-funded public schools in the Chicago ‘burbs to try to equalize the quality of their facilities and staffs. Washington marginally affects local schools–that’s why it is an important but marginal issue at the national level, except insofar as national politicians claim they’re going to fix everything. And of course it’s important on blogs where people pretend that national leaders can fix everything without greatly increasing the federal government’s power and budget.
After reading this:
“Look at the differences between Deerfield High School and Fenger High School in the Chicago area.”
PJR concludes this:
“Apparently Deerfield H.S. is in the two-tiered Chicago Public School system nowadays.”
Apparently, reading comprehension is above PJR’s current pay scale. It’s either that or the word “area” gets him really confused.
ilsm,
As someone who actually spent a phanza in a wat, I have a pretty good idea of my karma.
As a general rule, I think that white liberals who read about a RichardGere-JCrew version of an eastern religion should stop casting judgement on others, especially when you try to insert a religious concept about which you have little knowledge. Maybe you feel confident after learning something new in the latest issue of Vanity Fair, but do you even hear yourself when you come up with these posts?
PJR
thanks for an attempt at rationality. i have been knocked out of the mood by someone who has a one rule to rule them all solution to a rather complicated problem. he has trouble reading too. not noticing the difference between “great teacher” and “teacher with advanced degree.”
Kevin
you are out trying to score debate points that we got tired of in the sixth grade playground.
it is not worth talking to you.
Your topic sentence was about schools “in Chicago” and your finger is pointed at Chicago politics at the end of the paragraph. I read okay, usually. I do better when I’m reading something semi-coherent.
“Because he himself has never investigated the metrics involved in social mobility measures and therefore doesn’t know what they are, he thinks that they are ‘vague’.”
When asked to quantify his “social mobility” index, AllanW is unable to provide an answer. Vague it is.
“Thanks for the laugh, Kevin.”
People laugh at things they don’t understand. In this case it’s past performance, statistics, and probability. But this is not surprising since you came up with this gem:
“You must surely realise that any statistical analysis that involves quintiles results in a zero-sum total. Yes?” HAR-HAR-HAR
“I think it’s his use of the term ‘hard sciences’ that makes me laugh the hardest.”
AllanW tries to quantify “social mobility” and then laughs at the term “hard sciences”. You are funny due to your ignorance, but you don’t get that the joke is on you.
AllanW is proof we need to improve the quality of public education and maybe give some thought about who should contribute to the gene pool going forward.
“Your topic sentence was about schools “in Chicago” and your finger is pointed at Chicago politics at the end of the paragraph.”
Yet you inferred that I had Deerfield in the Chicago Public School system with your “Apparently Deerfield H.S. is in the two-tiered Chicago Public School system nowadays.” I’m glad you think it’s okay to have a different tier of public schools that serve children in the same area. I guess the students at Fenger do not deserve the same quality that the students at Deerfield enjoy.
“I do better when I’m reading something semi-coherent.”
Then why respond? Either my comments are crystal clear to you or you find it necessary to reply to statements that perplex you.
FIX THE SCHOOL SYSTEM!
Kevin: “Your statement is just a rant by a sycophant.”
First one to call names loses. 🙂
coberly: “we appear to have a class of criminals who have gotten power by preaching low taxes and no gummint interference.”
That reminds me:
“There is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress.“
— Mark Twain
Allan W: “As Wilkinson and Pickett point out in the very first data in ‘The Spirit level’, we are the first generation or so which is butting-up against the limit for what material wealth can do for all sorts of outcomes.”
What about Tokugawa Japan? Because of their policy of isolation, as an island nation they pretty well stayed near their limits of material wealth for a few hundred years, no?
References, please? I have never, in my moderately long life, met anyone calling themselves a liberal who defended a two-tiered education system. If you believe defending education free to the public is the equivalent of defending a two-tiered system, please explain what connection you see (which I am certainly missing) that allows you to draw this conclusion.
The two-tiered education we have in the US is the result of local funding of schools, resulting in those in wealthy areas receiving (both directly, through local property taxes, and indirectly, through gifts and money-raising efforts of well-off parents) much better funding than those in poor areas. Many of us would like to see a federal system that would treat every child the same regardless of background the same- but given our many differences- both statewide and locally- that would open up a whole different can of worms.
I don’t know what you are proposing in place of public education (something implemented at the inception of our Republic and staunchly defended-until recently- by both sides of the political spectrum) but I would be curious to hear. Just please don’t trot out the red herring of vouchers for private schools. That would do nothing except create a two tiered system of private education -with no public accountability at all.
This is nonsense. Idiotic trivial correlation at best. Another example of the errors of aggregation.
THE VERY SAME DATA could be used to argue that all differences are racial.
I am a conservative, and I take great offense to the statement that all I care about is making power and money. I believe that an equal society will produce an all around more productive society, and bring a better well being of the nation. Me being conservative has nothing to do with greed, I just don’t trust the government to appropriate money properly, and I feel that I should decide where my money goes to.