Re: Study disovers Swedes are less well-off than American blacks

2003-01-05 Thread AdmrlLocke
I have little doubt that the heart of the study reaches a correct 
mathematical conclusion--that the average Swede has a lower income than the 
average American black.  It does, however, contain a few myths I'd like to 
briefly address below.

In a message dated 12/29/02 10:23:43 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 [snip] Does anyone on the list have any comments about this story? Despite 
the fact that the left-liberal responses I read to this article were devoid 
of substance, I still think there must be more to the story than this article 
says.  Do you all think it is better to be black in America or white in 
Sweden (and why, of course)? Or does the answer all depend on some other 
factor? 


~Alypius

Assuming that the study got its numbers right, one would be better of in a 
material sense--food, clothing, shelter, medical care, idle entertainment--as 
an average black in America rather than as an average Swede.  People don't 
necessarily maximize income, especially not measureable income; they maximize 
utility.  Is it better to be a black in America?  I don't know, and probably 
neither does anyone else.  I'd venture a guess that an awful lot of American 
blacks would say otherwise, though I'm not sure.  It's easy to image that if 
only I were (white, male, middle-class, rich, pretty, thin, this, that, or 
the other thing that I'm not) I'd be much better off.  Even if they would say 
otherwise it doesn't mean that it's correct since they don't know what it's 
like to be a Swede any more than a Swede knows what it's like to be a black 
American.  Most economists tend to focus on incomes as a proxy for utility, 
but I've seen studies which conclude that people with higher incomes don't 
feel any happier.  Personally I'd rather have the problems of high income 
than those of low income--but in truth we're comparing here high income to 
higher income.


[snip]


Weak growth means that Sweden has lost greatly in prosperity compared with 
the United States, HUI's president, Fredrik Bergstrom, and chief economist, 
Robert Gidehag, said.

This is misleading, as are most economic stories of failure and success.  
Relative failure means only that your ego gets wounded.  As the next line 
indicates, the average Swede has a 20% higher real income today than he or 
she did 20 years ago. I'd take a 20% real increase in my income any day.  Of 
course I'd rather have the 56% increase, but both represent successes.  Ind


International Monetary Fund data from 2001 show that U.S. GDP per capita in 
dollar terms was 56 percent higher than in Sweden, while in 1980, Swedish GDP 
per capita was 20 percent higher.


The median income of African American households was about 70 percent of 
the median for all U.S. households, while Swedish households earned 68 
percent of the overall U.S. median level.


This means that Swedes stood below groups, which, in the Swedish debate, are 
usually regarded as poor and losers in the American economy, Bergstrom and 
Gidehag said.

Again it's not a race to some finish line, winner-take-all contest.  It's not 
a contest at all.  Both blacks Americans and Swedes win by having higher 
incomes.  What this does say is that in America we have a relatively 
distorted nothing of what it means to be poor.  By long-term historical 
standards, even poor Americans are fantastically wealthy.  Look at the 
poorest nations of the world to see how people have lived for most of human 
history.  That's poverty.  Even by our own recent standards, poor people are 
rich:  back in the 1990s I saw a study which reported that the average 
welfare recipient in America consumed more in constant dollars than the 
average middle income American in 1955.  And that average income American in 
1955 had a real income exceptionally high not only by long-term human 
standards, but simply by standards of the world in 1955.


If the trend persists, things that are commonplace in the United States 
will be regarded as the utmost luxury in Sweden, the authors said. We are 
not quite there yet, but the trend is clear.

Well that may come to pass, but as I  understand it, a vastly larger share of 
Americans than Europeans own their own homes, so the commonplace in the US, 
luxury in Europe has been going on for some time. I understand that the 
socialized medical systems of many European countries also don't provide many 
of the treatments--like kidney dialysis or heart-bypass surgery--that 
Americans routinely get.  Perhaps, if real Swedish incomes continue to grow, 
even there socialized medical system will provide commonly what the US system 
has provided commonly for decades.  Of course by then the US system will 
probably be providing newer services that the Swedish economy won't--it's 
better, all other things held constant, to have a really high income than a 
merely high income.

There's no doubt that we'd all rather have a $100 income than a $70 come or a 
$68 income, holding all other factors constant.  But the 

Re: Study disovers Swedes are less well-off than American blacks

2002-12-30 Thread Jacob W Braestrup
I am somewhat familiar with the mentioned study, having written a 
piece on it a while back (I also have the study on pdf at work 
somewhere – although in Swedish I am afraid. I shall check it on 
Monday)

Anyway, I will venture a few comments.

On your question: “Do you (all) think it is better to be black in 
America or white in Sweden (and why, of course)?”, I would say: YES! – 
at least in terms of economic opportunities. Unless the study is lying 
(which I believe it is not), the median black American household DOES 
have higher purchasing power than the median Swedish (white AND non-
white, mind you) household.

The difference, however, is not very large. Another thing is, that 
this is MEDIAN households we are talking about, and so the study says 
nothing of the spread of income. Without knowing this for certain I 
would venture that the difference of before tax income among black 
Americans is far greater than the similar difference among Swedes. 
This difference is of course increased when comparing after tax 
income, since the Swedish welfare state is vastly more redistributive 
than the American (indeed, this is the reason for the relative slow 
economic growth in Sweden). Thus, a risk-aversive person may yet 
prefer to have been born a Swede rather than a black American.

That is: a risk-aversive AND egoistic person – since, as the study 
shows, ALL Americans are getting increasingly richer than Swedes, 
indicating that a black American today can pretty much rest assured 
that his / her children will grow up to be richer than the average 
Swede. 

Another thing to keep in mind is that the study is comparing median 
income BEFORE taxes, rather than after taxes / welfare transfers (both 
in kind and money). This of course raises the question whether the 
median household receives more or less from this taxes v. welfare 
exchange (and whether the median American black household receives 
more or less than the median Swedish household). This is to some 
degree an ideological question. I for my part, have no doubt that the 
answer is that the welfare states in both Sweden AND America are so 
large as to make the median households in both countries worse off 
after the tax v. “welfare” exchange – and consequently making the 
Swedish household even worse off relatively than before taxes.

Jacob Braestrup
Danish Taxpayers Association


 This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
 
 
 This article can be found at several sites on the net.  This link is 
to a left-wing site where the feedback was almost uniformly negative, 
but, as so often in leftist critiques, factually empty. Does anyone on 
the list have any comments about this story? Despite the fact that the 
left-liberal responses I read to this article were devoid of 
substance, I still think there must be more to the story than this 
article says.  Do you all think it is better to be black in America or 
white in Sweden (and why, of course)? Or does the answer all depend on 
some other factor? 
 
 ~Alypius
 
  http://pub176.ezboard.com/frepnetfrm131.showMessage?
topicID=141.topic
 
 Study disovers Swedes are less well-off than American blacks 
 -
---
 Study discovers Swedes are less well-off than the poorest Americans
 Reuters via Haaretz | 5/4/2002 | Reuters
 
 Posted on 5/4/02 3:41 PM Pacific by l33t
 
 STOCKHOLM - Swedes, usually perceived in Europe as a comfortable, 
middle class lot, are poorer than African Americans, the most 
economically-deprived group in the United States, a Swedish study 
showed yesterday.
 
 The study by a retail trade lobby, published in the liberal Dagens 
Nyheter newspaper 19 weeks before the next general election, echoed 
the center-right opposition's criticism of the weak state of Sweden's 
economy, following decades of almost uninterrupted Social Democratic 
rule.
 
 The Swedish Research Institute of Trade (HUI) said it had compared 
official U.S. and Swedish statistics on household income, as well as 
gross domestic product, private consumption and retail spending per 
capita between 1980 and 1999.
 
 Using fixed prices and purchasing power parity adjusted data, the 
median household income in Sweden at the end of the 1990s was the 
equivalent of $26,800, compared with a median of $39,400 for U.S. 
households, HUI's study showed.
 
 Weak growth means that Sweden has lost greatly in prosperity 
compared with the United States, HUI's president, Fredrik Bergstrom, 
and chief economist, Robert Gidehag, said.
 
 International Monetary Fund data from 2001 show that U.S. GDP per 
capita in dollar terms was 56 percent higher than in Sweden, while in 
1980, Swedish GDP per capita was 20 percent higher.
 
 Black people, who have the lowest income in the United States, now 
have a higher standard of living than an ordinary Swedish household, 
the HUI economists said.
 
 If Sweden were a U.S. state, it would be the poorest, measured

Study disovers Swedes are less well-off than American blacks

2002-12-29 Thread Alypius Skinner



This article can be found at several sites on the 
net. This link is to a left-wing site where the feedback was almost 
uniformly negative, but, as so often in leftist critiques, factually 
empty.Does anyone on the list have any comments about this 
story?Despite the fact that the left-liberal responses I read to this 
article were devoid of substance, I still think theremust be more to the 
story than this article says. Do you all think it is better to be black in 
America or white in Sweden (and why, of course)? Or doesthe 
answerall depend on some other factor? 

~Alypius
http://pub176.ezboard.com/frepnetfrm131.showMessage?topicID=141.topic

Study disovers Swedes are less 
well-off than American blacks 

Study discovers Swedes are less well-off than the poorest AmericansReuters 
via Haaretz | 5/4/2002 | ReutersPosted on 5/4/02 3:41 PM Pacific by 
l33tSTOCKHOLM - Swedes, usually perceived in Europe as a comfortable, 
middle class lot, are poorer than African Americans, the most 
economically-deprived group in the United States, a Swedish study showed 
yesterday.The study by a retail trade lobby, published in the liberal 
Dagens Nyheter newspaper 19 weeks before the next general election, echoed the 
center-right opposition's criticism of the weak state of Sweden's economy, 
following decades of almost uninterrupted Social Democratic rule.The 
Swedish Research Institute of Trade (HUI) said it had compared official U.S. and 
Swedish statistics on household income, as well as gross domestic product, 
private consumption and retail spending per capita between 1980 and 
1999.Using fixed prices and purchasing power parity adjusted data, the 
median household income in Sweden at the end of the 1990s was the equivalent of 
$26,800, compared with a median of $39,400 for U.S. households, HUI's study 
showed."Weak growth means that Sweden has lost greatly in prosperity 
compared with the United States," HUI's president, Fredrik Bergstrom, and chief 
economist, Robert Gidehag, said.International Monetary Fund data from 
2001 show that U.S. GDP per capita in dollar terms was 56 percent higher than in 
Sweden, while in 1980, Swedish GDP per capita was 20 percent 
higher."Black people, who have the lowest income in the United States, 
now have a higher standard of living than an ordinary Swedish household," the 
HUI economists said.If Sweden were a U.S. state, it would be the 
poorest, measured by household gross income before taxes, Bergstrom and Gidehag 
said.They said they had chosen that measure for their comparison to get 
around the differences in taxation and welfare structures. Capital gains such as 
income from securities were not included.The median income of African 
American households was about 70 percent of the median for all U.S. households, 
while Swedish households earned 68 percent of the overall U.S. median 
level.This means that Swedes stood "below groups, which, in the Swedish 
debate, are usually regarded as poor and losers in the American economy," 
Bergstrom and Gidehag said.Between 1980 and 1999, the gross income of 
Sweden's poorest households increased by just over 6 percent, while the poorest 
in the United States enjoyed a three times higher increase, HUI said.If 
the trend persists, "things that are commonplace in the United States will be 
regarded as the utmost luxury in Sweden," the authors said. "We are not quite 
there yet, but the trend is clear."According to HUI figures, during the 
period 1998-1999, U.S. GDP per capita was 40 percent higher than in Sweden, 
while U.S. private consumption and retail sales per capita exceeded Swedish 
levels by more than 80 percent.The HUI economists attributed the much 
bigger difference in consumption and sales mainly to the fact that U.S. 
households pay themselves for education and health care, services that are 
tax-financed and come for free or at low user charges in 
Sweden.According to recent opinion polls Sweden's Social Democrats are 
comfortably ahead of the center-right opposition in the run-up to the September 
15 elections.