OT: Immaculate Transformation.

--
In other words, you can't back up your bullshit.

Nothing of the kind. Fact. You are a useless wannabe.

Why bother. You do it for me.

Um, I don't know how that responded to Kevin, but it was quite interesting. It led to a criticism of that article:

The essay corrects a mistake in the original reference and replaces our British friends. But the clincher was a comparison to other countries:

"As an example of output from the [Luxembourg Income Study] they had a wonderful paper a decade ago showing that the bottom 10% in the US have the same incomes (yes, PPP adjusted) as the bottom 10% in either Sweden or Finland. While the top 10% have very much larger incomes than the top 10% in either country. All that redistribution hasn't the Nordic poor richer than the American poor but it has made the rich poorer."

Of course that was pre-O. Median U.S. income has fallen, so we might not fare as well today.

Cheers, James Arthur

What have they done right?

--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to 
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.

). It is unlawful and unethical to shoot someone whilst running way. The th reat is gone. Period. Once he was shot at under those unlawful conditions, he surel y has a right to then defend himself, if indeed that was what he did.

were to somehow leave the EU and join the US how would we rank? The answer is that we'd be the 2nd-poorest state in the union, poorer than Missouri. Poorer than the much-maligned Kansas and Alabama. Poorer than any state oth er than Mississippi, and if you take out the south east we'd be poorer than that too."

g.

ritish friends. But the clincher was a comparison to other countries:

nderful paper a decade ago showing that the bottom 10% in the US have the s ame incomes (yes, PPP adjusted) as the bottom 10% in either Sweden or Finl and. While the top 10% have very much larger incomes than the top 10% in ei ther country. All that redistribution hasn't the Nordic poor richer than th e American poor but it has made the rich poorer."

That doesn't actually follow. The Nordic rich probably weren't all that wel l off by American standards before the redistribution got going, so the re distribution probably didn't make the Nordic rich poorer, though it may hav e decreased the rate at which they became richer.

fare as well today.

Median US income has fallen since the GFC, but average US income has risen, which implies that the US rich are doing quite a lot better than they were .

ost_Always_Do_Better

presents quite a lot of data showing the poor in more egalitarian countries do better than even the rich in less egalitarian (read US and Portugal) co untries on quite a lot of indices of well-being.

Which brings me to the point that I really want to make, which is that the poor in the UK, Sweden and Finland have access to universal health care and good schools, so that their lower income doesn't actually reflect a poorer quality of life than that on offer in Mississippi or Ferguson, Missouri.

The UK is depressingly unequal, and the poor in the UK do worse than the po or in Sweden and Finland, but not as badly as the poor in the US.

What the US poor spends on medical care come out of their documented income . The National Health Service in the UK is free for it's users, and costs a bout half as much per head as the US equivalent. You have to pay your natio nal insurance contributions to cover it, but that looks like a tax, and a r emarkably messy one.

Concentrating on income ignores the obvious point that money is what you us e to buy what you want (when you can buy it). If your environment offers so me of what you want without asking you to pay for it, a lower income there doesn't necessarily reflect a lower quality of life and some features of li ving in a more egalitarian society - like more positive social interactions - can't be bought. Money can't buy you love.

As the book "The Spirit Level" points out, in a lot of detail, being poor i n a more equal country is a whole lot better than being poor in a less equa l country.

The book also compares US states on the same basis and finds essentially th e same correlations - US states are more similar than nation states, but sh ow the same consequences of greater or less equality.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Here ya go...

"I came across a striking fact while researching this piece: if Britain were to somehow leave the EU and join the US how would we rank? The answer is that we?d be the 2nd-poorest state in the union, poorer than Missouri. Poorer than the much-maligned Kansas and Alabama. Poorer than any state other than Mississippi, and if you take out the south east we?d be poorer than that too."

=================================================================================

Really?

California is the richest state in the union with a GDP of $ 1.958 trillion.

UK has a GDP of $ 2.313 trillion.

See

--
Hmmm... 

I just read recently that endless repetition won't make a lie true. 

Now where could that have been???

--
Flagging isn't the same as backing up.

And emphasizing my point, here's a black cop shooting a white thug...

...Jim Thompson

-- | James E.Thompson | mens | | Analog Innovations | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at

| 1962 | I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

Not a lie, John. You *are* a useless old geezer.

If you could read, you would see that *YOU* are my backup. No more needed.

--
That's pretty funny, coming from someone who believes that the value 
of pi is 2.

--
If you thought I couldn't read, you'd hardly waste your time writing 
to me. 

Such isn't the case, however, and since you claim I can't, knowing 
full well that I can, you're caught in another lie. 

If you could reason,  well... never mind.

When the lie is your only tool, it's no wonder you use it so much.

Old, useless, geezers never change.

Per capita, and converted to PPP. Using your numbers--

California has 38 million, U.K. 63 million (2011 census). That's $51.5K per capita California vs. $36.7K U.K. (nominal).

The U.K. is judged 1.30x more expensive than the U.S.[1], so adjusted for Purchasing Power Parity, the U.K.'s average is equivalent to $28.2K per capita purchasing power, relative to the U.S.

[1]

California is remarkably unequal. California has 12% of the U.S. population, a big share of the millionaires, but 30% of the welfare (our poverty programs) recipients. CA's very wealthy live alongside the nation's poor in some places. In the elite areas, enclaves are carved out for the poor.

None of that really matters. Money isn't happiness. If the Brits are happy, that's what's important.

I was simply impressed at the comparisons, since America's socialists often tell us how much better things are in places they've never been.

Cheers, James Arthur

were to somehow leave the EU and join the US how would we rank? The answer is that we'd be the 2nd-poorest state in the union, poorer than Missouri. Poorer than the much-maligned Kansas and Alabama. Poorer than any state oth er than Mississippi, and if you take out the south east we'd be poorer than that too."

lion.

es_by_GDP_(nominal)

8 million, U.K. 63 million (2011 census).

for Purchasing Power Parity, the U.K.'s average is equivalent to $28.2K per capita purchasing power, relative to the U.S.

_price_levels

population, a big share of the millionaires, but 30% of the welfare (our po verty programs) recipients. CA's very wealthy live alongside the nation's poor in some places. In the elite areas, enclaves are carved out for the p oor.

If you've got enough of it, as explored in the book "The Spirit Level"

ost_Always_Do_Better

Once you've got enough money - and California and the UK are well above tha t level - equality is a lot more important. The UK is a relatively unequal country. The USA sits at the most unequal end of the scale, and Japan and S candinavia sit at the other end, with the UK on the US side of the middle.

Being poor in the UK is a lot less painful than it is in California.

The aren't as happy - or as rich - as the Germans and the Swedes, but they are happier, healthier, better educated and and more socially mobile than residents of the US, and much less likely to end up in prison.

en tell us how much better things are in places they've never been.

And they are right. That's what book-learning is all about.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

--
Let sleeping dogs lie?