The 2015 Popularity Contest (aka UK General Election )

[daylightrobber]

It does I believe, yes, and I'm aware that pensions make up a huge chunk of welfare spending. Nevertheless, the state 'safety net' is larger and more comprehensive now than at any time in British history, and by quite a considerable margin, both in terms of direct welfare payments but also in state delivery of services such as health and education.

You know I'm really glad you acknowledge that pensions for part of the welfare. Can you answer why it's okay to slash spending on all other benefits but not the pension?

 

[Clint Planet]

Or his book prior to that where he argues on the importance of 'learning how to learn'. Sadly, modern schooling is still stuck in the Victorian era.

Oh, I'm all for leading how to learn. It's not an alien concept to me. After all, I am a highly-trained professional.

But you obviously have time for Stiglitz. What do you think about his views on the social and economic costs of inequality?

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I'm not bothering with pop psychology.

Get yourself an education rather than a raft of internet clips. It's too important a topic for glibness.

As I tried to suggest, a proper response would involve so many words, G O T would break.

* My last post on this particular aspect of the debate.

You're dismissing the 20 years or so of research into the topic by arguably the leading thinker on it in the world as 'pop psychology'? And you accuse me of being glib. Interesting. I posted a video because I assumed that most people haven't read her studies and books.

If you don't want to provide a response, that's your prerogative, and I'm sure there are plenty of better things to do on a Saturday, but hopefully being an open minded chap you'll check out her work sometime.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

You know I'm really glad you acknowledge that pensions for part of the welfare. Can you answer why it's okay to slash spending on all other benefits but not the pension?

It isn't (imo). Politics though isn't it? Older folks tend to vote more than younger folks, which is why no party has dared raise the retirement age to keep in line with life expectancy.

 

[Clint Planet]

I'm not bothering with pop psychology.

Get yourself an education rather than a raft of internet clips. It's too important a topic for glibness.

.

Dweck is very much flavour of the month in education. Like so many others, she has much to commend her but, like all of the others, her ideas will fall out of fashion in time and we'll all latch onto the Next Big Answer to Everything.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Oh, I'm all for leading how to learn. It's not an alien concept to me. After all, I am a highly-trained professional.

But you obviously have time for Stiglitz. What do you think about his views on the social and economic costs of inequality?

I broadly agree with it. Concentrated power is not something I agree with, regardless of whether it's in a state or a large corporation. Humanity seems to flourish most when power is dissipated throughout society rather than focused within a small 'elite'.

 

[Clint Planet]

I broadly agree with it. Concentrated power is not something I agree with, regardless of whether it's in a state or a large corporation. Humanity seems to flourish most when power is dissipated throughout society rather than focused within a small 'elite'.

You socialist, you! What should we do about it, then, given that so far you've claimed neither to know nor care about inequality?

 

[Clint Planet]

Evidence would suggest that those from privileged backgrounds aren't just ill equipped, many of them simply don't care.



How Wealth Reduces Compassion

As riches grow, empathy for others seems to decline

April 10, 2012 |By Daisy Grewal

••

Who is more likely to lie, cheat, and steal—the poor person or the rich one? It’s temping to think that the wealthier you are, the more likely you are to act fairly. After all, if you already have enough for yourself, it’s easier to think about what others may need. But research suggests the opposite is true: as people climb the social ladder, their compassionate feelings towards other people decline.

Berkeley psychologists Paul Piff and Dacher Keltner ran several studies looking at whether social class (as measured by wealth, occupational prestige, and education) influences how much we care about the feelings of others. In one study, Piff and his colleagues discreetly observed the behavior of drivers at a busy four-way intersection. They found that luxury car drivers were more likely to cut off other motorists instead of waiting for their turn at the intersection. This was true for both men and women upper-class drivers, regardless of the time of day or the amount of traffic at the intersection. In a different study they found that luxury car drivers were also more likely to speed past a pedestrian trying to use a crosswalk, even after making eye contact with the pedestrian.

In order to figure out whether selfishness leads to wealth (rather than vice versa), Piff and his colleagues ran a study where they manipulated people’s class feelings. The researchers asked participants to spend a few minutes comparing themselves either to people better off or worse off than themselves financially. Afterwards, participants were shown a jar of candy and told that they could take home as much as they wanted. They were also told that the leftover candy would be given to children in a nearby laboratory. Those participants who had spent time thinking about how much better off they were compared to others ended up taking significantly more candy for themselves--leaving less behind for the children.

A related set of studies published by Keltner and his colleagues last year looked at how social class influences feelings of compassion towards people who are suffering. In one study, they found that less affluent individuals are more likely to report feeling compassion towards others on a regular basis. For example, they are more likely to agree with statements such as, “I often notice people who need help,” and “It’s important to take care of people who are vulnerable.” This was true even after controlling for other factors that we know affect compassionate feelings, such as gender, ethnicity, and spiritual beliefs.

In a second study, participants were asked to watch two videos while having their heart rate monitored. One video showed somebody explaining how to build a patio. The other showed children who were suffering from cancer. After watching the videos, participants indicated how much compassion they felt while watching either video. Social class was measured by asking participants questions about their family’s level of income and education. The results of the study showed that participants on the lower end of the spectrum, with less income and education, were more likely to report feeling compassion while watching the video of the cancer patients. In addition, their heart rates slowed down while watching the cancer video—a response that is associated with paying greater attention to the feelings and motivations of others.

These findings build upon previous research showing how upper class individuals are worse at recognizing the emotions of others and less likely to pay attention to people they are interacting with (e.g. by checking their cell phones or doodling).

But why would wealth and status decrease our feelings of compassion for others? After all, it seems more likely that having few resources would lead to selfishness. Piff and his colleagues suspect that the answer may have something to do with how wealth and abundance give us a sense of freedom and independence from others. The less we have to rely on others, the less we may care about their feelings. This leads us towards being more self-focused. Another reason has to do with our attitudes towards greed. Like Gordon Gekko, upper-class people may be more likely to endorse the idea that “greed is good.” Piff and his colleagues found that wealthier people are more likely to agree with statements that greed is justified, beneficial, and morally defensible. These attitudes ended up predicting participants’ likelihood of engaging in unethical behavior.

Given the growing income inequality in the United States, the relationship between wealth and compassion has important implications. Those who hold most of the power in this country, political and otherwise, tend to come from privileged backgrounds. If social class influences how much we care about others, then the most powerful among us may be the least likely to make decisions that help the needy and the poor. They may also be the most likely to engage in unethical behavior. Keltner and Piff recently speculated in the New York Times about how their research helps explain why Goldman Sachs and other high-powered financial corporations are breeding grounds for greedy behavior. Although greed is a universal human emotion, it may have the strongest pull over those of who already have the most.

This is fascinating, by the way.

 

[peteblue]

Not only that, benefit capping has displaced lots of already vulnerable people such as refugees who, no longer able to afford living in their own London communities, are dispersed amongst potentially hostile provincial towns which are simply not geared up to support them in their needs.

But shouldn't refugees be dispersed and integrated anyway instead of staying in "their own London communities".......oh and where are these "potentially hostile provincial towns"....do you mean Leicester, Birmingham, Wolverhampton, etc etc

 

[peteblue]

You know I'm really glad you acknowledge that pensions for part of the welfare. Can you answer why it's okay to slash spending on all other benefits but not the pension?

Because it also pays pensions for the public sector and we mustn't upset them..........

 

[Clint Planet]

But shouldn't refugees be dispersed and integrated anyway instead of staying in "their own London communities".......oh and where are these "potentially hostile provincial towns"....do you mean Leicester, Birmingham, Wolverhampton, etc etc

If you'd fled your country in fear of your life, would you find it more helpful to be allowed to commune with your fellow Britons or be dispersed amongst the indigenous population? Integration comes later - often with the second generation. As for the hostility, us it that implausible to suggest that a Somali woman in a hijab might be more likely to be abused on the streets of Stoke or Portsmouth than within her own community on the streets of Tottenham?

 

[daylightrobber]

Because it also pays pensions for the public sector and we mustn't upset them..........

Good try.

 

[peteblue]

If you'd fled your country in fear of your life, would you find it more helpful to be allowed to commune with your fellow Britons or be dispersed amongst the indigenous population? Integration comes later - often with the second generation. As for the hostility, us it that implausible to suggest that a Somali woman in a hijab might be more likely to be abused on the streets of Stoke or Portsmouth than within her own community on the streets of Tottenham?

With respect, I think you are wrong mate. UK people can adapt to most cultures and integrate people. It's when you get 'communities' that the Uk population gets a bit twitchy.........

 

[Clint Planet]

 

[Bruce Wayne]

You socialist, you! What should we do about it, then, given that so far you've claimed neither to know nor care about inequality?

I quite like what Steven Johnson calls 'peer progressives', and whilst I suspect much of it might be a pipe dream, there are some small movements in that direction.

http://www.brainpickings.org/2012/09/18/steven-johnson-future-perfect/