| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Economic inequality
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


Economic inequality

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
Novosedoff View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun


Joined: 28 Mar 2020
Location: Moscow
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Novosedoff Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Economic inequality
    Posted: 02 Jun 2020 at 15:49
Well, having read the latest of Jared Diamond's books, I am not surprised that things are getting more and more violent in certain places.. It starts from "I can't breathe" and then the crowd responds by running amok.. Smile 

 

I teach history to children and I am proud that they leave my classes permeated with sh*t and hatred to meet the real world..
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Novosedoff View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun


Joined: 28 Mar 2020
Location: Moscow
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Novosedoff Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Jun 2020 at 15:56
Here is some more from another book by Abhijit V. Banerjee "Good Economics for Hard Times" (2019)


I teach history to children and I am proud that they leave my classes permeated with sh*t and hatred to meet the real world..
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2723
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2020 at 05:06
With all due respect, it didn't start with "I can't breathe"

Wonder why riot ready adults who killed numerous police over the past seven days just allowed that murder to happen on film? They don't give a sh*t! Numbers of Blacks killed by police have gone down in last decade. Conducted by a Black scientist, he stuttered in shock and he could not believe it, since media supplies a different narrative.
Attacks on elderly unarmed whites & home invasions are the rising crimes.


We can blame everyone for this mess. Including globalists (EU/Merkel)who thought it was a good idea to force together opposing ideologies and place undue economic strain on capitalist countries who are already paying the bills for refugees all over the world. 

Not to mention what Merkel did to Greece, yet she keeps Bosnians in refugee camps since the 1990's?
The moves are obvious and most taxpayers get it, this globalists leveling of our efforts to evolve will not prevail. China is not on your side EU.

Are you actually try to spin this as a Capitalistic 'effect'?

New Study Says White Police Officers Are Not More Likely To Shoot Minority Suspects

A new peer-reviewed study of fatal police shootings says that white officers are not more likely to shoot and kill minority suspects. Critics contend it doesn't address racial disparities by police. ARI SHAPIRO, HOST:

When you look at the number of police shootings in relation to the population, you find that people of color are shot and killed more often than white people. The reason for that disparity has been intensely debated for years, especially since an unarmed black teenager was shot and killed in Ferguson, Mo. almost five years ago.

There has been one recurring theory, that white cops are more likely to shoot black people because of racial bias. Now a new study is challenging that conclusion. NPR's Martin Kaste has more.

MARTIN KASTE, BYLINE: Since the Ferguson protests of 2014, we've learned a lot more about fatal shootings by the police. News organizations started collecting their own data on shootings to make up for incomplete federal stats, and academics started building on that. Michigan State University psychologist Joseph Cesario is part of a group that looked at fatal shootings in 2015. They added in the race of the police, and then did a statistical analysis.

JOSEPH CESARIO: The race of a police officer did not predict the race of the citizen shot. In other words, black officers were just as likely to shoot black citizens as white officers were.

KASTE: Other studies have looked at this question, but this one comes closest to being a nationwide analysis. It's also getting extra attention because it's in a prestigious peer-reviewed journal, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. And that puzzles Philip Atiba Goff.

PHILIP ATIBA GOFF: I'm a bit surprised that this made its way into PNAS given what they actually found.

KASTE: Goff is a prominent researcher in issues of race and criminal justice and the co-founder of the Center for Policing Equity. He says he applauds the authors for bringing in new data and trying a new approach, but he doesn't think they came up with much.

GOFF: It doesn't do very much to move us towards an understanding of how much are police responsible for racial disparities. And the things it does sort of lead us to are things that we already knew.

KASTE: For instance, he says if the study is aiming to debunk the assumption that white cops shoot people for racist reasons while black cops don't, he says that's a strawman because no one in his field actually thinks that. GOFF: Racism is not a thing that white people can have and black people can't. And nobody's research would suggest that it does. That's a really wild premise based in no research that no serious scientist should be able to say out loud and then get it published.

KASTE: But the paper's lead author, David J. Johnson of the University of Maryland, says some academics do make that assumption, especially in his field, psychology. And he believes the same assumption is being made by the media.

DAVID J JOHNSON: I think that you see that in reporting on individual shootings, where they'll mention the race of the officer. And the reason that they mention that is because it's perceived as being relevant. So what we did was, for the first time, tested that assumption.

KASTE: Johnson takes pains to say that this study is not trying to deny the role of race. Instead, what they're trying to do is narrow down where it's having its effect on policing. He says it also raises some questions about a common fix for biased policing, the push to hire more minority officers because if this study is right, just hiring more black cops will not mean fewer black people get shot. And that fits with what implicit bias trainers say.

LORIE FRIDELL: People can have biases against their own demographic groups. Women can have biases about women. Blacks can have biases about blacks. It is incorrect to assume that any issue of bias in policing is brought to us by white males.

KASTE: Lorie Fridell is a criminologist as well as a bias trainer. She says academics have been wrestling with this question for decades, and this latest paper is not about to settle things.

FRIDELL: The defenders of police, of course, will cherry-pick the studies that show no bias. And the other side will cherry-pick the ones that do. But we don't have any definitive studies on this.

KASTE: She thinks people should be more open to the idea that bias and demographics can both play a role. And that's something that the authors of the paper and their critics both seem to agree on.

The real question here is not whether race is a factor in police shootings, but when? Is it beforehand in all the things that might lead up to a shooting, such as drug laws or racial profiling? Or does it come down to the skin color of the individual cop holding the gun?

Martin Kaste, NPR News.



Edited by Vanuatu - 03 Jun 2020 at 05:07
Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)
Back to Top
Novosedoff View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun


Joined: 28 Mar 2020
Location: Moscow
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Novosedoff Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2020 at 05:27
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

Are you actually try to spin this as a Capitalistic 'effect'? 

Well, it could be. The rise of the economic inequality in the world has followed the demise of the USSR with its communism, which is barely a coincidence. 


Edited by Novosedoff - 03 Jun 2020 at 05:30
I teach history to children and I am proud that they leave my classes permeated with sh*t and hatred to meet the real world..
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2723
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2020 at 06:01
Originally posted by Novosedoff Novosedoff wrote:

Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

Are you actually try to spin this as a Capitalistic 'effect'? 

Well, it could be. The rise of the economic inequality in the world has followed the demise of the USSR with its communism, which is barely a coincidence. 
I am among those who admire the great history of the Russian people, socialism cost Russia it's power.IMHO
 
Often it's the case that two things can be true while seemingly op-positional. Conservatives want to open US economy- Leftists say Right wing doesn't care if we die from covid! It's never that simple.

We can want to do things that are inherently risky but the pay off may be worth it.
When was the last time mass starvation occurred worldwide?

If you like I can find opposition to what you say, yet I know there is always going to be truth in the 'have-nots' getting a sh*tty deal. That is an existential question, not an economic one.

Capitalists can create great wealth that can effect the world condition. No in Israel would build a water treatment plant for the Palestinians, least likely the PLO who receive millions for just such purposes. 
An American entrepreneur did that, because he could.


Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)
Back to Top
Novosedoff View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun


Joined: 28 Mar 2020
Location: Moscow
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Novosedoff Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2020 at 07:16
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:


When was the last time mass starvation occurred worldwide?

Have there been any mass starvation worldwide in history? Smile Local famines happen almost every year in different parts of the world.
As a child I used to know an old Russian woman whose only child died of starvation in Russia..

Man shall not live by bread alone after all Wink

I do agree with your remark on using (or inventing) covid as another pretext for closing the economy. Abhijit Banerjee's research and views of economic protectionism are totally aligned with current political doctrine of the US, which is perhaps the main reason for awarding the guy the Nobel prize and for popularizing his writing. Some countries have made a lot of progress most recently in skimming the cream off from the rest of the world, so it is the right time perhaps to DK on all the debts and draw the iron curtain once again


Edited by Novosedoff - 03 Jun 2020 at 07:27
I teach history to children and I am proud that they leave my classes permeated with sh*t and hatred to meet the real world..
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2723
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2020 at 07:29
Originally posted by Novosedoff Novosedoff wrote:

Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:


When was the last time mass starvation occurred worldwide?

Have there been any mass starvation worldwide in history? Smile Local famines happen almost every year in different parts of the world.
As a child I used to know an old Russian woman whose only child died of starvation in Russia..

Man shall not live by bread alone after all Wink

I do agree with your remark on using (or inventing) covid as another pretext for closing the economy. Abhijit Banerjee's research and views of economic protectionism are totally aligned with current political doctrine of the US, which is perhaps the main reason for awarding the guy the Nobel prize and for popularizing his writing.
wiki has list
It's been a very long time since World Wide famine. For most of my youth we saw people starving in Africa, Sudan and Ethiopia. I guess the drought in Sudan is causing a famine as we speak. 
The trouble has always been getting supplies to people in countries where law & order just do not exist. 

Also celebrity types used to care and donate maybe that's why it is so alive in my memory.
Armand Hammer did not get the Nobel, he lost to Dali Lama but they were the final two choices. So he did get very close.
Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)
Back to Top
Novosedoff View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun


Joined: 28 Mar 2020
Location: Moscow
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Novosedoff Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2020 at 07:41
So should we be grateful for not having to starve to those who deprives us of the very last liberties we have? Smile Should we kiss their shoes for not taxing us for the air we breathe?

Edited by Novosedoff - 03 Jun 2020 at 07:42
I teach history to children and I am proud that they leave my classes permeated with sh*t and hatred to meet the real world..
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2723
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2020 at 07:47
Whoa,
Who is depriving you of your Liberties?
Capitalists?
I wouldn't thank people who keep me down.


Edited by Vanuatu - 03 Jun 2020 at 07:49
Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)
Back to Top
Novosedoff View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun


Joined: 28 Mar 2020
Location: Moscow
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Novosedoff Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2020 at 07:50
Capitalists or communists are non-sense to me. I think the authorities of our countries are the main source of our liberty concerns 
I teach history to children and I am proud that they leave my classes permeated with sh*t and hatred to meet the real world..
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 10765
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2020 at 11:58
Is the issue inequality?  Or is it poverty?  Americans are relatively affluent compared to most of the world, people who are "below the poverty line" have a vehicle, a big screen TV and a computer, as well as rental residence (apartment, rental house).  Where does affirmative action come into the equation, after all if you are concerned about the 'injustice' towards minorities to the extent that upper middle class blacks get preferential treatment in entering universities, then you probably are not concerned with while Appalachians, or former Vietnamese boat people.  Yes, there are some minorities that are not part of the affirmative action train ride.  Of course, America is not the only place where this happens, there are affirmative action laws in India, and Malaysia as well.  Can't have too many ethnic Chinese taking up University spot, in Malaysia or in Harvard for that matter.

Some people want government to care of them, I am afraid what that means.  Why does anybody expect that what the government will do for you, is really a question of what they will do to you.  Hasn't anyone learned from the blessing of government in the 20th century?  Government has a monopoly on 'legitimate' violence.  It can kill you, imprison you, take everything away from you.  It can then educate your children to teach them that you are the bad guy.  The problem, in my opinion, is not that we don't feed the beast enough, it is that we feed it too much.  We also have a different political system that everyone else, so I do not see that much virtue in taking models from elsewhere, or casual advice from elsewhere.  Many people seem to want us to throw the baby out with the bathwater, and start from scratch with some utopian wet dream. 
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2723
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2020 at 13:16
America worked hard to be a market force. WW2 was a crash course in flexibility. Manufacturing was necessarily true religion, it had to be in the 1950's.

I have never known America generally to despise the poor or those who need assistance. Individuals yes but institutionally the US cares for people from all over the world for $0 just because they can, anything else in bullsh*t.   
Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2723
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2020 at 13:19
Originally posted by Novosedoff Novosedoff wrote:

Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

Are you actually try to spin this as a Capitalistic 'effect'? 

Well, it could be. The rise of the economic inequality in the world has followed the demise of the USSR with its communism, which is barely a coincidence. 
The rise of economic inequality began when?
Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)
Back to Top
Novosedoff View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun


Joined: 28 Mar 2020
Location: Moscow
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Novosedoff Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2020 at 20:06
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

Originally posted by Novosedoff Novosedoff wrote:

Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

Are you actually try to spin this as a Capitalistic 'effect'? 

Well, it could be. The rise of the economic inequality in the world has followed the demise of the USSR with its communism, which is barely a coincidence. 
The rise of economic inequality began when?

You may check the above screenshots I attached to my previous posts. They show some data on inequality for two countries: the US and China - in 1970s and 2010s. What major events in the world took place between 1970s and 2010s to justify the shift in inequality?  

PS. Are you familiar with writing of contemporary french economist Thomas Piketty? There have been a number of publications in Financial Times based on the data from his recent book about modern capitalism  


Edited by Novosedoff - 03 Jun 2020 at 20:10
I teach history to children and I am proud that they leave my classes permeated with sh*t and hatred to meet the real world..
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2723
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Jun 2020 at 06:10
OK yea I saw the screens shots they make my point. IMO.
Yes earners make the most at the top so they can afford to hire someone with no education to do lawn work. 

The artisan class should be paid more than those who shovel sh*tSmile
And degree professionals should make more than artisans- usually. Art can be priceless and it could be created by an illiterate genius.

Why have any education at all for rural people? Just throw them in a computer room and have them write code. Right next to the chimps typing Shakespeare?

There is no better system than capitalism bc it allows for some to advance and most of those could not earn wealth in other systems like socialism.

No way I accept that inequality in China started in the 1970's, if you want to restrict discussion to post WW2 that's ok.
China has hundred of millions of uneducated people rural farmers are useful, city people do manufacturing they are manufacturing massive amounts of goods for the world cheaply so people get very low wages. The Chi Coms don't care about little kids making sneakers for LeBron James earning pennies an hour, the deal works for Nike so they "Just do it"

China also creates clothing, jewelry and food to cater to the 1% there is no f**king morality in how China does business. Dog eating bastards.Smile

Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)
Back to Top
Novosedoff View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun


Joined: 28 Mar 2020
Location: Moscow
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Novosedoff Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Jun 2020 at 07:25
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

There is no better system than capitalism bc it allows for some to advance and most of those could not earn wealth in other systems like socialism.


Noone doubts the fact that communism is counter-productive esp. as far as the knowledge economy is concerned. But I wouldn't place socialism and capitalism against each other, or perhaps my understanding of these things is a bit distorted or ignorant. Socialism is about the mechanism of wealth redistribution within a society. While Capitalism is ... - I've just realized I don't know what it is.. LOL    


Edited by Novosedoff - 04 Jun 2020 at 07:26
I teach history to children and I am proud that they leave my classes permeated with sh*t and hatred to meet the real world..
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2723
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Jun 2020 at 08:44
Originally posted by Novosedoff Novosedoff wrote:

Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

There is no better system than capitalism bc it allows for some to advance and most of those could not earn wealth in other systems like socialism.


Noone doubts the fact that communism is counter-productive esp. as far as the knowledge economy is concerned. But I wouldn't place socialism and capitalism against each other, or perhaps my understanding of these things is a bit distorted or ignorant. Socialism is about the mechanism of wealth redistribution within a society. While Capitalism is ... - I've just realized I don't know what it is.. LOL    
In the New World (Dutch colonies) it became apparent that some people are hard workers and strive for their personal best. Others not so much, in fact waste and destruction were on the minds of settlers and they were determined not to waste the bounty. They had never seen such natural abundance not even the West Indies could compare in flora, fauna and obviously the land was otherworldly.  

Capitalism is already prevalent in England the industrialization had begun so the idea of meritocracy was being explored.

England had laws against poverty and debtor's prisons this is Charles Dickens era 1850's.
The US had no such thing but you had to work and contribute or did not eat. Capitalism is designed to encourage ideas and ingenuity which benefits not only the inventors and developers, it also promotes advancement in the society which in turn allows others to prosper. Two words- Steam Engine. 

Capitalism is the economy of evolution it encourages advancement and life gets easier, humans can learn and stretch their limits of understanding.
Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)
Back to Top
Novosedoff View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun


Joined: 28 Mar 2020
Location: Moscow
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Novosedoff Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jun 2020 at 00:09
That's great Smile Thanks, Vanuatu, for your thorough explanation 
I teach history to children and I am proud that they leave my classes permeated with sh*t and hatred to meet the real world..
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2723
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jun 2020 at 17:42
Smile
It's more involved as you might have guessed. Yet the principle doesn't change, dynamism creates wealth and the possibility of new wealth through innovation and competition. Like the old folk story about the shoe maker and the elves.
Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 10765
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Jun 2020 at 04:19
what is the phrase, "cease the means of production"? or maybe it is "seize the means of production," something like that.  The problem becomes who controls the means of production, it is not the people, it tends to be strongmen in the name of the people.  On the other hand, it is generally entrepreneurs, "capitalists" which innovate, but in general block off innovation after they have established themselves.  They tend to speak a good speech about competition and the market, but when on top they buy up competition, incorporate it or suppress it, try their darnedest to form a monopoly.  Of course, sometimes there is a shift in market, how many corporate retail names are going to disappear with this pandemic?

shoe maker and elves?
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2723
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Jun 2020 at 00:31
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Elves_and_the_Shoemaker
short version
longer wider version

The point about the elves story is how the shoemaker uses a single pair of shoes made by the elves to save his wife and self from starving. He uses the profit to reinvest and builds the business up from the brink of collapse.
Looney Tunes did a short film about economics using the elf story as an example, you probably will remember this "Yankee Dood It" director Friz Freleng. Amazing guy




Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2723
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Jun 2020 at 00:37
So, yes there were "factors of production" from the article.
Land was available in prodigal abundance in early American history, but it is only one of the classic economic "factors of production." The others are labor, capital, and entrepreneurship. As the earlier chapters of this book have shown, modern capitalism fuses these four factors into operational systems for the conduct of economic life, most notably through the ingenious device of the business corporation.



Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2723
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Jun 2020 at 00:46
ok in honor of capitalism which has always been a little light fingered- the rest of the article -


There are several million corporations in the United States today, and a handful existed at the nation's official birth in 1776. The device became integral to the American economy only in the middle nineteenth century, but it was actually present at the creation 250 years earlier. In 1607, the settlers at Jamestown arrived under the charter of the Virginia Company of London. Puritans founded Boston in 1630 under the auspices of another English corporation, the Massachusetts Bay Company.

The proprietors of the Virginia Company soon were interested primarily in revenues from tobacco. Those of the Massachusetts Bay Company cared less about profit than about setting up what their leader John Winthrop called a "City upon a Hill." They wanted to demonstrate for all humanity the virtues of clean Christian living. If some of the Puritan merchants among them became moderately wealthy, then that might be a sign of God's grace, so long as customers were not cheated or overcharged. The line between virtuous profit and damnable avarice was blurry then, as it remains today. But the Puritans had an unmistakably capitalist turn of mind.

So did William Penn and his community of Friends. Persecuted in England for their religious beliefs, they acquired in 1681 a royal grant of land in America, and proceeded to develop their new colony on both religious and commercial principles. The Quaker merchants of Pennsylvania become prosperous international traders. Like the Puritan merchants of New England, they used their familial and religious connections to form a tight network of trustworthy relationships stretching over long distances. This kind of system for making credible business commitments is one of the essential conditions of strong economic development. In most capitalist economies today, it is embedded in the intricate law of contracts enforced by governments through courts.

Still another English corporation instrumental in populating the New World was the Royal African Company. Chartered in 1672, this company proceeded to take a significant though not dominant part in the slave trade. For the profit of shareholders, it brought to the western hemisphere masses of men and women who had been taken from Africa against their will. Eventually, many thousands of white merchants and seamen on both sides of the Atlantic participated in this commerce, including several hundred from Massachusetts and Rhode Island. The total number of Africans transported to the New World was about 10 million. Their destination was usually Brazil or one of the Caribbean sugar islands, but some 596,000, or about one of every 17, went to areas that became part of the United States.

In 1776, the 13 colonies that made up the original United States declared their independence after almost 170 years of British colonial status. Even at that early date, the new country's population of 2.5 million included plentiful examples of capitalism's many faces. Then as now, capitalism could serve despicable ends, noble ones, or some mixture of the two.

In between the oppressed slaves on the one hand and free yeoman farmers and entrepreneurs on the other stood a large number of whites who had come to America as indentured servants. Between one-half and two-thirds of all white immigrants before the Revolution arrived under these terms. They flocked to America mainly from England, but also from Scotland, Ireland, and Germany. (Germans tended to come in family groups, the others as single adults.) A few were abducted and taken aboard ship by force, but most made the trip voluntarily. They exchanged four to seven years' labor for passage to the New World.

So capitalism did come in the first ships, and in many different forms: legitimate commerce, legal cover for religious freedom, the slave trade, and individuals' exchange of labor for a ticket to America. Yet none of these examples represented modern capitalism. Few had much to do with the First Industrial Revolution, let alone the Second or Third. Each concerned farming, commerce, and trading, not technology and manufacturing. But all contained powerful elements of capitalism, and that proved to be momentous for the nation's future.

Editor's note: Thomas McCraw died inn 2012.


Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2723
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Jun 2020 at 00:53

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/robberbarons.asp

Robber Barons

 Updated Mar 13, 2020

What Is a Robber Baron?

A robber baron is one of America’s successful industrialists during the 19th century, which was also known as the Gilded Age. A robber baron is a term that is also sometimes attributed to any successful businessperson whose practices are considered unethical or unscrupulous. This behavior can include employee or environmental abuse, stock market manipulation, or deliberately restricting output to charge higher prices.

KEY TAKEAWAYS

  • A robber baron is a term used frequently in the 19th century during America's Gilded Age to describe successful industrialists whose business practices were often considered ruthless or unethical.
  • Included in the list of so-called robber barons are Henry Ford, Andrew Carnegie, Cornelius Vanderbilt, and John D. Rockefeller.
  • Robber barons were accused of being monopolists who earned profits by intentionally restricting the production of goods and then raising prices.
  • On the other hand, some of the most famous of these tycoons became noted philanthropists later in life, giving away hundreds of millions of dollars to a variety of worthy causes.

Understanding Robber Barons

The first known uses of the phrase “robber baron” described feudal lords in medieval Europe who robbed travelers, often merchant ships along the Rhine River as they passed nearby. The term appeared in American newspapers in 1859. Its modern use stems from Matthew Josephson’s The Robber Barons (1934).

Robber barons were widely despised and considered rapacious monopolists during their lifetimes. However, later biographies and historical reviews about the Gilded Age’s American robber barons cast a more complicated and favorable light.

Economic theory says a monopolist earns premium profits by restricting output and raising prices. This only occurs after the monopolist prices out or legally restricts any competitor firms in the industry. However, there is no historical evidence that natural monopolies formed before the Sherman Antitrust Act.

Many so-called robber barons—James J. Hill, Henry Ford, Andrew Carnegie, Cornelius Vanderbilt, and John D. Rockefeller—became wealthy entrepreneurs through product innovation and business efficiency. Of the goods and services they provided, supply grew, and prices fell rapidly, greatly boosting Americans’ standards of living. This is the opposite of monopolistic behavior.

Andrew Carnegie gave over $350 million to charity during his lifetime, including over $56 million to build 2,509 public libraries around the world.

Criticism of Robber Barons

Among common criticisms of the early robber barons included poor working conditions for employees, selfishness, and greed. Some robber barons—including Robert Fulton, Edward K. Collins, and Leland Stanford—earned their wealth through political entrepreneurship.

Many wealthy railroad tycoons during the 1800s received privileged access and financing from the government via extensive use of lobbyists. They received monopolistic special licenses, per-mile subsidies, huge land grants, and low-interest loans.

Special Considerations

While working conditions in 19th century America were often challenging, some workers may have been better off working for a robber baron. Rockefeller and Ford, for example, paid higher-than-average wages, including bonuses for innovation or exceptional production. Managers often received long vacations at full pay.

Some tycoons rank among the most noted philanthropists of all time. Rockefeller donated at least 6 to 10% of every paycheck he ever earned; this later increased to 50%. He gave over $550 million to charity and championed biomedical research, public sanitation, medical training, and educational opportunities for disadvantaged minorities.

Railroad tycoon James J. Hill publicized and provided free education about crop diversification, along with free seed grain, cattle, and wood to local communities. He would transport immigrants at reduced rates if they promised to farm near his railroads.



Edited by Vanuatu - 10 Jun 2020 at 00:55
Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 10765
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (2) Thanks(2)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Jun 2020 at 09:45
Getting wealthy (or rich, or stinking rich) is not imo a vice, although cutting the corners in order to get rich can be a vice.  Nor necessarily is giving charity a virtue.  Wisely (and kindly) using your money may be a virtue, but also what else are you going to do with that pile of money?  Millionaires generally are better than most folks and figuring out how to use their money.  Money is a form of influence, and charity is another way of personal influence.

Nietzsche said, "I am not poor enough to give alms."  Or to put it another way, an ancient philosopher said, 'you are not generous, you just have a need to give.'  I don't think that satisfying this need, is in itself virtuous.  We encourage charity because we think we will benefit (either personally or as a society), like we like politicians who give us candy.
Back to Top
Novosedoff View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun


Joined: 28 Mar 2020
Location: Moscow
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Novosedoff Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Jun 2020 at 05:21
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

Getting wealthy (or rich, or stinking rich) is not imo a vice, although cutting the corners in order to get rich can be a vice.  Nor necessarily is giving charity a virtue.  Wisely (and kindly) using your money may be a virtue, but also what else are you going to do with that pile of money?  Millionaires generally are better than most folks and figuring out how to use their money.  Money is a form of influence, and charity is another way of personal influence.

Nietzsche said, "I am not poor enough to give alms."  Or to put it another way, an ancient philosopher said, 'you are not generous, you just have a need to give.'  I don't think that satisfying this need, is in itself virtuous.  We encourage charity because we think we will benefit (either personally or as a society), like we like politicians who give us candy.

I find American statistics on rich folks rather interesting. 

On one hand, James Diamond claims 42% of the bottom 20% Americans have very little chance to leave the group of the bottom 20% Americans by income (see slide 1 below).

On the other hand, Tomas Sowell reports the figures of incredible generosity when Bill Gates and other rich Americans give up to 50% of their wealth to charity (see slide 2).

In 2008 Forbes counted almost 500 billionaires in America, but their consolidated wealth would still represent only 10% of the annual American GDP, whereas in Russia 87 Russian billionaires had consolidated wealth of 30% of Russian GDP, which made Russian inequality look even stronger.

 




Edited by Novosedoff - 30 Jun 2020 at 05:23
I teach history to children and I am proud that they leave my classes permeated with sh*t and hatred to meet the real world..
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2723
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Jun 2020 at 22:28
Jared Diamond is a Leftist Novosedov, it isn't possible for him to write about capitalism objectively.
His political views are equally distorted.

Did I mention his last professional embarrassment?

Sowell on the other hand is deeply respected and for decades he has produced data driven theories on economics and race. 

This doesn't suit the narrative of rabid Leftists but they don't even dare challenge his command of the 20th century evolution. 
Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)
Back to Top
Novosedoff View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun


Joined: 28 Mar 2020
Location: Moscow
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Novosedoff Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Jul 2020 at 00:58
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

Jared Diamond is a Leftist Novosedov, it isn't possible for him to write about capitalism objectively.
His political views are equally distorted.

Did I mention his last professional embarrassment?

Sowell on the other hand is deeply respected and for decades he has produced data driven theories on economics and race. 

This doesn't suit the narrative of rabid Leftists but they don't even dare challenge his command of the 20th century evolution. 

Well, I am myself a bit leftish, that's not a crime, I hope Smile

Sowell's views are bit distorted too. For instance, in his Basic Economics Sowell copied the following quote from Gurcharan Das's "India Unbound":

Though it is rather obvious that back then all the countries had slavery and could barely be regarded as "liberal democracies"


I teach history to children and I am proud that they leave my classes permeated with sh*t and hatred to meet the real world..
Back to Top
Novosedoff View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun


Joined: 28 Mar 2020
Location: Moscow
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Novosedoff Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Jul 2020 at 01:11
But overall I have to admit that I was very impressed by Sowell's writing and his rather broad knowledge of diverse facts. I even acquired another book by Sowell, Migrations and Cultures.

Btw the above screenshot from my previous post is not the only example, in which Sowell advocates something rather doubtful or unproven. The long lasting debate between economists about the benefits of the free trade is another case where Sowell seems to disagree with some of his more prominent colleagues, including recent Nobel prize winner Abhijit Banerjee, who advocates for protectionism (perhaps the reason why Banerjee won a Nobel prize as soon as Trump had become the new president). You may wish to check the attached screenshots to see the argument:

   





Edited by Novosedoff - 01 Jul 2020 at 01:16
I teach history to children and I am proud that they leave my classes permeated with sh*t and hatred to meet the real world..
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 10765
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Jul 2020 at 03:46
I cannot read that small of print.  I don't know what you think Sowell has not proven, but I am sure that when one gets down to the details, one can poke holes in just about any theoretician's theories.  However, I am glad you will give him a chance, too many "liberals" will dismiss him out of hand, as an "Uncle Tom." (which is hell of a racist thing to say).

I think the Nobel prize is often rather political.  For example, Obama got the third, "at least he's not Bush" award given first to Carter, then Gore, then Obama.  Of course, as far as economic theory is concerned, I would assume an economist would know whether her theories are useful, or not.

As far as child labor is concerned (I can barely make out that much in squinting at the small print), I think that some economists would consider it as a unfortunate side effect of modernization and industrialization.  
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.142 seconds.