International Women’s Day transmogrified (addended)

George Rebane

IWD was launched in 1917 by the American Socialist Party to oppose the war and support nascent communist movements across Europe.  Their message of ‘bread and peace' was later attributed by Leon Trotsky as the real start of the communist and socialist revolutions.  The underlying message to attract ideologically vanilla people was social justice for women, it’s upshot being that under socialism women would do better and be more equal than under capitalism.

Well, it hasn’t turned out to be that way despite that the IWD celebrations to this day continue spreading the lies that launched the movement.  A. Davies and J. Harrigan write (‘For Gender Equality, You Can’t Beat Capitalism’) that “socialist leaders used International Women’s Day ostensibly to highlight their commitment to gender equity. Yet contrary to its socialist origins, more than 100 years of evidence since the first International Women’s Day suggests that free markets are the single best solution to inequity, gender or otherwise.”

Combining data from the UN and Canada’s Fraser Institute demonstrates that women have been doing enormously better along all dimensions of equality – especially income equality – in countries espousing free market principles than in countries under the thrall of collectivist central planners.  From these data Davies and Harrigan conclude –

Since the advent of International Women’ Day, many, from the common people to presidents and popes, have looked to government control of markets as the solution to the problems of poverty and inequality. A landslide of evidence over the past century shows that, regardless of our good intentions, the more we allow governments to control markets, the more poverty and inequality we experience. … There is no better time to note these facts than on International Women’s Day. A celebration that was once simple Communist propaganda can, and should, be repurposed to celebrate the forces that actually lift people out of poverty and inequality. The evidence suggests that equality doesn’t come at the end of the government’s gun, but at the end of the free market’s handshake.

Another progressive shibboleth for light thinkers bites the dust.

[Addendum, more  inequality developments]  Paul Krugman, call your office!  Thomas Picketty, last year’s darling of progressives worldwide, has recanted the message in his 2014 best seller, Capital in the 21st Century.  In that celebrated tome he introduced us to r > g stating that “return on capital (r) outpaces the growth rate of the economy (g) over time, leading inexorably to the dominance of inherited wealth. Progressives such as Princeton economist Paul Krugman seized on Mr. Piketty’s thesis to justify policies they have long wanted—namely, very high taxes on the wealthy.”

Well, it turns out that a lot of economists took a look at that proposition last year, and gave it a thorough debunking which was, you guessed it, assiduously ignored by the lamestream.  Progressives, from Team Obama on down, kept citing Piketty as God’s truth explaining all the horrors of inequality they have been preaching from the nation’s classrooms to Congress.  That these arguments were bovine scat became so overwhelming among the knowledgeable and well read, they convinced Picketty to walk back his arguments in a new paper – ‘About Capital in the 21st Century’ (preview copy Download AboutCapitalInThe21stCentury_preview).

Economist Robert Rosenkranz reviews (here) some of the more egregious errors in Picketty’s 2014 blockbuster that apparently eluded agenda-driven progressives like nobelist Paul Krugman, eager to have some semblance of rigorous support for their stream of pro-socialist rants (Krugman writes for the NYT).  In his rapture Krugman’s review of Capital included phrases such as a “magnificent, sweeping meditation on inequality.”

Revising his sweeping meditation as he “consigns his famous formula to irrelevance”, the bottom line from Picketty is the admission -

“In addition, I certainly do not believe that r>g is a useful tool for the discussion of rising inequality of labor income: other mechanisms and policies are much more relevant here, e.g. supply and demand of skills and education.” He correctly distinguishes between income and wealth, and he takes a long historic perspective: “Wealth inequality is currently much less extreme than a century ago.”

So we can summarize Picketty’s blinding revelations of 2014 (in his own words) as, “I do not view r>g as the only or even the primary tool for considering changes in income and wealth in the 20th century, or for forecasting the path of inequality in the 21st century.”  Given all that, do you think this will change any of the Left’s narrative on income and wealth inequality as they seek ever higher taxes on those who build businesses and create jobs?  Nah!

Comments

[Paul Emery]

What countries are those George that are "espousing free market principles" that you refer to in your post?

[George Rebane]

PaulE 1059pm - Please read the cited references yourself.

[Paul Emery]

It's a subscription site I'd rather not join. A simple listing would do.

[Gregory]

Paul, perhaps you've missed the simple instructions to read WSJ articles online...in this case, you click on the link and you get a teaser that includes the title of the article. In this case that's

"For Gender Equality, You Can’t Beat Capitalism"

Enter that title in a google search box with a copy and paste. Google returns with a number of suggestions, with the desired WSJ article at the top. Click on it, and the WSJ gives it to you for free. For whatever reason, WSJ will allow their protected content served when the referring page is google.com. Enjoy.

This title is more entertaining:"‘Calvin and Hobbes’: America’s Most Profound Comic Strip"

[Ben Emery]

The empowerment of women through education and equality is the largest factor in reversing many of the major problems of the modern era, including global warming/ climate change. The absence of women in governing decisions for so long has created a very dysfunctional global culture indeed. This dysfunction, suppression, and outright oppression of women perspective has seeped into social and family health. Unfortunately what we call progression for women in politics or business is they have to be just as cut throat sob's as men to break through those glass ceilings. Thatcher and Clinton are perfect examples of this in politics.

As my brother and friends who work in the NGO world have found in almost every society and culture they come into contact with is, go to the women if change is what is needed. The ones who do most of the work. If it will make their life less demanding they are more willing to try new things.

Power to the people, Today Power to the Women

http://www.internationalwomensday.com/

[fish]

The empowerment of women through education and equality is the largest factor in reversing many of the major problems of the modern era, including global warming/ climate change.

.....your claim that education and equality (darn...there's that word again) for women will mitigate global warming/climate change how again?

[Ben Emery]

Fish,

Here is one of the answers to get you going in the correct direction.

Developed nation women are less likely to send their children off to war to secure access to fossil fuels. Therefore are more willing to explore and sponsor alternatives to carbon based energy.

Undeveloped nation women spend up to 50% of their days scavenging for firewood and water for heating the home, cooking, and boiling off water. They would most definitely be more willing to use solar ovens, work towards water pumps, or alternatives if the opportunity presented itself.

Gender and Biodiversity
http://www.wedo.org/category/themes/sustainable-development-themes/biodiversity

Women and men undertake different roles in the use and management of natural resources to combat biodiversity loss and ensure equitable access to these resources, especially in developing countries. Although gender differentiated responsibilities vary region to region, in most communities in the developing world, women act as primary caretakers and natural resource managers. For example:

• Women often take the leading role in household /community management by controlling consumption patterns, collecting firewood for fuel and cooking, managing household waste, and providing healthcare through traditional medicines.
• Females in developing countries on average carry 20 litres of water per day over 6 km.
• Women control as much as 60-80% of the world’s food production and play a huge role in both water management and forestry. However, in some countries, women have few legal rights to land and globally women own less than 2% of the world’s titled land.

The gendered nature of resource management coupled with an unequal access to rights in certain countries leaves many women particularly vulnerable to the affects of biodiversity loss. As forests are depleted and fresh water supply exhausted, it is women and young girls who travel farther each day to collect firewood and water for their communities. Having to devote more time to water collection and travelling longer distances, means that girls may be unable to attend school and often puts women at greater risk for sexual harassment.

Significantly though, these gendered roles have provided women with vital technical and traditional knowledge on managing natural resources, particularly in terms of preservation and innovation. For example, women’s work in agriculture lends them a vast understanding of crop and seed varietals and in turn how to adapt their food production to changes in weather patterns and food supply. Without women’s full participation in decision making we cannot hope to develop the solutions and innovations necessary to combat biodiversity loss.

[Todd Juvinall]

I think we see who wears to pantaloons in Ben Emery's family. What a hoot.

[George Rebane]

BenE 1141am - where may we find evidence that in less developed countries women, in their traditional daily tasks, do NOT follow greedy policies when foraging for food, fuel, water, or any other needed resource from a commons? I use 'greedy policy' in its formal technical sense that may or not have social justice or moral implications. And a commons (q.v.) should be interpreted in a similar manner.

Evidence to the contrary abounds as seen from denuded forests and fields, and polluted waterways where women are the prime harvesters of resources found there.

[Gregory]

"Developed nation women are less likely to send their children off to war to secure access to fossil fuels. Therefore are more willing to explore and sponsor alternatives to carbon based energy."

The delusions are never ending.

Show me a woman who thinks poor people should be forced to pay huge premiums for "green" energy and I'll show you a woman blinded by the same politics Br'er Ben is blinded by.

It appears we may well be heading towards a glut of petroleum in the US market... perhaps $20 a barrel oil this summer as the industry runs out of storage space and much of what we have is forbidden to be shipped to foreign markets. And in almost unrelated news, it now is pretty clear that the peak of Solar Cycle 24 was a year ago and we may well be sliding to a cold phase that could last decades.
http://services.swpc.noaa.gov/images/solar-cycle-sunspot-number.gif

Pass the popcorn.

[fish]

Posted by: George Rebane | 09 March 2015 at 12:25 PM

Actually George I was interested to see if Ben would make reference to the dramatic depression in fertility that seems to accompany literacy in women.

[Todd Juvinall]

Funny how Ben Emery and all liberals cannot admit the progress for women in industrialized democracies. Kind of like the race baiters on civil rights. We in America are an ongoing country not a stagnant one yet according to Ben Emery and Al Sharpton we are in the same place we were in 1936.

The other things that shows the hypocrisy of the libs is Iraq and Afghanistan. American blood was spilled so millions of girls and women can go to school. But the feminists and liberals only care about Sandra Fluke getting her IUD here. Amazing!

[Joe Koyote]

I think we see who wears to pantaloons in Ben Emery's family. What a hoot.--

I think we can see why Todd has been married three times unsuccessfully . what a hoot!!

[Todd Juvinall]

I was too much for one gal. Spread the wealth JoeK. Besides I gave up half my stuff three times. I am a philanthropist!

[Bonnie McGuire]

As a young married woman with five children and a wonderful husband I thought women in America were so fortunate. My job was to help my husband and take care raising our children. I had a sister who had to work and hire baby sitters to raise the children. Her husband wasn't that ambitious. Yes women deserve to earn equally like men, but it looked like the women's movement put them back pulling the plow plus hiring people to raise the kids....their most important profession determining the kind of people who will make up our future society.

[Paul Emery]

Gosh and golly guys, women in this country didn't have the right to vote till 1920, well after the golden age of capitalism peaked out after the turn of the century. Isn't that the time when things were best for all you free market capitalism is our savior types? It was a long and hard battle not particularly supported by the Republican or Democratic men till it reached the tipping point and they had no choice.

[George Rebane]

PaulE 940pm - A bit hard to follow your line here. Are you contesting the finding about where women enjoy the greatest freedoms and equality that I report in my post?

[Todd Juvinall]

I think Paul Emery forgets that the American experience has been ongoing and one of learning and progress. He is stuck somewhere in the past and can't get up. If everyone was as angry we would be just like Zimbabwe.

[Shawn]

Dear Dr. Rebane, I am trying to find out how to contact you regarding research I'm doing on Mark Meckler. Could you please get in touch with me at: [email protected]?

Thank You,
Shawn

[Todd Juvinall]

Apparently George W. Bush and his wife went to Selma and marched across the bridge with all the civil rights folks. The New York Times cropped them OUT of the picture! If that is not the latest example of lamestream BS. Only NYT lover Pelline would like that.

[Paul Emery]

Todd

Can you provide me with documentation for your 10:23?

[Todd Juvinall]

In the NYT.

[Paul Emery]

Well Todd I agree it was news worthy and greatly neglected by the press that Bush was in front of the parade especially when it was a major media push that the Repubs sent scanty representation to the march.

The photo was however appropriately cropped since Bush was way off to one side with somewhat of an open space in the middle. Whoever set up the parade was for sure aware of photo op opportunities and probably assigned Bush to the far right to focus the story on Obama.

[Todd Juvinall]

Yeah, can't be a Bush hater like you Paul and have the man and his wife in the photo. Got it.

[Paul Emery]

I don't hate Bush Todd. I just think he was a really lousy President.

Actually Todd, I'm agreeing with you on this one. This is classic manipulation of the news to create a desired outcome. In this case it was that the Repubs didn't support the March.

[Todd Juvinall]

I think you are warped if you think we are in agreement. Obviously the liberal media of which you are aligned can't even respect a Republican President to have his picture at a rally where we are all supposed to get along. You are a good example of why no one believes the press and relies on blogs and internet and FOX. Pathetic.

[Paul Emery]

Whatever Todd. It's all good Brother

[Todd Juvinall]

It is all good. Life is good. So you know I did the estimates for the insulation at your new digs?

[Paul Emery]

I didn't know that Todd. You should come by some time, I'll give you a tour.

[michael anderson]

Paul and Todd, group hug.

[fish]

I think we can see why Todd has been married three times unsuccessfully . what a hoot!!

Interesting JoKe...I'm reminded of the P.J. O'Rourke line that I find so apropos to those inclined left.......

"If you say a modern celebrity leftist/leftist politician is an adulterer, a pervert and a drug addict, all it means is that you've read his autobiography".

I you enlightened types were open and encouraging of alternative life choices.....the very soul of what it means to be a progressive.....to be nonjudgmental!

So Todds been through a couple of brides....so what?

I'm on my second!

How bout you?

[Barry Pruett]

Michael Anderson: Hahaha!

[George Rebane]

Administrivia - while counting each other's peccadillos and divorces does reach out and include the distaff side, it is getting a bit far from women's broader roles in society, and the even larger issue of income and wealth equity. ;-)

However, for your rhetorical exertions on topics unlimited, the 11mar15 sandbox is now open for business.

[Todd Juvinall]

The libs always go personal but I could care less and let's head over to the "sandbox"!

[fish]

The libs always go personal but I could care less and let's head over to the "sandbox"!

I go personal as well Todd but from their perspective that should be perfectly appropriate. After all we are the "haterz". That's why I find it surprising when JoeK gives you sass about your divorces. From the lefty/SJW side nothing sexual, chemical, or behavioral should be subject to criticism!

[Ben Emery]

Bonnie,

I am very glad you had a good marriage and husband but you are forgetting about all the women who were in bad marriages and had no way out due to inability to earn a living on their own. Being financially dependent with little social safety nets in place makes it very hard to get out of bad situations. We have made great strides through legislation and policies in the last 50-80 years in this regard but it has been at the objection of most Republicans politicians.

[Ben Emery]

Fish,
It is true that women with more education wait longer to have children. In cultural terms it can be attributed to women not being viewed as objects that are there to be used as men see fit. The educations broadens their awareness of opportunities and gives a much higher self worth other than being a baby machine for their men.

There is definitely a correlation between birth rates ad education. That is why in developed nations our birth rates are basically around 2 children or less replacing the current population but not adding to it. In nations where women have little education and very few human rights birth rates are much higher.

And Yes, global population along with everything that comes along with it are definitely a contributing factors in global warming/ climate change.

United States
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/97facts/edu2birt.htm

Latin America
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/2105295.html

International
http://www.un.org/press/en/2011/pop994.doc.htm

[Ben Emery]

George and Greg,
You are trying to draw me into a philosophical debate due to not having any real understanding of this issue or having the data to counter what I am saying.

Sorry for not biting but I have better things to do.

Todd,
You aren't even worth commenting you individually. You are an ignorant man on so many issues, women's rights being one of them.

[Todd Juvinall]

Wow Ben Emery you are just too smart about women's issues. I am humbled by your superior intelligence. Since you are also a man, I expect you will be honored by the highest authorities for your complete and utter understanding and empathy on women's issues. Wow! What a guy.

Regarding my intelligence Ben Eery. Every time you open your mouth you make my case about why you are such a failure. Thanks again.

[George Rebane]

BenE 1233pm - Again you misunderstood the point of my 1225pm question. No philosophy whatsoever would be involved in your answer, however taking such a detour would testify to the invalidation of your 1141am thesis. No matter, your implicit response will serve - take your ease.

[Gregory]

"George and Greg,
You are trying to draw me into a philosophical debate due to not having any real understanding of this issue or having the data to counter what I am saying."

Not at all, Ben. You've been unable to rationally discuss anything in the past; my 09 March 2015 at 12:48 PM was purely for the entertainment of everyone else, including mine.