Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Inequality in Equalland

daemonology.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 139 posts

Re: Inequality in Equalland

#31

Post by ugh »

This is a nice demonstration that ‘raw’ inequality data is not very useful. “X% have Y% of the wealth!” really doesn’t tell you very much.

I’m actually only concerned about the consequences of inequality (which could be positive or negative), not about inequality itself. What do I care if 1% of the population have 99% of the wealth if there are no consequences to it? I certainly don’t want to reduce inequality out of spite.

Statistics that tell me, just as an example, how the wealth of parents corresponds with the success of their children in school are much more interesting and reducing inequality probably wouldn’t even be the best solution for such a problem. It’s not as though all that money in mommy’s and daddy’s bank account makes their kids magically more intelligent. (But it can pay for private schools or for private lessons and so on.)

Re: Inequality in Equalland

#32

Post by biot »

btilly wrote: post #28
maeon3 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Money is a terrible motivator? lol. What's this nonsense? Give me your name and address, I'll write you a check for $1500 free and clear to take back what you just said.

Watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrkrvAUbU9Y and then get back to me on how good a motivator money is.

When I saw your link, I was fully expecting this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc -- also quite entertaining and informative.

Re: Inequality in Equalland

#33

Post by cperciva »

ugh wrote: post #31

This is a nice demonstration that ‘raw’ inequality data is not very useful. “X% have Y% of the wealth!” really doesn’t tell you very much. I’m actually only concerned about the consequences of inequality (which could be positive or negative), not about inequality itself. What do I care if 1% of the population have 99% of the wealth if there are no consequences to it? I certainly don’t want to reduce inequality out of…

It’s not as though all that money in mommy’s and daddy’s bank account makes their kids magically more intelligent. (But it can pay for private schools or for private lessons and so on.)

FWIW, numerous studies have found that the vast majority of correlation between parental income and the academic success of children can be explained by a third factor: Parental education. Educated parents both earn more and provide far more educational encouragement and assistance to their children.

Re: Inequality in Equalland

#34

Post by ugh »

cperciva wrote: post #33
ugh wrote: post #31

This is a nice demonstration that ‘raw’ inequality data is not very useful. “X% have Y% of the wealth!” really doesn’t tell you very much. I’m actually only concerned about the consequences of inequality (which could be positive or negative), not about inequality itself. What do I care if 1% of the population have 99% of the wealth if there are no consequences to it? I certainly don’t want to reduce inequality out of…

It’s not as though all that money in mommy’s and daddy’s bank account makes their kids magically more intelligent. (But it can pay for private schools or for private lessons and so on.) FWIW, numerous studies have found that the vast majority of correlation between parental income and the academic success of children can be explained by a third factor: Parental education. Educated parents both earn more and provide f…

Yeah, I knew that and should have written that in my comment. You are right.

I’m from Germany where this kind of inequality is particularly egregious. The explanation is probably that the fate of students is decided early on, in fourth grade. (You continue in one of three different types of schools after fourth grade, depending on your grades. Switching between schools is a hassle and only the highest school has a clear path to all universities.) Looking back at my own experience in elementary school, I would say that it was essential for me that my parents learned with me and helped me with my homework.

Re: Inequality in Equalland

#35

Post by johngalt »

j_baker wrote: post #25
johngalt wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can I hire you? Money doesn't motivate you right? Minimum wage, no benefits and 80hr weeks are required.

Oh, so we're playing the reductio ad absurdum game now? Ok, I'll bite. I'll pay you $1 million to jump off the Golden Gate Bridge. Wait, what was that? Money can't motivate you to do that?

Gladly. New meaning to the term golden parachute. Additionally I bet you'd find that there are people who would take that offer even if it meant their certain death.

Fyi, reductio ad absurdum is a valid method of argument.

I imagine I'd get a lot more applicants applying to my job post if I paid $1million vs. minimum wage. You may say money is a terrible motivator, but people will go through all sorts of horrible things for very small amounts of it.

Re: Inequality in Equalland

#36

Post by mikeklaas »

johngalt wrote: post #13
j_baker wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No you don't. Money is a terrible motivator. If the only thing that is keeping you from working hard is the prospect of making more money, might I suggest that you've chosen the wrong career? I'm not saying that Equalland is desirable. I'm just saying that I think you're overestimating the effect money has on how productive people are.

Can I hire you? Money doesn't motivate you right? Minimum wage, no benefits and 80hr weeks are required.

Yes! If it is for two years and I get a master's degree at the end of it.

(Okay, it wasn't quite 80hr-weeks, and I earned slightly more than minimum wage, but...)

Re: Inequality in Equalland

#37

Post by jdp23 »

Imagine another country which has government-funded secondary education and pensions that cover the bulk of retirement expenses. Wouldn't the "necessary" inequality be noticeably lower in that case?

Re: Inequality in Equalland

#38

Post by lsd5you »

cperciva wrote: post #33
ugh wrote: post #31

This is a nice demonstration that ‘raw’ inequality data is not very useful. “X% have Y% of the wealth!” really doesn’t tell you very much. I’m actually only concerned about the consequences of inequality (which could be positive or negative), not about inequality itself. What do I care if 1% of the population have 99% of the wealth if there are no consequences to it? I certainly don’t want to reduce inequality out of…

It’s not as though all that money in mommy’s and daddy’s bank account makes their kids magically more intelligent. (But it can pay for private schools or for private lessons and so on.) FWIW, numerous studies have found that the vast majority of correlation between parental income and the academic success of children can be explained by a third factor: Parental education. Educated parents both earn more and provide f…

I feel that you are omitting genetics as a possible (probable) significant cause of academic success, which because of the corelation with the parents own academic success will be hard to disambiguate as a variable.

According to horizon (a main stream medium-high brow documentary series in the UK), separated twin studies show that as much as 50% of 'measured intelligence' can be attributed to genetics - which was fairly surprising (not the figure itself, because it agrees with my own suspicions) but because it was on a mainstream show. What is more earlier in the show they talked about a scientist in the 30's (nephew of Francis Galton, forget his name) who had faked a bunch of such studies and made up numbers. The figure he invented was 30%.

Re: Inequality in Equalland

#39

Post by lotharbot »

cperciva wrote: post #2

This blog post was inspired by the article and conversation here (especially pg's comment about income vs. wealth): http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2039503

I'm curious: were you also inspired by my previous posts, or did you independently develop the idea of "equalland"?

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1830974 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1904114

Re: Inequality in Equalland

#40

Post by [deleted] »

cperciva wrote: post #33
ugh wrote: post #31

This is a nice demonstration that ‘raw’ inequality data is not very useful. “X% have Y% of the wealth!” really doesn’t tell you very much. I’m actually only concerned about the consequences of inequality (which could be positive or negative), not about inequality itself. What do I care if 1% of the population have 99% of the wealth if there are no consequences to it? I certainly don’t want to reduce inequality out of…

It’s not as though all that money in mommy’s and daddy’s bank account makes their kids magically more intelligent. (But it can pay for private schools or for private lessons and so on.) FWIW, numerous studies have found that the vast majority of correlation between parental income and the academic success of children can be explained by a third factor: Parental education. Educated parents both earn more and provide f…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN