Inequality *Is* Wrong

[Elok]

Okay, so revise that to "poor people in industrialized countries tend to act and feel bad." Still kind of duh, innit?

[KrazyHorse]

The more unequal countries are doing worse on all these kinds of social problems. It's an extraordinarily close correlation. But if you look at that same index of health and social problems in relation to GNP per capita, gross national income, there's nothing there, no correlation anymore.

Yes, because I don't think that the big reason behind countries being poor is that their people are dumber on average. I do think that intranational dispersions in market incomes (especially in more modern market economies) are substantially driven by lack of cognitive ability and lack of prudence on the part of the poorer portions of society. The social ills you've listed are deeply tied to behaviors on the left tail of the distribution, and I see absolutely no evidence presented here that intervention in the market outcomes for poor people would let to a reduction in these behaviors.

[KrazyHorse]

The conference is about inequality, not poverty, which is what makes it quite interesting.

Not at all. It is simply another point of evidence that the worst ills that we associate with poverty are tied to the people who are poor, not the fact that they are poor.

[Dinner]

I can think of lots of policy changes which would have the effect of discouraging bad behaviors and encouraging good behaviors. Tax policy especially lends itself to stuff like this. Further more just things like universal health care would be a MASSIVE move forward in treating things like addiction or mental illness and, yes, I have to believe no longer being an addict or mentally ill would help people make better decisions.

Notice how I haven't even gotten to education yet we've already debunked your claim that there is no evidence that interventions to help poor people would change their behaviors? ****, just changing welfare rules which discourage both savings and work would change the behaviors of many of them.

[Fake Boris]

Yes, because I don't think that the big reason behind countries being poor is that their people are dumber on average. I do think that intranational dispersions in market incomes (especially in more modern market economies) are substantially driven by lack of cognitive ability and lack of prudence on the part of the poorer portions of society.

Have you listened to the conference?

It makes extremely strong points. Among others, social ills are more frequent at all income levels in inegalitarian countries.

That is, even rich people are more likely to be depressed, or alcoholic, in inegalitarian countries than egalitarian ones.

The social ills you've listed are deeply tied to behaviors on the left tail of the distribution, and I see absolutely no evidence presented here that intervention in the market outcomes for poor people would let to a reduction in these behaviors.

You don't have to intervene on market outcomes. You can simply intervene upstream, by favouring certain forms of property and labor organization that generate egalitarian outcomes.

Not at all. It is simply another point of evidence that the worst ills that we associate with poverty are tied to the people who are poor, not the fact that they are poor.

I don't understand. Remember, PPP GDP has no bearing on social ills (according to the guy).

[KrazyHorse]

Oerdin:

I didn't say that no intervention would change behaviors. I said that intervening to reduce inequality in incomes was not a good tool to use to fix these types of problems (technically I said that there was no evidence presented here to demonstrate that it was).

Please learn to read.

[Fake Boris]

xpost, you you were responding to Oerdin

[Jon Miller]

Maybe that's because making bad decisions tends to make you poor!

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/341/6149/976.abstract

JM

[Jon Miller]

He's also not even that poor. From what I understand he has a place to live, enough to eat, and even some modest luxuries. He just doesn't have as much as most in the US. He probably does better than many much harder-working illegal immigrants. That's pretty unfair, don't you think?

That probably puts him into the middle quintile.

JM

[Kidlicious]

I get the feeling kucibros don't like him. Maybe he's a scapegoat, so he drinks.

[AAAAAAAAH!]

The more unequal countries are doing worse on all these kinds of social problems. It's an extraordinarily close correlation. But if you look at that same index of health and social problems in relation to GNP per capita, gross national income, there's nothing there, no correlation anymore.

So we have three options:
1. Inequality causes social problems
2. Social problems contribute to inequality
3. Certain factors create social problems and contribute to inequality

The first option is the least plausible in my opinion. If Bill Gates had twice as much money that wouldn't make me any more likely to take up smoking and excessive drinking.

[Aeson]

I agree/disagree with everything said in this thread equally.

[AAAAAAAAH!]

I agree/disagree with everything said in this thread equally.

This greatly reduces my desire to engage in destructive behaviors.

[Fake Boris]

So we have three options:
1. Inequality causes social problems
2. Social problems contribute to inequality
3. Certain factors create social problems and contribute to inequality

The first option is the least plausible in my opinion. If Bill Gates had twice as much money that wouldn't make me any more likely to take up smoking and excessive drinking.

Statistically, yes.

Just watch the conference and if you think there's something wrong with the data, say it.

[Bereta_Eder]

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/341/6149/976.abstract

JM

I haven't really realized that the self-evidents need a scientific approach to be verified.