Skip to main content

The Economics of Not So Innocent Fraud

I was doing a bit of research, and being obliged to truth, no matter how ugly, I decided to research some issues on political affiliation. Although I had at times read that education increased with Republican voting - an exit poll, a questionable source - I found a Pew study that showed income and Republican values go hand-in-hand. Although this seems commonsensical, it contradicted my sense that educated people are typically liberal, although IQ correlates with income at 0.3, a relatively low degree. Alternatively, the most educated people, i.e., professors, are more often affiliated with the Democratic party, rather than the Republican, by a 7 to 1 ratio.

Regardless, it did make me question myself, and I was reminded of Galbraith's The Economics of Innocent Fraud: Truth For Our Time, that many people in power, both corporate and political, believe in fallacies that are self-rewarding. For those that enjoy economics, the book is a very worthwhile but slender read.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst by Robert M. Sapolsky My rating: 5 of 5 stars I finished reading this crying. It is a work of neurobiology, social science, anthropology, and history, but ultimately it is a work of great humanity, suggesting ways that humans, our groups, our systems, and our societies can be made better. View all my reviews

Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, Third Edition

Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, Third Edition by Geert Hofstede My rating: 4 of 5 stars A detailed and fascinating review of Hofstede's dimensions, by the researcher himself, showing broad high-level insights into history and culture, although a bit tedious, as it often describes in detail relationships many of us implicitly understand. View all my reviews

The Right to Write - NYTimes.com

In an article,  The Right to Write - NYTimes.com , I commented on the right to write, since writers are sometimes questioned on the validity of their writing, e.g., Harriet Beecher Stowe with Uncle Tom's Cabin: One, people always have the right to write, but readers concurrently have the right to reject said writing. Much personal criticism of depictions from writers is whether the depiction seems valid or plausible, but even that is an exercise in empathy, since it requires one to experience that depiction ideationally.  Two, there is a streak in Americans, and maybe anyone, that states that you cannot understand 'my pain', usually the death of a child or some horrific personal lose. Over a longer term I have sensed that people most easily accept empathy if it is expressed by someone with similar experiences, an aspect I believe is part of human nature. I find both irksome, since they deny empathy.