Utopia Talk / Politics / 92% Of Americans prefer Sweden

Milton Bradley Member	Tue Sep 28 15:53:16 Reposted, dumbass mods had deleted the invalid chars thread Michael I. Norton, Harvard Business School, Soldiers Field Road, Boston, MA 02163, mnorton@hbs.edu; Dan Ariely, Duke University, One Towerview Road, Durham, NC 27708, dandan@duke.edu. Most scholars agree that wealth inequality in the United States is at historic highs, with some estimates suggesting that the top 1% of Americans hold nearly 50% of the wealth, topping even the levels seen just before the Great Depression in the 1920â??s (Davies, Sandstrom, Shorrocks, & Wolff, 2009; Keister, 2000; Wolff, 2002). While it is clear that wealth inequality is high, determining the ideal distribution of wealth in a society has proven to be an intractable question, in part because differing beliefs about the ideal distribution of wealth are the source of friction between policymakers who shape that distribution: Proponents of the 'estate tax,' for example, argue that the wealth that parents bequeath to their children should be taxed more heavily than those who refer to this policy as a burdensome 'death tax.' We take a different approach to determining the 'ideal' level of wealth inequality: Following the philosopher John Rawls (1971), we ask Americans to construct distributions of wealth they deem just. Of course, this approach may simply add to the confusion if Americans disagree about the ideal wealth distribution in the same way that policymakers do. Thus, we have two primary goals. First, we explore whether there is general consensus among Americans about the ideal level of wealth inequality, or whether differences â?? driven by factors such as political beliefs and income â?? outweigh any consensus (McCarty, Poole, & Rosenthal, 2006). Second, assuming sufficient agreement, we hope to insert the preferences of â??regular Americansâ?? regarding wealth inequality into policy debates. A nationally representative online sample of respondents (N = 5,522, 51% female, Mage = 44.1), randomly drawn from a panel of over one million Americans, completed the similar to that reported in the 2006 United States census (Median = $48,000), and their voting pattern in the 2004 election (50.6% Bush, 46.0% Kerry) was also similar to the actual outcome (50.8% Bush, 48.3% Kerry). In addition, the sample contained respondents from 47 states. We ensured that all respondents had the same working definition of wealth by requiring them to read the following before beginning the survey: 'Wealth, also known as net worth, is defined as the total value of everything someone owns minus any debt that he or she owes. A person's net worth includes his or her bank account savings plus the value of other things such as property, stocks, bonds, art, collections, etc., minus the value of things like loans and mortgages.' Americans Prefer Sweden For the first task, we created three unlabeled pie charts of wealth distributions, one of which depicted a perfectly equal distribution of wealth. Unbeknownst to respondents, a second distribution reflected the wealth distribution in the United States; in order to create a distribution with a level of inequality that clearly fell in between these two charts, we constructed a third pie chart from the income distribution of Sweden (Figure 1). 2 We presented respondents with the three pair-wise combinations of these pie charts (in random order) and asked them to choose which nation they would rather join given a â??Rawls constraintâ?? for determining a just society (Rawls, 1971): â??In considering this question, imagine that if you joined this nation, you would be randomly assigned to a place in the distribution, so you could end up anywhere in this distribution, from the very richest to the very poorest.â?? As can be seen in Figure 1, the (unlabeled) United States distribution was far less desirable than both the (unlabeled) Sweden distribution and the equal distribution, with some 92% of Americans preferring the Sweden distribution to the United States. In addition, this overwhelming preference for the Sweden distribution over the United States distribution was robust across gender (Females: 92.7%; Males: 90.6%), preferred candidate in the 2004 election (Bush Voters: 90.2%; Kerry Voters: 93.5%) and income (less than $50,000: 92.1%; $50,001-100,000: 91.7%; more than $100,000: 89.1%). In addition, there was a slight preference for the distribution that resembled Sweden relative to the equal distribution, suggesting that Americans prefer some inequality to perfect equality, but not to the degree currently present in the United States. While the choices among the three distributions shed some light into preferences for distributions of wealth in the abstract, we wanted to explore respondentsâ?? specific beliefs about their own society. In the next task, we therefore removed Rawlsâ?? â??veil of ignoranceâ?? and assessed both respondentsâ?? estimates of the actual distribution of wealth and their preferences for the ideal distribution of wealth in the United States. For their estimates of the actual distribution, we asked respondents to indicate what percent of wealth they thought was owned by each of the five quintiles in the United States, in order starting with the top 20% and ending with the bottom 20%. For their ideal distributions, we asked them to indicate what percent of wealth they thought each of the quintiles ideally should hold, again starting with the top 20% and ending with the bottom 20%. These results demonstrate two clear messages. First, respondents vastly underestimated the actual level of wealth inequality in the United States, believing that the wealthiest quintile held about 59% of the wealth when the actual number is closer to 84%. More interesting, respondents constructed ideal wealth distributions that were far more equitable than even their erroneously low estimates of the actual distribution, reporting a desire for the top quintile to own just 32% of the wealth. These desires for more equal distributions of wealth took the form of moving money from the top quintile to the bottom three quintiles, while leaving the second quintile unchanged, evidencing a greater concern for the less fortunate than the more fortunate (Charness & Rabin, 2002). We next explored how demographic characteristics of our respondents affected these estimates. Figure 3 shows these estimates broken down by three levels of income, by whether respondents voted for George W. Bush (Republican) or John Kerry (Democrat) for United States president in 2004, and by gender. Males, Kerry voters, and wealthier individuals estimated that the distribution of wealth was relatively more unequal than did women, Bush voters, and poorer individuals. For estimates of the ideal distribution, women, Kerry voters, and the poor desired relatively more equal distributions than their counterparts. What is most striking about Figure 3, however, is its demonstration of much more consensus than disagreement among these different demographic groups. All groups â?? even the wealthiest respondents â?? desired a more equal distribution of wealth than what they estimated the current United States level to be, while all groups also desired some inequality â?? even the poorest respondents. In addition, all groups agreed that such redistribution should take the form of moving wealth from the top quintile to the bottom three quintiles. In short, while Americans tend to be relatively more favorable toward economic inequality than members of other countries (Osberg & Smeeding, 2006), Americansâ?? consensus about the ideal distribution of wealth within the United States appears to dwarf their disagreements across gender, political orientation, and income. Overall, these results demonstrate two primary messages. First, a large nationally representative sample of Americans seem to prefer to live in a country more like Sweden than like the United States. Americans also construct ideal distributions that are far more equal than they estimated the United States to be â?? estimates which themselves were far more equal than the actual level of inequality. Second, across groups from different sides of the political spectrum, there was much more consensus than disagreement about this desire for a more equal distribution of wealth, suggesting that Americans may possess a commonly held â??normativeâ?? standard for the distribution of wealth despite the many disagreements about policies that affect that distribution, such as taxation and welfare (Kluegel & Smith, 1986). We hasten to add, however, that our use of â??normativeâ?? is in a not necessarily in a prescriptive sense. While some evidence suggests that economic inequality is associated with decreased well-being and health (Napier & Jost, 2008; Wilkinson & Pickett, 2009), creating a society with the precise level of inequality that our respondents report as ideal may not be optimal from an economic or public policy perspective (Krueger, 2004). Given the consensus among disparate groups on the gap between an ideal distribution of wealth and the actual level of wealth inequality, why donâ??t more Americans â?? especially those with low income â?? advocate for greater redistribution of wealth? First, our results demonstrate that Americans appear to drastically underestimate the current level of wealth inequality, suggesting they may simply be unaware of the gap. Second, just as people have erroneous beliefs about the actual level of wealth inequality, they may also hold overly optimistic beliefs about opportunities for social mobility in the United States (Benabou & Ok, 2001; Charles & Hurst, 2003; Keister, 2005), beliefs which in turn may drive support for unequal distributions of wealth. Third, despite the fact that conservatives and liberals in our sample agree that the current level of inequality far from ideal, public disagreements about the causes of that inequality may drown out this consensus (Alesina & Angeletos, 2005; Piketty, 1995). Finally, and more broadly, Americans exhibit a general disconnect between their attitudes towards economic inequality and their self-interest and public policy preferences (Bartels, 2005; Fong, 2001), suggesting that even given increased awareness of the gap between ideal and actual wealth distributions, Americans may remain unlikely to advocate for policies that would narrow this gap. http://www...rton%20ariely%20in%20press.pdf
Milton Bradley Member	Tue Sep 28 15:56:35 the pwnge is devastating.
J.B. Member	Tue Sep 28 16:02:58 "Most scholars agree" Stopped right there.
Rugian Member	Tue Sep 28 16:05:44 People with degrees are elitists! Long live the Cultural Revolution!
UPs Axis Of Retards Member	Tue Sep 28 16:07:24 Profile: J.B. YoP: 9 - 10s Known for: Conspiracy Theories, Hates Islam, Isn't A Christian but acts like a Christian, Has many multies, Spams UP forum, runs Muzzlefree.com and has many multies there as well. Cannot debate, hold a conversation, and crybaby. Bio: JB is a poster on UP forum and is a known threat to the integrity of the board as he spams with his nonsense and will attack anyone that has logic. He is considered the ringleader in the Axis Of Retards.
miltonfriedman Member	Tue Sep 28 16:10:57 J.B. Member Tue Sep 28 16:02:58 "Most scholars agree" Stopped right there. ^Well deserved for his claim as the ringleader in the axis of retards.
Milton Bradley Member	Tue Sep 28 16:12:46 "As can be seen in Figure 1, the (unlabeled) United States distribution was far less desirable than both the (unlabeled) Sweden distribution and the equal distribution, with some 92% of mericans preferring the Sweden distribution to the United States. In addition, this overwhelming preference for the Sweden distribution over the United States distribution was robust across gender (Females: 92.7%; Males: 90.6%), preferred candidate in the 2004 election (Bush Voters: 90.2%; Kerry Voters: 93.5%) and income (less than $50,000: 92.1%; $50,001-100,000: 91.7%; more than $100,000: 89.1%). " ROFL
Milton Bradley Member	Tue Sep 28 16:14:14 Americans simply dont know what the fuck they're voting for.
miltonfriedman Member	Tue Sep 28 16:16:09 Too many other issues overwhelm the economic concerns - which explains why the 8 years under Bush were so disastrous.
Rugian Member	Tue Sep 28 16:18:30 What exactly is this study telling us though? Sure, people naturally have no love for income inequality. No one wants a society where billionaires can go around kicking homeless untouchables on the streets with impunity. On the other hand, I don't think this is a slam dunk in terms of saying "Americans want redistributive programs implemented." If these guys had instead gone around and asked something like "Society is broken down into five quinitiles. The first group produces 80% of the factories, stores and employment opportunities in America. The other four groups split the remainder. How should the wealth of this society be distributed?", I think you'd get some markedly different results.
Milton Bradley Member	Tue Sep 28 16:19:18 "No one wants a society where billionaires can go around kicking homeless untouchables on the streets with impunity." I can name several on this board alone who do
miltonfriedman Member	Tue Sep 28 16:21:42 "The first group produces 80% of the factories, stores and employment opportunities in America. The other four groups split the remainder. How should the wealth of this society be distributed?", I think you'd get some markedly different results." Of course - but few rich people can really track how many jobs they actually created.
Milton Bradley Member	Tue Sep 28 16:22:11 "What exactly is this study telling us though? " its telling us that when americans dont have a label on the economic model and thus cant immediately jump to neatly packaged 'communism/libertarianism' categories without having to think for themselves, they want something completely different to what they think they vote for. It also shows they have no understanding of the actual economic disparities or what those disparities actually mean in the real world.
Milton Bradley Member	Tue Sep 28 16:24:21 Of course, you can rest assured that when the labels of the models were revealed, the 90.2% of Bush voters choked on their coffee and probably stormed out furious at being tricked by educated liberals at harvard business school
Milton Bradley Member	Tue Sep 28 16:27:43 where did sam go?
Adolf Hitler Member	Tue Sep 28 16:39:27 My my, the axis of retards went very quiet lol...
Forwyn Member	Tue Sep 28 16:43:44 "For estimates of the ideal distribution, women, Kerry voters, and the poor desired relatively more equal distributions than their counterparts." A little disingenuous, since the difference is negligible in all areas.
Milton Bradley Member	Tue Sep 28 16:46:16 All in all, swedes have created the society they want and americans have been taken for a ride by the 1% that own them
Nimatzo Member	Tue Sep 28 16:46:28 This is not news though, we all know that people from third world nations prefer the better living standards of civilized western countries.
miltonfriedman Member	Tue Sep 28 16:53:52 "A little disingenuous, since the difference is negligible in all areas." Negligible, perhaps; but with a huge sample size, even slight difference can be statistically significant.
Adolf Hitler Member	Tue Sep 28 16:55:58 "For estimates of the ideal distribution, women, Kerry voters, and the poor desired relatively more equal distributions than their counterparts" This isnt criticism, this is calmly stating a statistical fact of the study. I doubt their counterparts would argue that at all.
Adolf Hitler Member	Tue Sep 28 16:57:25 Bush voters would in general agree and say 'damn right, this is a meritocracy'
Forwyn Member	Tue Sep 28 17:07:40 That the sample size was so large simply reinforces the idea that the largest discrepancy(based on political persuasion) will generally be no larger than 3.3%.
miltonfriedman Member	Tue Sep 28 17:15:39 I am not sure what you are getting at. They may be negligible in your mind, but to claim that one group is higher than another is not disingenuous.
Adolf Hitler Member	Tue Sep 28 17:16:29 " Males, Kerry voters, and wealthier individuals estimated that the distribution of wealth was relatively more unequal than did women, Bush voters, and poorer individuals. For estimates of the ideal distribution, women, Kerry voters, and the poor desired relatively more equal distributions than their counterparts" Im not sure what you find objectionable about this, its what anyone would expect. And its hardly a key part of the study anyway
Cloud Strife Member	Tue Sep 28 17:17:21 `Following the philosopher John Rawls (1971), we ask Americans to construct distributions of wealth they deem just. ' Durrp, and what do Americans or anyone for that matter understand about wealth accumulation.
Cloud Strife Member	Tue Sep 28 17:21:01 The `distribution' is itself completely irrelevant. All that matters is how much you have, not how many thousands time more your neighbor's grandpa uptown has.
Trolly McCool Member	Tue Sep 28 17:22:52 Hard to justify that one person is actually worth 26,000 times more than another person.
Trolly McCool Member	Tue Sep 28 17:23:45 Also hard to justify that one person should have billions of dollars while another literally starves to death.
Cloud Strife Member	Tue Sep 28 17:25:43 `Hard to justify that one person is actually worth 26,000 times more than another person.' Yes, boo hoo, and all that. Still, mind your own business, and stop trying to steal from someone else to make yourself better off. `Also hard to justify that one person should have billions of dollars while another literally starves to death.' Not hard to justify at all. Stop being so jealous. Also, feed yourself. It's not like anyone has to starve in this country. At the absolute worst, you eat out of dumpster. More likely people give you free food because everyone is so fucking generous for some goddamned reason.
Adolf Hitler Member	Tue Sep 28 17:26:13 Someone needs to get this study to jon stewart
Adolf Hitler Member	Tue Sep 28 17:29:29 "Durrp, and what do Americans or anyone for that matter understand about wealth accumulation. " the definition used was very simple to grasp "'Wealth, also known as net worth, is defined as the total value of everything someone owns minus any debt that he or she owes. A person's net worth includes his or her bank account savings plus the value of other things such as property, stocks, bonds, art, collections, etc., minus the value of things like loans and mortgages.' "
roland Member	Tue Sep 28 17:40:32 "As can be seen in Figure 1, the (unlabeled) United States distribution was far less desirable than both the (unlabeled) Sweden distribution and the equal distribution, with some 92% of mericans preferring the Sweden distribution to the United States. " I couldn't imagine the 30% of diehard Republicans supporters support this...
Cloud Strife Member	Tue Sep 28 17:41:40 "'Wealth, also known as net worth, is defined as the total value of everything someone owns minus any debt that he or she owes. A person's net worth includes his or her bank account savings plus the value of other things such as property, stocks, bonds, art, collections, etc., minus the value of things like loans and mortgages.' " And the implications of altering it are completely lost on you and 99% of the world.
Cloud Strife Member	Tue Sep 28 17:41:40 "'Wealth, also known as net worth, is defined as the total value of everything someone owns minus any debt that he or she owes. A person's net worth includes his or her bank account savings plus the value of other things such as property, stocks, bonds, art, collections, etc., minus the value of things like loans and mortgages.' " And the implications of altering it are completely lost on you and 99% of the world.
Adolf Hitler Member	Tue Sep 28 17:58:16 "I couldn't imagine the 30% of diehard Republicans supporters support this... " Nor can they - when the 'Sweden' label is hidden and Ayatollah Beck isn't there to rally them to hate sweden. But when you put a sticker over the 'sweden' label...hey presto, 90.2% of bush voters do...this is good news for the reputation of americans in one way. It shows the UP axis of retards are really a tiny fraction of the USA when the chips come down
Nimatzo Member	Tue Sep 28 18:20:35 Cloud strife has completely lost out on the big point of interest regarding the results of this study. That without fail Americans repeatedly say something and then do something different. WE HATE SOCIALIST SWEDEN! Oh wow society A looks amazing! WHAT? SOCIALIST SWEDEN IS SOCIETY A? WE HATE SOCIALIST SWEDEN!' You guys are FUCKED!
Cloud Strife Member	Tue Sep 28 18:22:17 `Cloud strife has completely lost out on the big point of interest regarding the results of this study. ' Oh, I really couldn't care less. If that's the point, then it's a weak one, and psychology has come up with far more interesting results long long ago.
Nimatzo Member	Tue Sep 28 18:26:26 On no, you see most other civilized countries manage to create a society that they actually WANT. In the USA you created one that apparently 90% do not want. Yet about 45% of the same people will vehemently oppose all the attempts that would create such a society. That is unique I believe.
Milton Bradley Member	Tue Sep 28 18:30:15 yeah the 1% who own the rest have got them vehemently voting to be enslaved. sad...
Cloud Strife Member	Tue Sep 28 18:32:56 `On no, you see most other civilized countries manage to create a society that they actually WANT. ' Link or STFU fag boy.
Nimatzo Member	Tue Sep 28 18:34:55 And that upper 1% knows this, that people would rather aim for stars they will never reach, the American dream you know, that 99% will never realize. But as long as you can dream you know anything could happen.
Cloud Strife Member	Tue Sep 28 18:35:50 Let me get this straight. You read this link, and you think, Wow, it confirms my suspicions that were so obvious! The USA is ran by 1% of the smartest most manipulative son's of bitches and history and they are using the Republican party to mind fuck everyone into giving these fabulous elites more delicious money and baby meat to eat. Damn, those stupid Americans wanting one thing but being so easily duped into voting into perpetual servitude where they are simultaneously fat fucking bitches and starving in the street. LOL, here in Europe we sure got exactly what we want as a society, because we're just smarter and have bigger dicks.
Nimatzo Member	Tue Sep 28 18:51:04 No.
Cloud Strife Member	Tue Sep 28 18:55:03 Then may I humbly suggest that you stop saying it, in your pussyfooting fag way.
Nimatzo Member	Tue Sep 28 19:21:16 I suggest you stop making shit up. Had you cleaned that post up I might have said yes.
Hot Rod Member	Thu Sep 30 05:45:58 Urinater acquitted for not offending STOCKHOLM, Sweden (UPI) -- A Swedish court acquitted a man on a public urination charge because he took measures not to offend passersby. The Stockholm court ruled the 45-year-old man, whose name was not released, took proper precautions to protect potential witnesses when he urinated behind a bus shelter and kept his back to the street, The Local reported. The man had faced a $120 fine, but contested the citation in court. "There is a ruling with legal force where a man was acquitted for the same reason after having peed behind a container. The court of appeal found then, just as we have, that the intent to offend, or offensiveness in and of itself, was lacking," District Judge Annika Johansson said. Prosecutor Silvia Ingolfsdottir said the state may appeal the ruling. United Press International
Milton Bradley Member	Thu Sep 30 06:44:34 A non authoritarian state. Good news. Not that peeing in public has got anything whatsoever to do with the point of this study, Hijacker.
Hot Rod Member	Thu Sep 30 06:52:36 A social comment is not a hijack.
saiko Member	Thu Sep 30 06:53:31 "Wow, it confirms my suspicions that were so obvious! The USA is ran by 1% of the smartest most manipulative son's of bitches and history and they are using the Republican party to mind fuck everyone into giving these fabulous elites more delicious money and baby meat to eat. Damn, those stupid Americans wanting one thing but being so easily duped into voting into perpetual servitude where they are simultaneously fat fucking bitches and starving in the street. LOL, here in Europe we sure got exactly what we want as a society, because we're just smarter and have bigger dicks." That is roughly what I was thinking, though I'm not sure how my huge dick is relevant to the matter.
saiko Member	Thu Sep 30 06:55:46 Next study I want to see (if Ariely hasn't done it already) is one where for half the respondents the unequal distribution is labeled 'Sweden' (because socialism makes everyone poor except the fat cat leaders) and the equal one 'USA' and for the other half it's vice versa. But I should read the article first.
saiko Member	Thu Sep 30 06:56:21 Maybe the label for USA should instead be "USA USA USA" though.
Hot Rod Member	Thu Sep 30 06:57:16 Your dick is probably irrelevant. Ask AH what he he thinks of it, he is the expert.
Worst Post Ever Member	Thu Sep 30 07:04:17 ^
Milton Bradley Member	Thu Sep 30 07:06:25 "Hot Rod Member Thu Sep 30 06:57:16 Your dick is probably irrelevant. Ask AH what he he thinks of it, he is the expert. " The lame flame hijacking continues.
Hot Rod Member	Thu Sep 30 07:15:31 Are you saying that when you do shit to my threads it is cute and quaint, but when I do shit to your threads it abominable hijacking? In other words you can dish it out, but you can't take it. Wuss.
Milton Bradley Member	Thu Sep 30 07:17:51 ^ The derailing lame flame hijacking continues. it really should be considered as spam
Hot Rod Member	Thu Sep 30 07:21:33 Does that include when you and the other Horsemen purposely wreck my threads?
Milton Bradley Member	Thu Sep 30 07:36:49 ^ The derailing lame flame hijacking continues. it really should be considered as spam
Hot Rod Member	Thu Sep 30 08:11:26 LOL, MB is saying, don't do as I do, do as I say do. If you want this to stop all you have to do is STFU.
miltonfriedman Member	Thu Sep 30 09:37:15 "If you want this to stop all you have to do is STFU." That's nice - how old are you?
Milton Bradley Member	Thu Sep 30 14:21:16 The derailing lame flame hijacking continues. it really should be considered as spam
Milton Bradley Member	Thu Sep 30 14:22:19 Its funny how not one single post by hot rod has to do with the topic.
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: