Maybe it's the "earning" of money that teaches its value, and makes one jealous of one's own money to the degree that an understanding is reached that it is unfair to take things of value from others that you did not earn. If money is won in a lottery, this lesson is not learned.
This is, in part, why I am against "reparations" for American blacks. What they claim to have been promised - two acres and a mule - was not a hand-out. Such a "prize" wouldn't amount to anything without a lot of hard work. But now many want a windfall, wealth they did nothing to earn. This is not what they were promised. Indeed, if they were presented with anything that required work of them for the (eventual/delayed) realization of wealth (like a free college education) most would probably turn it down. They aren't interested in the "work" part and have no respect for the work effort most people expend in order to accumulate wealth.
This most likely plays a role too. A thief, a plumber and a gambler might have the same socioeconomic status, but very different psychological outlooks regarding money.
My mother was born during the Great Depression (in Rhode Island, of immigrant parents) and lived throughout her childhood is a seriously poor, run-down neighborhood. (I remember it from times I visited as a child, before it was leveled for urban renewal/highway construction in the late 1950s.) The neighborhood was spotlessly clean, as were the interiors of most tenements. There was no crime problem. My mother always used to say, "Being poor is not an excuse to be dirty or to be a criminal." She was very proud of her neighborhood, which was made up almost entirely of blacks and immigrant families. The aggregate culture was one that promoted hard work, respect for elders and value of education (many of the immigrant parents were illiterate, as were my maternal grandparents, but they made sure their children attended school), and religious faith. Maybe that had something to do with the neighborhood's condition? A silly idea, I know!
The thing about lottery winners is that while the lottery itself is of course random, the people who PLAY the lottery are not. There is a very specific mindset to lottery playing (gambling) that does not lend itself to long term savings and good overall behavior. So in effect, it's a group self-selected for less desirable social traits.
As for racial differences, sociologists need to get out more. The hell with the stupid studies and surveys. Spend a day in a mixed race kindergarten and you will be able to construct a 100% correct racial breakdown across the full gamut of personality traits, including criminality. And it will be the same in every kindergarten you visit.
lottery winnings (as opposed to earned income) have a very different effect on socio-economics factors than wealth that is created... not sure what that does to study outcome?
A co-author of the Swedish lottery study responds with literature showing wealth for marginalized groups does reduce crime. Have no idea on the soundness of the cited literature
First of all, selecting lottery winners for study automatically skews the sample towards people who wanted to get something for nothing, which is almost a definition of criminals. Second, the definition of "crime" in this study is very narrow and excludes a great deal of what ought to be crime (by the wealthy) but is defined away by a legal system designed by and for the wealthy. That's why the entire fractional reserve banking system can be based on a fraud, that bankers can lend and charge interest on something they did not have but created out of thin air, and it's considered perfectly legal if you're a properly certified Member of the Cartel. Wealthy people need only commit larger and self-justified crimes, under the same something-for-nothing windfall motivation of the poor, and it won't even show up in the crime statistics. Joe Biden has made tens of millions in influence-peddling bribes, some of it rising to the level of treason, yet none of that shows up in crime statistics and he's still the president.
Perhaps what you meant to say is "violent crime is what people care about *most*." Because if you don't mind about all the other forms of crime, you won't mind if a back up a moving truck to your house and take all your stuff, or hack your bank account and empty it into mine. Of course the possibility of physical harm or death at the hands of criminals captures people's imaginations the most strongly, but the myriad of other ways we can be harmed by the something-for-nothing mentality is ever-present in our lives and very real, like the 35% to 45% of of every price we pay being the accumulated interest. That's a lot of your working life slipping through your fingers, and we used to call that slavery. Which is now a crime, by the way - unless it can be done so subtly you don't notice the chains.
I love this data-driven articles that bust ''social'' stupidities
Who would have thought it´s the same skills/talents that lets you earn money legally that also keep you out of prison?
Maybe it's the "earning" of money that teaches its value, and makes one jealous of one's own money to the degree that an understanding is reached that it is unfair to take things of value from others that you did not earn. If money is won in a lottery, this lesson is not learned.
This is, in part, why I am against "reparations" for American blacks. What they claim to have been promised - two acres and a mule - was not a hand-out. Such a "prize" wouldn't amount to anything without a lot of hard work. But now many want a windfall, wealth they did nothing to earn. This is not what they were promised. Indeed, if they were presented with anything that required work of them for the (eventual/delayed) realization of wealth (like a free college education) most would probably turn it down. They aren't interested in the "work" part and have no respect for the work effort most people expend in order to accumulate wealth.
This most likely plays a role too. A thief, a plumber and a gambler might have the same socioeconomic status, but very different psychological outlooks regarding money.
''The poor commits more crime but the rich are the badest''
You know this isnt true. Take a place like the Philippines, which is one of the poorest nations in the world, yet one of the safest and happiest.
It's the morality and the people.
My mother was born during the Great Depression (in Rhode Island, of immigrant parents) and lived throughout her childhood is a seriously poor, run-down neighborhood. (I remember it from times I visited as a child, before it was leveled for urban renewal/highway construction in the late 1950s.) The neighborhood was spotlessly clean, as were the interiors of most tenements. There was no crime problem. My mother always used to say, "Being poor is not an excuse to be dirty or to be a criminal." She was very proud of her neighborhood, which was made up almost entirely of blacks and immigrant families. The aggregate culture was one that promoted hard work, respect for elders and value of education (many of the immigrant parents were illiterate, as were my maternal grandparents, but they made sure their children attended school), and religious faith. Maybe that had something to do with the neighborhood's condition? A silly idea, I know!
The thing about lottery winners is that while the lottery itself is of course random, the people who PLAY the lottery are not. There is a very specific mindset to lottery playing (gambling) that does not lend itself to long term savings and good overall behavior. So in effect, it's a group self-selected for less desirable social traits.
As for racial differences, sociologists need to get out more. The hell with the stupid studies and surveys. Spend a day in a mixed race kindergarten and you will be able to construct a 100% correct racial breakdown across the full gamut of personality traits, including criminality. And it will be the same in every kindergarten you visit.
Umm, are you trying to tell us that some people are just born to be criminals? LOL!
Emil, is there a correlation between race and criminality? If so, what are the numbers?
If it was only a question of money, the crime rate unrelated to money (e.g. rape or murder) would be quite similar in every classes, wouldn't it?
lottery winnings (as opposed to earned income) have a very different effect on socio-economics factors than wealth that is created... not sure what that does to study outcome?
So if not income what explains the reduction in crime overtime then?
A co-author of the Swedish lottery study responds with literature showing wealth for marginalized groups does reduce crime. Have no idea on the soundness of the cited literature
https://twitter.com/eriklindqvist1/status/1738470490052645238
Nah, we steal because we are poor! When you have no money, you can't buy anything.
Crime is about to go way up, because jobs are about to be lost.
You rich people are so funny when you deny what is right in front of your face.
First of all, selecting lottery winners for study automatically skews the sample towards people who wanted to get something for nothing, which is almost a definition of criminals. Second, the definition of "crime" in this study is very narrow and excludes a great deal of what ought to be crime (by the wealthy) but is defined away by a legal system designed by and for the wealthy. That's why the entire fractional reserve banking system can be based on a fraud, that bankers can lend and charge interest on something they did not have but created out of thin air, and it's considered perfectly legal if you're a properly certified Member of the Cartel. Wealthy people need only commit larger and self-justified crimes, under the same something-for-nothing windfall motivation of the poor, and it won't even show up in the crime statistics. Joe Biden has made tens of millions in influence-peddling bribes, some of it rising to the level of treason, yet none of that shows up in crime statistics and he's still the president.
Perhaps what you meant to say is "violent crime is what people care about *most*." Because if you don't mind about all the other forms of crime, you won't mind if a back up a moving truck to your house and take all your stuff, or hack your bank account and empty it into mine. Of course the possibility of physical harm or death at the hands of criminals captures people's imaginations the most strongly, but the myriad of other ways we can be harmed by the something-for-nothing mentality is ever-present in our lives and very real, like the 35% to 45% of of every price we pay being the accumulated interest. That's a lot of your working life slipping through your fingers, and we used to call that slavery. Which is now a crime, by the way - unless it can be done so subtly you don't notice the chains.
Go back to sleep Tom.
Best laugh I've had all day - someone who is dreaming inside the Matrix wants me to go to sleep!