The Futile Quest for Economic Equality

[Skull Pilot]

Inclined to Liberty: The Futile Attempt to Suppress the Human Spirit

Chapters 13 and 14

The author cites a very interesting study, Economic Freedom of the World 2005, by the Fraser institute


The study reports that regardless of the degree of economic freedom, the index of which is based on the degree of personal choice, freedom of voluntary exchange, protection of person and property, the right to keep earnings and th e freedom to enter and compete in markets, among 128 countries 9comprising 93% of the world's population), the percentage share of income by quintiles from 1998-2002 remained about the same in each country.

Countries with greater freedom had higher per capita incomes but irrespective of the average level of per capita income of a country, the percentage distrubution of income for ascending quintiles settled out at approximately 6%, 11%, 15%, 21% and 47%.

These figures seem to indicate that income quintile tiers are a natural distribution much like a bell curve and remain largely unchanged in terms of percentage regardless of the attempts to equalize them.

The caveat of these numbers is that they are but a mere snapshot of a population at any given time and it is easy to assume they are static. that is that the people in the lower quintile are a fixed group.

This is not true however. We see that the lowest quintile of earners has the least number of people and also the youngest people as should be assumed. income mobility or the freedom to move up in the quintile tiers make income gaps even more meaningless.

Econ 309 Home Page (lecture 13 Economic Myths and reality)

The above lecture details that in the US only 5% of those in the lowest quintile in 1975 were still in the same quintile in 1991.

By 1991 59.3% of those people had mobilized to occupy the top 2 quintiles, while 35.6% mobilized to the second and third quintiles.

take the natural quintile distribution tiers and the fact of income mobility into account and one can safely say the statement,

"The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer"

is utterly false.

Any attempt to attenuate the higher quintlies incomes only results in a depression of income over all quintiles with the relative percentages remaining about the same.

 

[Zoomie1980]

A 19 year old apprentice plumber with no reputation, no experience could never hope to match a 30 year master plumber who has a 30 year reputation, seen and done it all within his profession, and now runs his own business.

No one with a brain larger than a walnut with more skills than finding your ass with both hands that has been working longer than a couple of years, makes minimum wage. Minimum wage is reserved for teenagers with part time jobs as dishwashers and burger flippers and the elderly greeting at WalMart and SAM's. The notion that we have all these 30 something family supporting people who make minimum wage is sheer lunacy by the the kool-aide drinkers.

If you are 30, of sound mind and body, and you are still flipping burgers or doing some other mindless labor, you DESERVE to be broke, poor, whatever.... You are hopeless, do us all a favor and shoot yourself....

Almost ALL of us start out at the bottom and have to work our way up. How well we do is 100% up to US.

 

[Agnapostate]

Empirical evidence indicates that societal experiments aimed at achieving social and economic equality has had some measure of success in the past. This commentary is flawed because it assumes that reformers will operate within the restrictive confines of a centralized state system.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Empirical evidence indicates that societal experiments aimed at achieving social and economic equality has had some measure of success in the past. This commentary is flawed because it assumes that reformers will operate within the restrictive confines of a centralized state system.

What evidence?

The numbers are the numbers. if 93% of the world's population regardless of country of origin and irrespective of any country's index of economic freedom, fall into the 6,11, 15, 21 and 47 percent quintiles, I would say that that is empirical evidence that no matter what system of government you have, the near constant result of the quintile tiers proves that any efforts to change this will result in failure.

Wealth is not a zero sum game. If you earn X and I earn 10X, for you to earn 2X do you have to take one X away from me or someone else or can you earn 5X irrespective of what i earn?

the way to increase income of the lowest quintiles is to let people in all quintiles have the freedom to make more.

 

[Agnapostate]

Of course, that continues to rely on the assumption that we preserve a standard monetary system, and the empirical evidence that I am referring to is based on entire societal reforms that have taken place in the past, most notably the anarchist collectives of the Spanish Revolution.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Of course, that continues to rely on the assumption that we preserve a standard monetary system, and the empirical evidence that I am referring to is based on entire societal reforms that have taken place in the past, most notably the anarchist collectives of the Spanish Revolution.

links, data, charts, graphs?

 

[Zoomie1980]

What evidence?

The numbers are the numbers. if 93% of the world's population regardless of country of origin and irrespective of any country's index of economic freedom, fall into the 6,11, 15, 21 and 47 percent quintiles, I would say that that is empirical evidence that no matter what system of government you have, the near constant result of the quintile tiers proves that any efforts to change this will result in failure.

Wealth is not a zero sum game. If you earn X and I earn 10X, for you to earn 2X do you have to take one X away from me or someone else or can you earn 5X irrespective of what i earn?

the way to increase income of the lowest quintiles is to let people in all quintiles have the freedom to make more.

That's not entirely correct. Standard of Living improves over history due to things like technology and productivity. The pie, itself, usually get's bigger. So while the distribution curve is fairly constant, the second part, about earning, is not. Over time, you can earn 2X without taking an X away from someone else due to the increased standard of living (wealth creation).

Policy goals should always focus on two things. Making the overall pie bigger (growth) and guaranteeing free flow of individuals from one quintile to another.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Thank you for the mobility point, I left that out of my earlier response.

 

[editec]

Income hardly indentifies actual incomes.

FYI among the industrialized nations the Untied States has the lowest incidence of people migrating from one income class to the other.

Generally speaking the vast majority of us are born in one income class and we die in that income class.

 

[Old Rocks]

Income hardly indentifies actual incomes.

FYI among the industrialized nations the Untied States has the lowest incidence of people migrating from one income class to the other.

Generally speaking the vast majority of us are born in one income class and we die in that income class.

The combination of poor medical availability for the critical first few years of life, and the difficulty in achieving a higher education in this nation guarntees that outcome. And the outcome is one that pleases conservatives.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Income hardly indentifies actual incomes.

FYI among the industrialized nations the Untied States has the lowest incidence of people migrating from one income class to the other.

Generally speaking the vast majority of us are born in one income class and we die in that income class.

Proof Ed? You'll see in my original post. 95% of people in the lowest quintile in 1975 were no longer in that same quintile by 1991

Inclined to Liberty: The Futile Attempt to Suppress the Human Spirit

Chapters 13 and 14

The author cites a very interesting study, Economic Freedom of the World 2005, by the Fraser institute


The study reports that regardless of the degree of economic freedom, the index of which is based on the degree of personal choice, freedom of voluntary exchange, protection of person and property, the right to keep earnings and th e freedom to enter and compete in markets, among 128 countries 9comprising 93% of the world's population), the percentage share of income by quintiles from 1998-2002 remained about the same in each country.

Countries with greater freedom had higher per capita incomes but irrespective of the average level of per capita income of a country, the percentage distrubution of income for ascending quintiles settled out at approximately 6%, 11%, 15%, 21% and 47%.

These figures seem to indicate that income quintile tiers are a natural distribution much like a bell curve and remain largely unchanged in terms of percentage regardless of the attempts to equalize them.

The caveat of these numbers is that they are but a mere snapshot of a population at any given time and it is easy to assume they are static. that is that the people in the lower quintile are a fixed group.

This is not true however. We see that the lowest quintile of earners has the least number of people and also the youngest people as should be assumed. income mobility or the freedom to move up in the quintile tiers make income gaps even more meaningless.

Econ 309 Home Page (lecture 13 Economic Myths and reality)

The above lecture details that in the US only 5% of those in the lowest quintile in 1975 were still in the same quintile in 1991.

By 1991 59.3% of those people had mobilized to occupy the top 2 quintiles, while 35.6% mobilized to the second and third quintiles.

take the natural quintile distribution tiers and the fact of income mobility into account and one can safely say the statement,

"The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer"

is utterly false.

Any attempt to attenuate the higher quintlies incomes only results in a depression of income over all quintiles with the relative percentages remaining about the same.

Surely you can post mobility numbers of other countries to prove your claim that the US has the worst mobility between income quintiles or can you?

 

[editec]

Which equally biased (as the Fraser institute ) organization will you accept if I bother to bring you those stats?

Will you accept with the same degree of uncritical thinking the statistics I can bring to this place from other sources?

Or will we (as is usual in these cases) end up each denying the validity of the other's sources?

 

[Paulie]

The combination of poor medical availability for the critical first few years of life, and the difficulty in achieving a higher education in this nation guarntees that outcome. And the outcome is one that pleases conservatives.

This is just retarded. What difficulty?

If you're poor, the government will PAY for you to go to school. And ANYONE can get a student loan.

There's no reason why any person in this country can not receive a higher education.

A fucking bum off the street can fill out a FAFSA and get 0 EFC.

 

[midcan5]

The above lecture details that in the US only 5% of those in the lowest quintile in 1975 were still in the same quintile in 1991.

By 1991 59.3% of those people had mobilized to occupy the top 2 quintiles, while 35.6% mobilized to the second and third quintiles.

take the natural quintile distribution tiers and the fact of income mobility into account and one can safely say the statement,

"The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer"

While this is just plain horse manure, the above lines stood out and if you need to ask why, you need to understand history in America. I'll give you one small hint, LBJ. Irony at its very best.

 

[editec]

While this is just plain horse manure, the above lines stood out and if you need to ask why, you need to understand history in America. I'll give you one small hint, LBJ. Irony at its very best.

If the path from poverty to affluence were as true as these apologists implied, there'd be no poverty in America.

Now the same sorts who are now giving us a story about economic opportunity are EXACTLY the same sorts who used to whine about three and four generations of people living on the dole.

They want it both ways...on one hand poverty is a short term event that only teens live in, but on the other the poor are stupid and lazy and shiftless who are incapable of making it in America and who should therefore just die quietly.

It's a fucking game the apologist tools of the system like to play.

Only a fucking idiot can't see through it.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Which equally biased (as the Fraser institute ) organization will you accept if I bother to bring you those stats?

Will you accept with the same degree of uncritical thinking the statistics I can bring to this place from other sources?

Or will we (as is usual in these cases) end up each denying the validity of the other's sources?

the mobility numbers were not from the Fraser Institute.

and since you haven't bothered to post anything that supports your opinion, we will never know how i will react to them will we?

You see it's called debate, discourse, discussion.

i read a book i found interesting. that book has footnotes and referenced material. the author used that material to support his arguments.

And really if you believe everything you don't agree with is biased and moronic and you refuse to support your claims, then the discourse then fails so why bother responding at all?

 

[Skull Pilot]

While this is just plain horse manure, the above lines stood out and if you need to ask why, you need to understand history in America. I'll give you one small hint, LBJ. Irony at its very best.

again you are free to post something that refutes the numbers.

 

[Skull Pilot]

If the path from poverty to affluence were as true as these apologists implied, there'd be no poverty in America.

Now the same sorts who are now giving us a story about economic opportunity are EXACTLY the same sorts who used to whine about three and four generations of people living on the dole.

They want it both ways...on one hand poverty is a short term event that only teens live in, but on the other the poor are stupid and lazy and shiftless who are incapable of making it in America and who should therefore just die quietly.

It's a fucking game the apologist tools of the system like to play.

Only a fucking idiot can't see through it.

Thats where you're wrong Ed.

there will ALWAYS be poverty. Just as there will ALWAYS be students who fail math. Just as there will ALWAYS be businesses that fail etc ad infinitum.

Only a fucking idiot would think otherwise.

 

[Zoomie1980]

Income hardly indentifies actual incomes.

FYI among the industrialized nations the Untied States has the lowest incidence of people migrating from one income class to the other.

Generally speaking the vast majority of us are born in one income class and we die in that income class.

Because the vast majority of us LIKE it that way. I came from a pretty poor background, my wife came from real poverty. We are now part of the that top 5% many on this forum loathe. But most people, given a choice, will take the easy classes and blow off high school, never bother with college or if they do, they are more interested in the social life than learning anything hard. Most will shun trade schools. So long as there is a social safety net and that net offers and acceptable life (even the poorest of the able-bodied sound minded poor in this country have a cell phone, cable TV, a car, and microwave, clothes and adequate food..), they will CHOSE it.

Modern global human society's basic ability to function DEPENDS on that axiom of the human condition. The only real difference between feudal times and today, is we are FREE to move between economic levels. The fact that most CHOSE to NOT move is no proof at all in the lack of that freedom. I am living proof of that freedom.

 

[Zoomie1980]

If the path from poverty to affluence were as true as these apologists implied, there'd be no poverty in America.

Now the same sorts who are now giving us a story about economic opportunity are EXACTLY the same sorts who used to whine about three and four generations of people living on the dole.

They want it both ways...on one hand poverty is a short term event that only teens live in, but on the other the poor are stupid and lazy and shiftless who are incapable of making it in America and who should therefore just die quietly.

It's a fucking game the apologist tools of the system like to play.

Only a fucking idiot can't see through it.

Really? Explain WHY a 30 year old, 12 years out of high school, would still be working a minimum or near minimum wage job? Remember, these are jobs like fast food service, manning the counter at Walgreens, etc...

Anyone with a pulse can get a FAFSA loan to go to college or a vocational school and gain a skill. If you are able bodied and sound minded and you are poor it is because you are a LAZY, SHIFTLESS, IDIOT, period. There simply is no excuse, not one. You get what you deserve in this country. If you don't like your state you have ONLY YOURSELF to blame.