6 ms·

You don’t have to read 44 pages, it’s on Table 6.5, under the consumption for the lowest quintile. The second source does that work for you by simply summarizin

by bhupy 6y ago

You don’t have to read 44 pages, it’s on Table 6.5, under the consumption for the lowest quintile. The second source does that work for you by simply summarizing the primary source. Average life expectancy is lower for the same reason that average wealth in the US is higher than other countries: outliers. The US has a higher homicide rate, a higher car accident rate, a higher opioid death rate, and a higher obesity rate. So you’re slightly more likely to die earlier if by gun, car, OxyContin, or Big Macs, which brings down the average. https://randomcriticalanalysis.com/2017/05/16/the-explanatory-power-of-drugs-car-accidents-and-homicides-on-us-life-expectancy-gaps/ https://randomcriticalanalysis.com/2017/05/16/the-explanator... Critically, the average life expectancy tells us very little about the state of the median American, or even a lower quintile American who avoids drugs and happy meals, and takes the bus.

sumedh 6y ago
Next time when you want to convey something make it direct. Table 6.5 is meaningless information if no one can directly reach it in a huge file. Try to to give the exact page number. Anyway I did waste my time to see what is on table 6.5, i see can year 2010, where is the more recent data? If more people are dying by drugs, OxyContin and big Macs does that mean these people dont get access to healthcare/emergency services because they are poor or they are not educated because they are poor? Isnt that a proxy to signal that people in other developed countries still have a better life compared to Americans?
- bhupy 6y ago
  Hence why I recommend reading the second source, which does the work for you: https://fee.org/articles/the-poorest-20-of-americans-are-richer-than-most-nations-of-europe/ https://fee.org/articles/the-poorest-20-of-americans-are-ric... > If more people are dying by drugs, OxyContin and big Macs does that mean these people dont get access to healthcare/emergency services because they are poor or they are not educated because they are poor? It’s certainly reasonable conjecture, but there’s little evidence to suggest that lack of access to healthcare/emergency services is the root cause for the opioid epidemic. In fact, we now know the root cause to largely be the Purdue Sackler fraud — doctors were over-prescribing it. It’s ironically a proxy for abundant access to prescription medication. Big Macs aren’t a necessity, it is more than easy to buy cheap and healthy food at the grocery store. This is especially true when you’re poor, because food stamps are currently prohibited for use at fast food restaurants. > Isnt that a proxy to signal that people in other developed countries still have a better life compared to Americans? No, it’s a proxy to signal that there exist a lot of Americans that exhibit poor personal lifestyle, and that America disproportionately allows individuals to live like that. Indeed, the data shows that if you live in America, eat healthy, and avoid drugs, your standard of living is comparable to, if not better than other developed countries. In fact the median (PPP adjusted) disposable income in the US is among the highest in the developed world: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposable_household_and_per_capita_income https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposable_household_and_per_c...
  - sumedh 6y ago
    The second link has the same 2010 chart, where is the more recent data? That link also says "The OECD data is particularly flawed because it is based on “income,” which excludes a host of non-cash government benefits and private charity that are abundant in the United States" A nation should not be dependent on handouts from rich people. So without the handouts as per this link we can assume the US bottom folks are in worse condition. > lot of Americans that exhibit poor personal lifestyle Which comes back to education, which means they dont get proper education compared to their peers in other developed countries. > disposable income in the US is among the highest in the developed world: Yes but then why is poverty rate high as well compared to other developed nations.
    - bhupy 6y ago
      > The second link has the same 2010 chart, where is the more recent data? I'll have to find some more recent data — but the state of the world hasn't dramatically deteriorated since 2010. In fact, the opposite has happened: we've experienced recovery since the Financial Crisis of 2008, so we should expect the numbers to be even better. In many ways, 2010 represents the low watermark for most metrics. As a data point, in 2019, the wage growth for low-wage earners out-paced that of the higher wage-earners: https://www.hiringlab.org/2019/03/05/february-jobs-report-preview/ https://www.hiringlab.org/2019/03/05/february-jobs-report-pr... > A nation should not be dependent on handouts from rich people. Eh? Why not? This is certainly debatable and not some axiomatic truth. The vast majority of the world works on handouts from rich people — it either comes in the form of taxes and transfers, or voluntary handouts. In the US, we see that both play a role in maintaining the high standards of living we enjoy. All that matters is the standard of living, given the current set of systems. The disposable income and consumption metric is downstream of all potential sources of material income, which enables access to goods/services/resources. Also, "without the handouts", if the state of the US deteriorates, this impacts the political will to turn voluntary handouts into taxes and transfers: you can't change a variable in the system, then conclude that all other variables will remain constant. And even if you do account for all variable changes, it's still a hypothetical. It's impossible to refute or falsify hypotheticals and counterfactuals. > Which comes back to education, which means they dont get proper education compared to their peers in other developed countries. Erm, okay — but the US is one of the most educated countries in the world. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/30/the-10-most-educated-countries-in-the-world.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/30/the-10-most-educated-countri... Total inflation adjusted per pupil education funding is the highest it's ever been: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d19/tables/dt19_236.55.asp?current=yes https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d19/tables/dt19_236.55.a... In any case, if you’re making the argument that drug abuse and unhealthy diets are caused by the K-12 education system rather than cultural differences, you’re going to have to back that up. Pretty much everyone in the US attends an increasingly funded (though perhaps inefficiently administered) public school, where we learn that drugs are bad and that eating your vegetables is good. > Yes but then why is poverty rate high as well compared to other developed nations. Because poverty rate is a relative measure within the country, not a comparative measure across countries. We measure it by drawing a line in the income/wealth distribution, and determining the percentage that live below that line. What it doesn't tell us is how the absolute standard of living for someone below that line in country A compares to their counterpart in country B (ask yourself what it means to live in poverty in Switzerland vs Swaziland). It also doesn't account for taxes and transfers. That's exactly what the analyses I've linked shows. After taxes and transfers, the bottom 20% of Americans enjoy a higher standard of living than their counterparts in comparable OECD countries — measured by PPP adjusted disposable income and consumption.

by bhupy 6y ago

sumedh 6y ago

Next time when you want to convey something make it direct. Table 6.5 is meaningless information if no one can directly reach it in a huge file. Try to to give the exact page number. Anyway I did waste my time to see what is on table 6.5, i see can year 2010, where is the more recent data? If more people are dying by drugs, OxyContin and big Macs does that mean these people dont get access to healthcare/emergency services because they are poor or they are not educated because they are poor? Isnt that a proxy to signal that people in other developed countries still have a better life compared to Americans?

bhupy 6y ago
Hence why I recommend reading the second source, which does the work for you: https://fee.org/articles/the-poorest-20-of-americans-are-richer-than-most-nations-of-europe/ https://fee.org/articles/the-poorest-20-of-americans-are-ric... > If more people are dying by drugs, OxyContin and big Macs does that mean these people dont get access to healthcare/emergency services because they are poor or they are not educated because they are poor? It’s certainly reasonable conjecture, but there’s little evidence to suggest that lack of access to healthcare/emergency services is the root cause for the opioid epidemic. In fact, we now know the root cause to largely be the Purdue Sackler fraud — doctors were over-prescribing it. It’s ironically a proxy for abundant access to prescription medication. Big Macs aren’t a necessity, it is more than easy to buy cheap and healthy food at the grocery store. This is especially true when you’re poor, because food stamps are currently prohibited for use at fast food restaurants. > Isnt that a proxy to signal that people in other developed countries still have a better life compared to Americans? No, it’s a proxy to signal that there exist a lot of Americans that exhibit poor personal lifestyle, and that America disproportionately allows individuals to live like that. Indeed, the data shows that if you live in America, eat healthy, and avoid drugs, your standard of living is comparable to, if not better than other developed countries. In fact the median (PPP adjusted) disposable income in the US is among the highest in the developed world: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposable_household_and_per_capita_income https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposable_household_and_per_c...
- sumedh 6y ago
  The second link has the same 2010 chart, where is the more recent data? That link also says "The OECD data is particularly flawed because it is based on “income,” which excludes a host of non-cash government benefits and private charity that are abundant in the United States" A nation should not be dependent on handouts from rich people. So without the handouts as per this link we can assume the US bottom folks are in worse condition. > lot of Americans that exhibit poor personal lifestyle Which comes back to education, which means they dont get proper education compared to their peers in other developed countries. > disposable income in the US is among the highest in the developed world: Yes but then why is poverty rate high as well compared to other developed nations.
  - bhupy 6y ago
    > The second link has the same 2010 chart, where is the more recent data? I'll have to find some more recent data — but the state of the world hasn't dramatically deteriorated since 2010. In fact, the opposite has happened: we've experienced recovery since the Financial Crisis of 2008, so we should expect the numbers to be even better. In many ways, 2010 represents the low watermark for most metrics. As a data point, in 2019, the wage growth for low-wage earners out-paced that of the higher wage-earners: https://www.hiringlab.org/2019/03/05/february-jobs-report-preview/ https://www.hiringlab.org/2019/03/05/february-jobs-report-pr... > A nation should not be dependent on handouts from rich people. Eh? Why not? This is certainly debatable and not some axiomatic truth. The vast majority of the world works on handouts from rich people — it either comes in the form of taxes and transfers, or voluntary handouts. In the US, we see that both play a role in maintaining the high standards of living we enjoy. All that matters is the standard of living, given the current set of systems. The disposable income and consumption metric is downstream of all potential sources of material income, which enables access to goods/services/resources. Also, "without the handouts", if the state of the US deteriorates, this impacts the political will to turn voluntary handouts into taxes and transfers: you can't change a variable in the system, then conclude that all other variables will remain constant. And even if you do account for all variable changes, it's still a hypothetical. It's impossible to refute or falsify hypotheticals and counterfactuals. > Which comes back to education, which means they dont get proper education compared to their peers in other developed countries. Erm, okay — but the US is one of the most educated countries in the world. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/30/the-10-most-educated-countries-in-the-world.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/30/the-10-most-educated-countri... Total inflation adjusted per pupil education funding is the highest it's ever been: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d19/tables/dt19_236.55.asp?current=yes https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d19/tables/dt19_236.55.a... In any case, if you’re making the argument that drug abuse and unhealthy diets are caused by the K-12 education system rather than cultural differences, you’re going to have to back that up. Pretty much everyone in the US attends an increasingly funded (though perhaps inefficiently administered) public school, where we learn that drugs are bad and that eating your vegetables is good. > Yes but then why is poverty rate high as well compared to other developed nations. Because poverty rate is a relative measure within the country, not a comparative measure across countries. We measure it by drawing a line in the income/wealth distribution, and determining the percentage that live below that line. What it doesn't tell us is how the absolute standard of living for someone below that line in country A compares to their counterpart in country B (ask yourself what it means to live in poverty in Switzerland vs Swaziland). It also doesn't account for taxes and transfers. That's exactly what the analyses I've linked shows. After taxes and transfers, the bottom 20% of Americans enjoy a higher standard of living than their counterparts in comparable OECD countries — measured by PPP adjusted disposable income and consumption.