Alex liked Arnold’s trend summary: Perhaps the most important trend of the past thirty years is the increased importance of cognitive skills relative to physical labor. … Consequences: … women[‘s] comparative advantage went from housework to market work. … [who now] … look for [mate] complementarity in consumption … [which] leads to more assortive mating … [which] leads to greater inequality across households … [and] children. …
Ayn Rand sure got it right to a large extent. Uncle Alan (Greenspan) and the boys thought she was talking to something else. Since when does a corporation become a person except in the minds of those suffering from some delusion. Hell, now they are hearing voices and they have appealed to the supreme court of the U.S. to give corporations the right to free speech. Howdy Doody anyone?
Dear Brothers and Sisters, Sons and Daughters of Liberty,
There are only two types of human beings.
One type just wants everyone to leave everyone else alone and these humans are students and advocates of the Philosophically Mature Non-Aggression Principle.
The other type refuses to leave others alone and these humans are the Mobocracy Looter Minions with their hords of bureaucrats, jackboots, and mercenaries that perpetuate the perpetration of the loot and booty gravy-train. Rob-peter-to-buy-paul's-vote bread and circuses of the doomed Amerikan Empire.
You are either the one...or the other.
The John Galt Solution of Starving The Monkeys is the only solution. Stop funding and forging your own chains and shackles. What are you leaving for your children and grandchildren and prodigy!?!
The Mobocracy Looter Minions must be allowed to consume everything around them, then each other, and finally themselves. There is no other way. Ayn Rand wrote about it over fifty years ago and it rings as soundly today as it did then.
Get your copy of Starving The Monkeys by Tom Baugh today, before the book is banned and the author is hunted down and Vince Fostered!
Sincerely,John and Dagny GaltAtlas Shrugged, Owner's Manual For The Universe!(tm)
This result disagrees with recent work by Branko Milanovic at the World Bank. I only read the abstract, but I suspect that there is a methodological issue here. Many of these studies, and I suspect this one, average over country level Gini coefficients. This shows such a reduction. However, according to Milanovic if one looks directly at world distribution across countries, the Ginis are still rising, even as extreme poverty rates are declining.
Since local measures don't correct for immigration and many complications at the low end of the income distribution, it's not even clear that inequality of native-born Americans (leaving out also children of first generation immigrants) has gone up. The consumption measures (which also don't correct for immigration and other complications) also show much less income inequality than any of the official income calculations.
Interesting. But what makes you think that an exchange has taken place? That is, how is a local decrease in equality connected to a non-local increase?
Plus the increase in inequality in the States is mostly a within education group phenomenon. Of course, Kling could mean some other measure of "cognitive skill".
I am troubled by Kling's piece because it offers no statistics on inter-generational income mobility, and simply offers the assertion that affluent parents beget affluent children.
Do they? What are the statistics on middle class parents having middle class children in the next generation...over time. Is that still true today, or are middle class children having difficulting maintaining the social or income status of their parents? And, what about social mobility of children of lower class households...what is their rate of achieving middle class status. Has that too changed over time.
When you compare the NBER piece to Kling's you are left feeling empty.
Ayn Rand sure got it right to a large extent. Uncle Alan (Greenspan) and the boys thought she was talking to something else. Since when does a corporation become a person except in the minds of those suffering from some delusion. Hell, now they are hearing voices and they have appealed to the supreme court of the U.S. to give corporations the right to free speech. Howdy Doody anyone?
Dear Brothers and Sisters, Sons and Daughters of Liberty,
There are only two types of human beings.
One type just wants everyone to leave everyone else alone and these humans are students and advocates of the Philosophically Mature Non-Aggression Principle.
The other type refuses to leave others alone and these humans are the Mobocracy Looter Minions with their hords of bureaucrats, jackboots, and mercenaries that perpetuate the perpetration of the loot and booty gravy-train. Rob-peter-to-buy-paul's-vote bread and circuses of the doomed Amerikan Empire.
You are either the one...or the other.
The John Galt Solution of Starving The Monkeys is the only solution. Stop funding and forging your own chains and shackles. What are you leaving for your children and grandchildren and prodigy!?!
The Mobocracy Looter Minions must be allowed to consume everything around them, then each other, and finally themselves. There is no other way. Ayn Rand wrote about it over fifty years ago and it rings as soundly today as it did then.
Get your copy of Starving The Monkeys by Tom Baugh today, before the book is banned and the author is hunted down and Vince Fostered!
Sincerely,John and Dagny GaltAtlas Shrugged, Owner's Manual For The Universe!(tm)
http://www.starvingthemonke...
http://voluntaryist.com/fun...
.
This result disagrees with recent work by Branko Milanovic at the World Bank. I only read the abstract, but I suspect that there is a methodological issue here. Many of these studies, and I suspect this one, average over country level Gini coefficients. This shows such a reduction. However, according to Milanovic if one looks directly at world distribution across countries, the Ginis are still rising, even as extreme poverty rates are declining.
Since local measures don't correct for immigration and many complications at the low end of the income distribution, it's not even clear that inequality of native-born Americans (leaving out also children of first generation immigrants) has gone up. The consumption measures (which also don't correct for immigration and other complications) also show much less income inequality than any of the official income calculations.
Great news, that I wasn't explicitly aware of. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
Interesting. But what makes you think that an exchange has taken place? That is, how is a local decrease in equality connected to a non-local increase?
Plus the increase in inequality in the States is mostly a within education group phenomenon. Of course, Kling could mean some other measure of "cognitive skill".
I am troubled by Kling's piece because it offers no statistics on inter-generational income mobility, and simply offers the assertion that affluent parents beget affluent children.
Do they? What are the statistics on middle class parents having middle class children in the next generation...over time. Is that still true today, or are middle class children having difficulting maintaining the social or income status of their parents? And, what about social mobility of children of lower class households...what is their rate of achieving middle class status. Has that too changed over time.
When you compare the NBER piece to Kling's you are left feeling empty.
Good comparison. Makes you think. Thanks.