What He Said

I Don't Give a Damn about the First (Insert Identity Here) CEO or President

Asthe author observes, "It takes a stupendous level of cognitive dissonance to simultaneously celebrate the fortunes of someone from a specific identity while looking past the vast sea of people from said identity who are stuck in gut wrenching poverty."

The Poor Do Have Self Control

One of the myths about the poor is that they cannot defer gratification for greater future benefits.

Well, scientists have found a way to objectively test for the ability to handle stress, it involves "Vagal Tone", activity of the Vagus nerve, which is an indicator of how well people handle stress.

What they discovered is that poor children who are best able to think things through the take the immediate reward, while rich kids will delay gratification.

It turns out that poor children use a different calculus:  Having never experienced the stability of their more fortunate cohorts, they go for the the immediate payoff, because experience has shown them that the any plans for the future will make their plans moot:

In the late 1960s, Walter Mischel, a researcher at Stanford University, invited several hundred children to participate in a game in which they were given a choice: They could eat one sweet right away, or wait and have two a little later. Initially, the goal was simple: to see how and why people (kids in this case) delayed gratification. But after the end of the experiment, Mischel began to check in with as many of the participants' families as he could, and over the following decade he learned that his little experiment probably had much larger implications than he had anticipated.

Many of the children had trouble resisting the single, immediate treat (a marshmallow), which was to be expected. The magnetic force that exists between kids and candies is no secret. What was surprising, however, was that that tendency — the inability to forego something good right now in exchange for something better in a bit — was associated with all sorts of negative life outcomes, including lower levels of academic achievement and higher rates of obesity.

………

The realization has sparked concerns that poverty begets a certain level of impulsiveness, and that that tendency to act in the moment, on a whim, without fully considering the consequences, makes it all the more difficult for poor children to succeed. But there's an important thing this discussion seems to miss. Poor kids may simply not want to delay gratification. Put another way, their decisions may not reflect the sort of impulsive nature we tend to attribute them to.

"When resources are low and scarce, the rational decision is to take the immediate benefit and to discount the future gain," said Melissa Sturge-Apple, a professor of psychology at the University of Rochester who studies child development. "When children are faced with economic uncertainty, impoverished conditions, not knowing when the next meal is, etc. — they may be better off if they take what is in front of them."

A recent two-part study conducted by Sturge-Apple shows how the tendency of poorer children to pounce on immediate rewards might not be the result of impulsiveness but rather of careful consideration.

In the first experiment, she monitored the heart rate of 200 low-income 2-year-olds. The monitoring allowed her to approximate each child's vagal tone — a measure of the activity of the vagus nerve, which has been shown to indicate how well a given individual performs under stress (i.e., reads social cues, reacts to environmental contexts, and adjusts behaviors). High vagal tone is good: it suggests a heightened ability to act relatively calmly under stress. Low vagal tone is bad: it suggests just the opposite.

Two years later, at the age of 4, the same children were presented with a choice. Each was sat a table where two plates and a bell were placed. One plate held two M&Ms, while the other held five. The children were told that they could either ring the bell and have the two M&Ms immediately or enjoy the plate of five as soon as the experimenter returned.

Interestingly, each child's vagal tone appeared to have a significant effect on their decision. But — and this is an important but — it didn't have the sort of effect many would have imagined. The higher the child's vagal tone — the greater, in other words, a child's ability to act calmly under pressure — the more likely the child was to ring the bell. The calmer the children were to think it through, the more likely they were to choose the immediate reward.

………

The children born to college-educated mothers of high socioeconomic status acted exactly as one would expect. The higher their vagal tone, or calmness under stress, the more likely they were to hold out for the five extra M&Ms. For children born to non-college-educated mothers of low socioeconomic status, on the other hand, the outcome was exactly the opposite. The higher their vagal tone, the less likely they were to wait.

The chart below, plucked from the study, shows just how stark the divergence is.

This is rational behavior, not evidence of lack of moral fiber.

If you don't know where your next meal is coming from, you eat whenever you can.

QED.

Their Goal Is to Punish Women. Mission Accomplished

One of the not so tightly kept secrets of the abortion criminalization movement is that they want to ban birth control as well.

The reason for this is because they want to punish women for their sexuality, and now a study shows that when they get what they want, they succeed in punishing women:

In the US, there are many laws limiting when and how women can receive abortions. But there is almost no research on what happens to women who seek out abortions and are denied them. Now a team of health researchers at the University of California, San Francisco has completed a longitudinal study of a group they call "Turnaways," women who tried and failed to get abortions due to local laws. The researchers found that women who received abortions were over six times as likely to have and achieve positive life plans than Turnaways.

The Turnaway study

To gather their unusual Turnaway data set, the researchers spent two years interviewing 956 women who sought abortions at 30 different abortion clinics around the US. 182 of them were turned away. All the women were interviewed a week after being turned away or receiving an abortion and then again a year later to assess the longer-term outcomes of their experiences. The team has also just completed interviews with the women that will reveal where they are five years after being turned away or not.

In its first analysis of turnaway data published two years ago, the team found that women seek out abortions for complicated reasons, with the most common being a feeling of financial unpreparedness. This earlier analysis also showed that 86 percent of turnaways chose to keep their children, and 67 percent of them would up below the poverty line a year later. By comparison, 56 percent of women granted abortions in the study were below the poverty line a year later. This finding lent credibility to many turnaways' concerns that being financially unprepared would cause problems down the line.

………

Only 53 percent of the goals were aspirational among turnaways. Women who received abortions had roughly 85 percent aspirational plans. Women who had children but did not parent them had 80 percent aspirational plans. The upshot was that turnaways who kept their children had far fewer positive goals for the future than their counterparts who received abortions.

Of all the goals measured, 47 percent were achieved. There was little difference between turnaways and women who had abortions when it came to achieving their goals. However, as the researchers write in their paper, women who received abortions "were significantly more likely to have both an aspirational plan and to have achieved it" than turnaways who kept their children. Upadhyay was quick to point out that overall, most of the women's goals were aspirational. "They all had high hopes," she said. But Turnaways "were much more likely to have negative goals."

What this latest phase in the Turnaway study reveals is that not having access to abortion can negatively impact women's lives. As Upadhyay and her colleagues put it in their paper, "Whether or not a person has aspirational plans is indicative of her hope for the future. Without such plans or hopes, she misses out on opportunities to achieve milestones in life."

Put bluntly, the Turnaways had fewer hopes, so they had fewer reasons to push themselves toward what they defined as better lives.

Destroying these women's lives is one of the goals of the anti-abortion movement.

You won't ever hear them say it, but it is clear from what they do.

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?

As a small child, I spent a fair amount of time unsupervised.

As a 20 year old, I took a year off while I changed schools and majors, and saw the (IMHO Ronald Reagan inspired) height of the missing child hysteria in 1981-82.^*

So, I am disgusted, but not surprised, that a mom was jailed for sending her 9 year old to play in the park alone, despite the fact that she was sent with a cell phone, and the mother was at work nearby:

Just in case you thought you could parent whatever way you see fit in 2014 America:

A North Augusta mother is in jail after witnesses say she left her nine-year-old daughter at a nearby park, for hours at a time.

Hours at a time? At a park? In the summer? Gosh! That certainly sounds normal and fun like a reason to throw a mom in jail—and place the child in state custody.

Here are the facts: Debra Harrell works at McDonald's in North Augusta, South Carolina. For most of the summer, her daughter had stayed there with her, playing on a laptop that Harrell had scrounged up the money to purchase. (McDonald's has free WiFi.) Sadly, the Harrell home was robbed and the laptop stolen, so the girl asked her mother if she could be dropped off at the park to play instead.

Harrell said yes. She gave her daughter a cell phone. The girl went to the park—a place so popular that at any given time there are about 40 kids frolicking—two days in a row. There were swings, a "splash pad," and shade. On her third day at the park, an adult asked the girl where her mother was. At work, the daughter replied.

The shocked adult called the cops. Authorities declared the girl "abandoned" and proceeded to arrest the mother.

Watch the news: It sounds like Debra Harrell committed a serious, unconscionable crime. The reporter looks ready to burst with contempt. But what are the facts? She let her daughter play at the park for several hours at a time—like we did as kids. She gave her a daughter a phone if she needed to call. Any "danger" was not only theoretical, it was exceedingly unlikely.

The danger is vanishingly small.

We are a nation who lives in terror of vanishingly small threats, child abduction, shark attacks, plane crashes, and non existent things, like vaccine related autism, while blithely ignoring greater threats, like driving, guns in the home, crossing the street, and anything that begins with the phrase, "Watch this."

Have I mentioned that we as a society are both paranoid and insane?

^*The people whipping up the hysteria claimed that there were something like 85,000 child abductions a year^†. They did this by counting every time a kid was delivered late from visitation, got lost in the mall for 5 minutes, etc.
^†Stranger child abduction number significantly less than 100 per year.

Missing the Point

Julia Ryan at The Atlantic observes that when correcting for demographics, public schools outperform private schools:

Sarah Theule Lubienski didn’t set out to compare public schools and private schools. A professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, she was studying math instructional techniques when she discovered something surprising: Private schools—long assumed to be educationally superior—were underperforming public schools.

She called her husband, Christopher A. Lubienski, also a professor at the university. “I said, ‘This is a really weird thing,’ and I checked it and double checked it,” she remembers. The couple decided to take on a project that would ultimately disprove decades of assumptions about private and public education.

Studying the National Assessment of Educational Progress and the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, they have found that, when controlling for demographic factors, public schools are doing a better job academically than private schools. It seems that private school students have higher scores because they come from more affluent backgrounds, not because the schools they attend are better educational institutions. They write about these conclusions—and explain how they came to them—in their book, The Public School Advantage: Why Public Schools Outperform Private Schools. Here’s an interview with the Lubienskis about their work, edited and condensed for clarity and length.

This is not a surprise, but it does not matter for two reasons:

• The quality of an educational experience is largely determined by the abilities of the students.
• It creates social connections which serve to preserve a de facto aristocracy.

The biggest determinant of school quality has always been the "quality", for lack of a better term, of the students.

To the degree that you put good students together in a self contained environment, their educational experience will likely improve, though this will be at the expense of those students, frequently poorer and more heavily pigmented, on the outside.

As to social connections, just look at Harvard, whose undergraduate program is widely considered to be one of the most overrated in academe,^* they remain very exclusive.
The reason for this is the quality of the student body, and the social connections that are created by going there. 

It seems like half of the Wall Street banksters went to Harvard, for example.

Nothing binds like those old school ties.

^*So says my Radcliffe (Harvard) graduate, former college president, step-mom.

This is a Shanda Before the Goyim

A tool to run comparisons

Israel has the highest proportion of its population living in poverty of any OECD nation:

Israel has the highest rate of poverty of all developed countries, according to a report released by the 33-nation Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) on Wednesday.

The OECD found that Israel's poverty rate stands as almost 21%.

It also put Israel at fifth place among countries with the widest gaps between rich and poor, after Chile, Mexico, Turkey and the United States, while Iceland, Slovenia, Norway and Denmark were the most egalitarian societies.

Israel has been practicing Thatcher style economics, even the Labour Party, for the past few decades, which could explain this.

I'm also wondering how much of this number is driven by the growing number of Heridi Jews in Israel. They are about 10% of the population, and are disproportionately: Over half the Heridim live in poverty, and are on government assistance, as versus about 15% of the general population.

Much of this differential is actually an artifact of poverty by choice. Many in this community prefer to remain on the dole, so that they can study Torah.

Of course, there is no requirement for someone not to work in order to study Torah.

Maimonides was a noted doctor, Rashi was a vintner, and the Baal Shem Tov was an inn keeper.

I do not know of anyone of this generation with the chops of those folks. Get a f%$#ing job.

Welcome to Belly Rave*

Poverty is growing more rapidly in the suburbs than in either urban or rural areas, this is not something that we have experience in handling:

In many of America’s once pristine suburbs, harbingers of inner-city blight — overgrown lots, boarded up windows, abandoned residences — are the new eyesores. From the Midwestern rust-belt to the burst housing bubbles of Nevada, California and Florida, even in small pockets of still affluent regions like Du Page County, Ill., the nation’s soaring poverty rates are visibly reclaiming last century’s triumphal “crabgrass frontier.” In well-heeled Illinois towns like Glen Ellyn and Elgin, unkempt, weedy lawns blot the formerly manicured, uniform and tidy landscape.

The Brookings Institution reported two years ago that “by 2008 suburbs were home to the largest and fastest growing poor population in the country.” In the previous eight years, major metropolitan suburbs had seen poverty rates climb by 25 percent, almost five times faster than cities. Nationwide, 55 percent of the poor living in the nation’s metropolitan regions lived in suburbs.

To add insult to injury, a new measure to calculate poverty — introduced by the Census Bureau just last year — darkens an already bleak picture: nationally, 51 million households had incomes less than 50 percent above the official poverty line, and nearly half of these households were in suburbs.

When juxtaposed with the structure of the suburbs, poverty may be even more problematic in the burbs, particularly in terms of things like transportation.

I'm not saying that the suburbs are heading toward a dystopian world of suburbs as gang infested slums, the there does appear to be a change in the status of suburbs.

^*Seriously, if you haven't read Gladiator At Law, by Frederik Pohl and C. M. Kornbluth, you should.

Economics Update

Unemployment Chart Pr0n Courtesy Calculated Risk

Well, we have the initial unemployment claims out now (government link), and it appears to point to improvement. Initial claims were 550,000, a decrease of 26,000 from the revised figure of 576,000 (but the initial figure was 570,000, so the drop is 20K, not 26K apples to apples), the 4 week moving average was 570,000, down from 572,250, and the continuing claims number(seasonally adjusted) was 6,088,000, down 159,000 from last week's revised level of 6,247,000 (only continuing claims were revised up from 6.23m, so the apples to apples drop is actually 142K, not 159K).

Anyone else knowing a pattern in revision numbers, or is it just me?

BTW, note that the continuing claims number drops as people lose benefits or move to emergency unemployment claims.

In any case, with foreclosures up 18% year over year, and poverty rate hitting an 11 year high, 13.2%, things really don't indicate a rapid improvement.

The weekly claims number needs to be below 400K before we will start seeing increases in employment.

Additionally, we have a leading indicator in Japan, machinery (capital) orders are in the toilet, with orders being the lowest since the start of the survey in 1987.

I'd also stay out of the stock market, as insiders selling continuing to go crazy, and when people sell their own stocks it's because they know something, even if this knowledge is not sufficient to trigger an criminal or civil investigation.

In the world of central banking, the Bank of England is leaving its benchmark unchanged, and continuing with bond purchases (quantitative easing).

Bonds did fairly well today, with the yields on mortgage backed bonds and US treasuries prices rising, which means that the yields are falling………Unless, of course, you are talking about Polish government bonds, which look to be heading into the world of hurt that their Baltic Republic neighbors are feeling.

Meanwhile, a week inventory report has pushed crude oil up, and the US dollar was up marginally, though whether this is a turn, or just a breather, is unclear.

Number of Uninsured Rising

Link.

Poverty is up too.

Click image for full size.

Not Enough Bullets, Stealing from the Poor to Give to the Rich Edition

Paul Krugman catches this measure of income inequality.

The top 0.01%, or the richest ¹/₁₀₀₀₀, now earn more than 6% of of all wages, a higher percentage than we had at the peak of the guided age.

These wages come from somewhere, and they come from the rest of us, but trying to fix this is beyone the political pale, because we are not citizens, we are serfs.

One of the Consequences of the Financial Meltdown

Is that it has shown to the world that the Neoliberal economic policies of the IMF and world bank are not applied to Europe and the US.

As such, the parties in power in many parts of the world are becoming far less receptive to "soak the poor" policies that have been foisted upon them by international institutions like the IMF and World Bank.

We are the fruits of that revalation going on in South Africa right now, where South African labor unions have extracted changes in policies from the ruling ANC.

The Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) is getting commitments to poverty reduction in exchange for their support of Jacob Zuma in his confrontation with Thabo Mbeki, and now they want a change in focus for the next government.

Of course, moneyed interests are not amused:

Investors fear the left has gained influence over the African National Congress in the past year and believe it might pressure the government to ditch policies that helped spur nearly a decade of growth in Africa's biggest economy.

Of course those policies haven't benefited a majority of the population. The argument is that by keeping social programs sparse, and any minimum wage low, that growth would eventually trickle down.

It hasn't in South Africa, or anywhere else.

In fact, what is arguably the best example of a formerly poor society becoming well off, Singapore.

Its leader in its formative years, Lee Kwan Yoo, made it clear to its capital class, that it would be unacceptable to take it all, that some of the profits had to find its way to everyone.

Fundamentally, if South Africa wants to follow this path, we aren't talking going Sweden. Simply by raising the minimum wage, improving the access to health care, and making sure that public school is free, available, and universal, you can improve the lot of everyone.

New York City Develops Its Own Poverty Calculation

My guess is that the city's numbers are more accurate than the federal poverty numbers, because they consider things that the feds don't, like medical expenses.

The number in poverty is 23%, as opposed to 19% under the federal numbers, and of course, some wanker at the American Enterprise Institute was quoted as saying that the poor are, "a lot better off than they were 20, 30, 40 years ago".

Yep, let's go back to outhouses and cholera for the poor, just to be fair.

Your Moment of Zen

World leaders enjoy 18-course banquet... then discuss how to solve global food crisis.

I got nothing to add here.

Suppressed World Bank Report Says 75% of Food Price Spike from Biofuels

Here:

Senior development sources believe the report, completed in April, has not been published to avoid embarrassing President George Bush.

"It would put the World Bank in a political hot-spot with the White House," said one yesterday.

Is there anything he touches that does not collapse into a morass of failure, corruption, and self dealing?

The New Hooverville is a Parking Lot

And many of the people in America are a job loss away from it:

Harvey now works part time for $8 an hour, and she draws Social Security to help make ends meet. But she still cannot afford an apartment, and so every night she pulls into a gated parking lot to sleep in her car, along with other women who find themselves in a similar predicament.

There are 12 parking lots across Santa Barbara that have been set up to accommodate the growing middle-class homelessness. These lots are believed to be part of the first program of its kind in the United States, according to organizers.

The lots open at 7 p.m. and close at 7 a.m. and are run by New Beginnings Counseling Center, a homeless outreach organization.

Welcome to George W. Bush's America.

Hoovervilles Return in Video

I've written before about the return of Hoovervilles (Favelas), and how we have some (very depressing) video showing the tent cities of the foreclosed in Los Angeles:


Bushvilles, or maybe Greenspanvilles, actually.

A New Study Shows that the "Rising Tide" Lifts Fewer Boats than Previously Counted

A new study of purchasing power parity (PPP) is showing that living standards for the bulk of populations in developing countries are far lower than previously estimated.

Basically, the relative purchasing power of currencies have been miscalculated, giving an unrealistic picture of the living standards of the average person in what is sometimes called the "3rd World".

It means that poverty and inequality are far higher than under previous estimates:

Suddenly the world has more poor. Incomes declined in emerging economies: down by 40 percent in China and India, 17 percent in Indonesia, 41 percent in the Philippines, 32 percent in South Africa and 24 percent in Argentina. For Indonesia, the decline was far worse than the Asian crisis, and for China and India, the decline was worse than the one experienced by Germany during the Great Depression. Yet hardly anyone noticed.

The event was the release of new estimates of purchasing power parity, or PPP. Measured as part of a large international endeavor called the International Comparison Program, PPP aims to accurately calculate a country’s economic power rather than simply dividing total national output by a country’s population.

It's hard to see this as anything but a full bore refutation of the facts that the free trade zealots use.

The Rise of Squatters in Foreclosed Homes

There is even a name for folks who squat in abandoned homes, they are called "bandos".

The US is sounding more like a post-crash Argentina every day.

I've already posted about returning Hoovervilles (Favelas), and this appears to be more of the same.

Why We’re All Going to Hell, Part 54,302

John Scalzi, in his blog post, Why We’re All Going to Hell, Part 54,302, makes the point that should be made: When the press covers someone giving away billions of dollars to the hungry, sick, and infirm, and the big story for the media is, "What does this mean for his narcissistic no-talent grand daughter?^*", we are all going to hell, particularly the wankers in the media who have decided to cover it this .

I might further argue that we are already in hell.

^*Early in the brief 7 ½ month history of this blog, I made a promise not to mention She Who Must Not Be Named, which was expanded a while back to They Who Must Not Be Named. Therefore, I will not mention her name, or their names, unless they run for office.

Jesse Jackson Says Dem Candidates Ignore Black Issues, Except for Edwards

Fascinating. It's clear that he is criticizing Obama with this statement:

Yet the Democratic candidates -- with the exception of John Edwards, who opened his campaign in New Orleans' Ninth Ward and has made addressing poverty central to his campaign -- have virtually ignored the plight of African Americans in this country. The catastrophic crisis that engulfs the African-American community goes without mention. No urban agenda is given priority. When thousands of African Americans marched in protest in Jena, La., not one candidate showed up.

Truth be told, I agree.

Among the serious candidates^*, only Edwards is talking to issues of inequality and poverty.

In fact, Obama's basic message, one of "bipartisan civility" pretty much excludes any discussion of the divide between the haves or have nots, because such a discussion would inevitably lead to people saying nasty things to each other.

This is why we do not need a conciliator in chief.

^*Which excludes Kucinich.