>So my question is: Are normative and positive issues (believing in
>differences and supporting racist policies) more confused and mixed
>in the debate on race than what we find in other debates? And if so,
>why? Is there a "rational" reason for this?
I think normative and positive issues get
> fabio wrote:
> >2) The real question is whether the current distribution of wealth is
> >typical or not. If you did the same study 1000 AD, would you get the same
> >picture?
>
> This is indeed the right question to ask. There seem to be just too
> many possible explanatory variables and too f
A question related to the issue of race and abilities:
Having followed some of the similar debate on IQ and race following the
Bell curve book and Goulds "mismeasure of man", it strikes me that many
participants in the debate (and often the most committed ones) fail to
separate the "positive"
>The second answer is of course the good one.
The second answer was:
"2. The belief that race is important is known to be false with such
confidence that considering the alternative is a waste of time, hence
stupid. "
>As Maria said, there is
>only one human race.
There is only one canine ra
Title: Re: Growth, Wealth, and Race
D. Friedman:
I believe you're missing the point of the below
response. No comment was made that infers the previous author
is demonizing eugentics. No normative statement is made in my
opinion, merely the curious fact (once again brought to the aca
The second answer is of course the good one. As Maria said, there is
only one human race.
What we call human races are just artifacts. We all come from so mixed
background that if there ever was something like different human races
they disapeared long ago.
But all this thread started with a discu
Please respond to ARMCHAIR
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject: Re: Growth, Wealth, and Race
>Thinking and writing analytically about race is certainly a good and
>important thing to do.
>As far as I know, the "race problem" has been analyt
>Thinking and writing analytically about race is certainly a good and
>important thing to do.
>As far as I know, the "race problem" has been analytically treated in
>two ways. One, to consider human homogeneity (there is one human race).
>Two to consider human heterogeneity (there are different hu
>I would not like to use dirty words but this line of thought could take
>you directly to some kind of racism. That's why your question is just
>stupid. But you probably know it.
It sounds as though you are saying one of two things:
1. The belief that race is important is, by definition, racism,
fabio wrote:
>1) The current distribution of wealth fits the latitude hypothesis
>pretty well. ...
>2) The real question is whether the current distribution of wealth is
>typical or not. If you did the same study 1000 AD, would you get the same
>picture?
This is indeed the right question to ask.
countries near the equator are more extreme in climactic conditions to
survive in. hence have either no call for societies to develop the complex
structures a temperate zone requires (low hanging fruit), or the daily
struggle to survive precludes the high population densities necessary for
adv
It seems that there are a few issues:
1) The current distribution of wealth fits the latitude hypothesis
pretty well. I don't think that anybody is really disputing this
point.
2) The real question is whether the current distribution of wealth is
typical or not. If you did the same study 1000 A
Alexandre wrote:
>
> Caro(a) Girard,
>
> i agree with Girard and if the stupid question is what really
> meant , groelandia is the richest place in the world.
Ditto my previous remarks about list civility.
Substantively, the Sachs correlation between income and latitude is of
course impe
One of the pieces where Sachs talks about the latitude, wealth, and
growth correlation is:
Geography and Economic Development
Gallup, John Luke ; Sachs, Jeffrey D. ; Mellinger, Andrew D.
National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper: 6849. 1998.
Abstract:
This paper addresses the complex
Fred Foldvary wrote:
>
> On Fri, 16 Feb 2001, Bryan D Caplan wrote:
>
> > Circle the globe. The only civilization I can see that ever emerged
> > around the equator was the Inca. And their effective climate was not
> > equatorial due to high elevation, as far as I understand.
>
> Most of the
Girard wrote:
>
> I would not like to use dirty words but this line of thought could take
> you directly to some kind of racism. That's why your question is just
> stupid. But you probably know it.
Normally I remove people from the list when they start making these
sorts of replies, but as the l
On Fri, 16 Feb 2001, Bryan D Caplan wrote:
> Circle the globe. The only civilization I can see that ever emerged
> around the equator was the Inca. And their effective climate was not
> equatorial due to high elevation, as far as I understand.
Most of the equator crosses water, but if you expa
> Sachs has popularized a strong finding: Distance from the equator
> explains a great deal of the variation in income *levels* between
> countries. The further from the equator, the richer countries are.
So how do you explain the ancient Mayan, Azctec, Inca, Egyptian,
Zimbabwe, and East Indian
John Cunningham wrote:
>
> Interesting response, wouldst appear to be an instance of threatening
> personal destruction for a "thoughtcrime." To even think about race
> analytically is apparently evil which must be eradicated, in this writer's
> view.
>
> john
Thinking and writing analytical
Interesting response, wouldst appear to be an instance of threatening
personal destruction for a "thoughtcrime." To even think about race
analytically is apparently evil which must be eradicated, in this writer's
view.
john
At 07:27 PM 2/16/01 +0100, you wrote:
>I would not like to use dir
I always thought there were no stupid questions.
At 07:27 PM 2/16/01 +0100, you wrote:
I would not like to use dirty words
but this line of thought could take
you directly to some kind of racism. That's why your question is
just
stupid. But you probably know it.
> On Thu, 15 Feb 2001, Bryan Cap
I would not like to use dirty words but this line of thought could take
you directly to some kind of racism. That's why your question is just
stupid. But you probably know it.
> On Thu, 15 Feb 2001, Bryan Caplan wrote:
>
> > Sachs has popularized a strong finding: Distance from the equator
> >
On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 11:53:34AM -0500, Bryan Caplan wrote
> Sachs has popularized a strong finding: Distance from the equator
> explains a great deal of the variation in income *levels* between
> countries. The further from the equator, the richer countries are.
> There are also some parallel
I was under the impression that there was at least another equatorial
civilization - that which arose in West Africa - Benin which, while somewhat
fluid, covered the delta and Edo States and stretched to Lagos and beyond in
present-day Nigeria. Like the Aztecs they certainly produced quite
spectat
Coincidentally enough, i just finished reading _Guns, Germs, and Steel_ as
well, it made for some interesting hours on the exercycle. I thought his
overall thesis was useful--the importance of existing plant and animal
resources and topography on the growth of early cultures--and he did
make s
fabio guillermo rojas wrote:
> Observation: A lot of cultures close to the equator seem to have been
> wealthy compared to Europe before the rise of the West aftyer 1500. The
> conquistadors compared Technotitlan to Cordoba (the wealthy Spanish
> coastal city) and various Arabic cultures close to
Alexander Guerrero wrote:
>
> I think that Aztecs are nearer to the north than to the equator!!!
> Alexander Guerrero
Mexico City is around 20' N, putting it on the northern part of the
tropics.
--
Prof. Bryan Caplan
Department of Economics Ge
--Original Message-
From: Alexander Guerrero [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2001 1:31 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Growth, Wealth, and Race
I think that Aztecs are nearer to the north than to the equator!!!
Alexander Guerrero
fabio guillermo r
On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 01:16:52PM -0800, Alexander Robert William Robson wrote
> On a similar topic, what do people on this list think of Jared Diamond's
> book "Guns, Germs and Steel"? Although I am not convinced by many of his
> arguments (he's just plain wrong in a lot of cases), I found the
: Alexander Guerrero [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2001 1:31 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Re: Growth, Wealth, and Race
I think that Aztecs are nearer to the north than to the equator!!!
Alexander Guerrero
fabio guillermo rojas wrote:
> > Question: What
I think that Aztecs are nearer to the north than to the equator!!!
Alexander Guerrero
fabio guillermo rojas wrote:
> > Question: What would controlling for racial composition do to these
> > results? Clearly there is high collinearity between race and latitude,
> > though modern transportation
> Question: What would controlling for racial composition do to these
> results? Clearly there is high collinearity between race and latitude,
> though modern transportation is weakening the connection. If you do
> both latitude and racial composition, what would happen? Does anyone
> have har
On Thu, 15 Feb 2001, Bryan Caplan wrote:
> Sachs has popularized a strong finding: Distance from the equator
> explains a great deal of the variation in income *levels* between
> countries. The further from the equator, the richer countries are.
> There are also some parallel findings for gro
"Bryan Caplan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" wrote:
> Sachs has popularized a strong finding: Distance from the equator
> explains a great deal of the variation in income *levels* between
> countries. The further from the equator, the richer countries are.
> There are also some parallel findings for gro
34 matches
Mail list logo
