4 ms·

>I don't see heaps of disposable income having much to do with free range parenting Maybe not directly. But indirectly it has a huge effect on the overall well

>I don't see heaps of disposable income having much to do with free range parenting Maybe not directly. But indirectly it has a huge effect on the overall well-being of your society and thus the things you can or can't do. Or do you believe that Norwegians would still behave the same way if they had income inequality similar to less fortunate countries? Because I don't see any evidence for that.

082349872349872 2y ago
I believe they have less income inequality because they behave the way they do, not the other way around. (that is: if you set out to make a society where "free range" parenting works, you will naturally also reduce income inequality; if you set out to make a society where middle class workers have to be kept motivated by fear of falling into a –reputedly or truly— crime-ridden underclass, you probably won't wind up with one suitable for what I would consider normal parenting)
- vinnyvichy 2y ago
  Reconsidering my thesis in light of ROK.. nominally Confucianist but not (currently) free-range. could be due to US influence? Also has a unusually marked (even for EastAsia) bully problem in schools..
  - vinnyvichy 2y ago
    https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0095555 https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...
- sigmoid10 2y ago
  >if you set out to make a society where "free range" parenting works, you will naturally also reduce income inequality That is an extremely bold assumption that has zero evidence. In fact, if you look at income inequality around the world, you'll see other factors are infinitely more important.
  - vinnyvichy 2y ago
    I'm neutral on this issue but let's look, for a start, at correlation? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_eq... Not even accounting for Berkson's paradox yet (patience pls!), let's set Japan's gini as fiducial for free range parenting countries? Possible outliers: south Korea, hk (see also my comment below while initiating consideration of Berkson) Interesting datapoints: Ukraine, Iraq, pakistan To get an idea of the level of discourse we should be aiming for, how about we investigate those interesting datapoints to find out if we should consider median (non-extensive) PPP as a proxy for parenting free-rangedness♥
    - sigmoid10 2y ago
      Funny how you use "interesting" instead of "disproving my argument." Rule Nr 1 in science is that you should never try to rationalise outliers before validating your model, because that is a dangerous line of thinking when you seek the truth. But I digress. At this point you will see anything in any statistic that validates you while being blind to the obvious. So I see no more reason in discussing this. Have a nice day.
      - vinnyvichy 2y ago
        My only hypothesis that needed validation here is that you're a former (theoretical?) physicist who has never been unblinded from your cynicism by say, living outside a well-paid Anglo bubble, or maybe by getting the chance to level-up in statistics professionally (working at ai for the MMAANG doesn't count, and you know it) Let's revisit this conversation in 20 years' time when Pakistan has leapfrogged India. Keeping my fingers crossed for Ukraine
        sigmoid10 2y ago
        I literally don't know what you're talking about, but it seems quite personal, off-topic, or plain delusional. It seems you are the one who really needs to spend some more time abroad to widen your perspectives. But I realize how this is easy to say for someone from a high income country who spent a lot of time working and travelling abroad, while people from low income countries will simply never get to see much of that. So I suppose the best I can say is that I feel sorry for you if you think this is what sets us apart. I wish the world didn't work that way.

082349872349872 2y ago

I believe they have less income inequality because they behave the way they do, not the other way around. (that is: if you set out to make a society where "free range" parenting works, you will naturally also reduce income inequality; if you set out to make a society where middle class workers have to be kept motivated by fear of falling into a –reputedly or truly— crime-ridden underclass, you probably won't wind up with one suitable for what I would consider normal parenting)

vinnyvichy 2y ago
Reconsidering my thesis in light of ROK.. nominally Confucianist but not (currently) free-range. could be due to US influence? Also has a unusually marked (even for EastAsia) bully problem in schools..
- vinnyvichy 2y ago
  https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0095555 https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...
sigmoid10 2y ago
>if you set out to make a society where "free range" parenting works, you will naturally also reduce income inequality That is an extremely bold assumption that has zero evidence. In fact, if you look at income inequality around the world, you'll see other factors are infinitely more important.
- vinnyvichy 2y ago
  I'm neutral on this issue but let's look, for a start, at correlation? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_eq... Not even accounting for Berkson's paradox yet (patience pls!), let's set Japan's gini as fiducial for free range parenting countries? Possible outliers: south Korea, hk (see also my comment below while initiating consideration of Berkson) Interesting datapoints: Ukraine, Iraq, pakistan To get an idea of the level of discourse we should be aiming for, how about we investigate those interesting datapoints to find out if we should consider median (non-extensive) PPP as a proxy for parenting free-rangedness♥
  - sigmoid10 2y ago
    Funny how you use "interesting" instead of "disproving my argument." Rule Nr 1 in science is that you should never try to rationalise outliers before validating your model, because that is a dangerous line of thinking when you seek the truth. But I digress. At this point you will see anything in any statistic that validates you while being blind to the obvious. So I see no more reason in discussing this. Have a nice day.
    - vinnyvichy 2y ago
      My only hypothesis that needed validation here is that you're a former (theoretical?) physicist who has never been unblinded from your cynicism by say, living outside a well-paid Anglo bubble, or maybe by getting the chance to level-up in statistics professionally (working at ai for the MMAANG doesn't count, and you know it) Let's revisit this conversation in 20 years' time when Pakistan has leapfrogged India. Keeping my fingers crossed for Ukraine
      - sigmoid10 2y ago
        I literally don't know what you're talking about, but it seems quite personal, off-topic, or plain delusional. It seems you are the one who really needs to spend some more time abroad to widen your perspectives. But I realize how this is easy to say for someone from a high income country who spent a lot of time working and travelling abroad, while people from low income countries will simply never get to see much of that. So I suppose the best I can say is that I feel sorry for you if you think this is what sets us apart. I wish the world didn't work that way.