Ask A Silly Question

The pollsters at Gallup present a result that baffles me based on a question that perplexes me:

Americans Oppose Income Redistribution to Fix Economy

by Dennis Jacobe, Chief Economist

PRINCETON, NJ -- When given a choice about how government should address the numerous economic difficulties facing today's consumer, Americans overwhelmingly -- by 84% to 13% -- prefer that the government focus on improving overall economic conditions and the jobs situation in the United States as opposed to taking steps to distribute wealth more evenly among Americans.

Well, geez - was "Both of the above" an alternative?  I can't be sure it was the specific question asked, but as best I can tell, this poll tells us that a vast majority think that improving general economic conditions will do more to "fix the economy" (quoting their question as presented in the graphic) than will be achieved by a government attempt to redistribute income.  Personally, I would love to believe that this means that a vast majority "oppose" attempts to redistribute income, as per the Gallup headline, and that may be the case.  But I don't see how the Gallup analysts can get there from here - surely there are respondents that think that redistributing income is a meritorious venture, but that improving economic conditions is a more direct way to "fix the economy" (whatever the heck that means).

In the time-honored tradition of leaving no dead horse unbeaten let me suggest this hypothetical poll, if time hangs heavy for the Gallup pollsters: ask Yankee fans whether they would prefer to (a) see the Yankees beat the Mets at Shea on this final Sunday in June, or (b) see the Yankees win the World Series this October.

My guesses - an overwhelming majority of Yankee fans will hold out for the World Series win, but Gallup will not headline an article with "Yankee fans oppose victory over Mets".

Oh, well.  Don Surber whacks Obama; Will Wilkinson connects this to support for education reform:

This is consistent with other polling data I have seen that shows that even as the percentage of Americans who claim to be concerned about income inequality has risen (as income inequality has risen), support for redistributive programs has been more or less constant. What you see instead is increased support for educational reform, suggesting a widespread belief that the problem worth worrying about is the ability of people toward the bottom to gain the skills they need to be successful, not the fact that some small percentage of people are becoming really fantastically rich.

Oh, I do want to see Obama dragged into a chat about his long history with education reform, with Bill Ayers at his side, with whom Obama first teamed up in 1987. As if.

Comments

[clarice]

Funny you should mention that, TM. I figure the only way that will be raised is if I dress you up to look like an idiot and smuggle you into a Townhall meeting.

[ann]

Here is another silly question: Which national convention would you rather attend?

Clarice, Are you still going to the Republican National Convention? If you are, can Hit tag along? He will love this (from my link):

"The St. Paul city council has voted in favor permitting bars to close at 4 a.m. during the Republican National Convention, and the RNC spokemsan says Republicans will be "drinking our beer, not burning it."

I have been thinking of him all day and wonder how many arches he stopped at and how many beers he drank tonight. :)

[clarice]

We're still waiting to hear about the convention passes, ann.

[sbw]

"taking steps to distribute wealth more evenly among Americans"

If government has ANY responsibility in this regard it is three-fold: to free up the economic engine so people can earn enough to provide for their own needs as they see them, to train and retrain to equip those in need to take the jobs that are available, where they are available, and, finally, to limit government so that it is a minimal drag on the economy.

Adam Smith reminded people that GDP is the wealth created when all people in a country are working at full capacity. Stealing from one person to subsidize another does not contribute to the wealth of a nation or to its satisfaction.

[Uncle BigBad]

OT - I just watched a few minutes of Christina Amanpour on CNN gushing about North Korea blowing up the cooling tower.

Can you guess what she credits as inspiring this rapprochement with the U.S.? Yes, I knew you could. You are right. She credits . . . .

The New York Philharmonic's recent concert in North Korea.

[narciso]

I used to think that because of her Iranian expatriate background and her complaints over Bosnia; that she actually cared about people, it turns out that's only when you can't do anything about the situation.

[Clint]

Offering "both of the above" as an alternative presupposes the existence of a potential policy that would produce both.

This would appear to be a case of having your cake or eating it, to me, making the initial poll question perfectly valid.

Can you actually think of a specific policy proposal in which the government would "take steps to distribute wealth more evenly" without having at least some negative consequences for the "overall economic conditions and the jobs situation?"

[BL]

Having recently looked up the word, my question is: Don Surber whacks Obama -- what! In a Turkish bath?

Oops, this is a serious thread. Blame it on my late night spaghetti and wine.

[Pofarmer]

Did anybody else hear Obama telling Latino's that he would "be their champion!" in the Whitehouse, and go Whaaaaattttt?

[Pofarmer]

Barack Obama stopped by Walter Reed Army Medical Center Saturday to visit wounded war veterans, a group that he has said endures substandard care under the Bush administration.

This whole line is kinda pissin' me off too.

If he didn't parrot every lefty meme, it would be kinda funny with the press talking about him "moving ot the center"

Not exactly an advertisement for govt run healthcare.

And, on another note, do you think the Dim's are gonna figure out the hated "Bush" isn't on the ballot in 08?

[Pofarmer]

And what the hell does this mean from the AFP

President George W. Bush's impending departure has rekindled hopes that new US leadership can prop up the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which marks its 40th year on July 1. Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama (seen here earlier this month) has emphasized that the United States is looking to a nuclear free world.

North Korea just blew up their cooling tower, but I guess that don't count. Libya gave up their program after the invasion of Iraq but that don't count. AQ Kahn was put out of business by the Bush administration and the Pakistani's, but that don't count. A Uranium smuggling ring in the CONGO(yes, that's in Africa) was busted up under the Bush administration, but that don't count. The only one of these things that was known before GWB took office is that North Korea had a nuclear program, which Bill Clintoon gave them!!!! Both Pakistan and India went nuclear on Wild Bill's watch.

Where do these people get their ideas?

Do they beleive in Peace Fairies, or something?

[Jane]

Obama tells them those things, and the media winks and nods. The amount of misinformation being propelled is breathtaking.

[MikeS]

High oil prices, high business taxes, and over-regulation are all having a negative effect on our economy.

Who is responsible and how do we turn (change) things around?

One answer is to raise taxes on oil and gasoline, and to raise taxes on rich people, so we can use that money to improve education the way they did in Chicago.

[Kevin B]

In another startling poll result, more people believe that fixing the engine will do more to get their car running than letting the air out of the tyres.

[eightnine2718281828mu5e]

---
Can you actually think of a specific policy proposal in which the government would "take steps to distribute wealth more evenly" without having at least some negative consequences for the "overall economic conditions and the jobs situation?"
---

Impose fines on companies that include non-compete and 'no employee poaching' clauses in employee contracts.

A lot of state courts find these to be unenforceable, but their presence signals to employees that they may face a lawsuit if they violate them.

The effect is that capital and resources are misallocated; employees are not free to go where the market values their skills most highly, and reduces an employee's income. This restraint of labor mobility increases the profits to management and holders of capital.

Which is, of course, the reason they include these clauses.

[glasater]

Why has Texas created 1.6 million jobs in the last 10 years whereas Michigan has lost 300,000 jobs and Ohio has lost 100,000 jobs? Because governance matters, taxes matter, regulation matters. Our opponents in this campaign are so dogmatic in their goal of having more government because they love the power it brings to them that they're willing to let it impose costs on the working people that they say they want to help

I just loved this comment from an interview of Phil Gramm by Stephen Moore of the WSJ.

[eightnine2718281828mu5e]

job creation

[GMax]

In another startling poll result, more people believe that fixing the engine will do more to get their car running than letting the air out of the tyres.

Ya gotta hand it to those 14%, who in the face of all logic still voted for 4 flat tires though!

[glasater]

job creation link--from 89

Ah yes--another non sequitur:-)

[PeterUK]

When Barack Hussein Obama changes things there will be plenty of job creation,you will all work for the government.

[Porchlight]

Gmax,

If all 4 tires are flat, it's "more fair" than if 3 are still inflated.

[eightnine2718281828mu5e]

---
When Barack Hussein Obama changes things there will be plenty of job creation,you will all work for the government.
---

government vs private job creation under Bush

[GMax]

Misery loves company I guess.

[Tom Maguire]

Can you actually think of a specific policy proposal in which the government would "take steps to distribute wealth more evenly" without having at least some negative consequences for the "overall economic conditions and the jobs situation?"

I am sure folks could be found on both sides of the issue, but one might argue that a long term investment in better education of the public (maybe not through our current public education system) combined with stricter border enforcement might reasonably be expected to result in fewer low-earning workers, thereby improving measured inequality as well as broader economic performance (although I Boldly Predict that the bottom quintile will still hold about 20% of the workforce.)

Should the economic pie be grown or re-sliced? I don't think that must be an either-or proposition. From which it does not follow that I support every possible means of re-slicing, starting with jiggering the tax code.

[eightnine2718281828mu5e]

---
better education of the public
---

Higher education and human capital

---
What good is higher education? The conventional view is that, in addition to producing a well-informed citizenry, it builds important human capital and raises national productivity. But what is the evidence for these assertions? In policy debates we are typically presented with faulty logic: workers in desirable, high value-added jobs (e.g., at Google or Biogen) tend to have lots of education. Therefore, if we want Americans to have such jobs we had better expand access to higher education. The counter argument, that returns to society as a whole from education diminish as access increases beyond the cognitive elite, is given below by a well-known curmudgeon and psychometric realist:
---

[glasater]

Regarding how well the government handled last year's passport situation......

"The top management of this Department said that's a problem, we need to fix it, and we're going to do everything that we can to make sure that the American people are able to get passports in the timeframe that we have said they should be able to get a passport in. Right now that's not the case"

Just one very small example of how our government operates .

[eightnine2718281828mu5e]

non sequitur

link

---
Scientists at Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center are about to embark on a human trial to test whether a new cancer treatment will be as effective at eradicating cancer in humans as it has proven to be in mice.

The treatment will involve transfusing specific white blood cells, called granulocytes, from select donors, into patients with advanced forms of cancer. A similar treatment using white blood cells from cancer-resistant mice has previously been highly successful, curing 100 percent of lab mice afflicted with advanced malignancies.

Zheng Cui, Ph.D., lead researcher and associate professor of pathology, will be announcing the study June 28 at the Understanding Aging conference in Los Angeles.

The study, given the go-ahead by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, will involve treating human cancer patients with white blood cells from healthy young people whose immune systems produce cells with high levels of cancer-fighting activity.

The basis of the study is the scientists' discovery, published five years ago, of a cancer-resistant mouse and their subsequent finding that white blood cells from that mouse and its offspring cured advanced cancers in ordinary laboratory mice. They have since identified similar cancer-killing activity in the white blood cells of some healthy humans.

"In mice, we've been able to eradicate even highly aggressive forms of malignancy with extremely large tumors," Cui said. "Hopefully, we will see the same results in humans. Our laboratory studies indicate that this cancer-fighting ability is even stronger in healthy humans."
---

[kim]

That's the problem we are hoping to change, Tom. Equity demands that the bottom quintile all be above average.
=======================

[PeterUK]

Slipping back into sferris mode?

"What good is higher education? " It produced you.

[GMax]

I Boldly Predict that the bottom quintile will still hold about 20% of the workforce.

Definitions are crazy things aren't they!

If we could figure out a way to truly incentize folks to perform better in school, I personally think that a better educated population would be a good thing, less likely to elect a demagogue for example or less likely to believe kooky conspiracy theory.

But as long as there ar folks who dont care and dont pay attention, you cant just throw money at the problem and expect that will make them care and pay attention.

[sbw]

"What good is higher education? "

Many with a degree show no education.

[eightnine2718281828mu5e]

---
It produced you.
---

naaah; I was born charming.

[Bill in AZ]

"A well educated society, being necessary to a free state, the right to keep and read books shall not be infringed"

[PeterUK]

"naaah; I was born charming."

See what I mean? Higher education knocked it out of you.

[eightnine2718281828mu5e]

---
Higher education knocked it out of you.
---

Nicely played, Peter. ;-)

[eightnine2718281828mu5e]

Lots of rumblings about the coming economic apocalypse; lots of in-the-money calls on calamity right now.

Anyone feeling sanguine about our economic prospects over the next year?

Or is it all just tidy up the root cellar and increase your exposure to pork and beans futures?

[glasater]

"Should the economic pie be grown or re-sliced? I don't think that must be an either-or proposition. From which it does not follow that I support every possible means of re-slicing, starting with jiggering the tax code"

Surely "growing" the pie is the most optimistic and realistic path out of our current economic situation. But one does not hear too many positive statements out of the left. All they want to do is beat folks down--into submission.

[jimmyk]

a long term investment in better education of the public (maybe not through our current public education system)...

I don't think investing in education is what most people think of when confronted with a question about income redistribution. In fact, to the extent the schools are viewed as broken, that would probably fall in the category of "improving overall economic conditions."

...combined with stricter border enforcement might reasonably be expected to result in fewer low-earning workers

Nah, it will result in more low-earning workers, just more of them will be outside of our border. Not sure why that's such a good thing. Do you really think that food deliverers and migrant farm workers are suddenly going to become high-paying jobs if we keep immigrants out? Those jobs will mostly just disappear.

[bad]

89

The Wake Forest study is very exciting. Thanks for the links.

[eightnine2718281828mu5e]

---
The Wake Forest study is very exciting.
---

no problem; I try to keep up with new treatments since my mother has been in and out of chemo for more than 10 years now.

But please, don't express any sympathy; there are elements on this board that get agitated by it.

[bad]

...my mother has been in and out of chemo for more than 10 years now

as Hit would say-- on my knees

[eightnine2718281828mu5e]

It's amazing the progress they've had with certain cancers; monoclonal antibodies and similar techniques are a godsend to so many people (and their families).

[PeterUK]

"But please, don't express any sympathy; there are elements on this board that get agitated by it."

Wrong board.

[bad]

Any step forward in the battle against any type of cancer ends up being of benefit in the overall war.

[bad]

Peter you make me laugh all the time. In my fantasies I am as funny as you.

[PeterUK]

bad,
Genetic screening You might find this positive.

[bad]

Iraqis: 43% say Iraq is going well while 17% of Americans say USA on right track.

Instapundit has the link.

[eightnine2718281828mu5e]

Here's the link:

full Iraqi poll (pdf)

[MikeS]

...17% of Americans say USA on right track.

I'm one of the 83% who think the U.S. is on the wrong track.

I think it is insane that we can't drill for oil (where we know there is oil) in this country.

There are U.S. Congressmen and Senators who not only insult our troops, but accuse them of crimes with out evidence.

People are trying to pass laws against praying or even saying "God", because others may be offended.

There are judges with more empathy for criminals than for the victims of criminals. At one point we had a nominee for President who was for something before he was against it. Now we may have a nominee for President who is simultaneously for and against stuff.

[eightnine2718281828mu5e]

---
You might find this positive.
---

Evolution through direct genetic selection.

Somewhere Huxley fist bumps Darwin.