Wealth, Poverty and Politics Hardcover – September 6, 2016

“Wealth, Poverty and Politics: An International Perspective” – This is Thomas Sowell’s attempt to explain the disparity in economic prosperity between nations and within societies.Let me begin by saying that Sowell’s book is not the first to tackle this topic, and he admits his book will not be the last word. Nonetheless, he does a great job integrating the scholarship of others and weaving various disciplines together to reveal international and historical patterns.Sowell claims there are four basic factors that are responsible for economic prosperity (or lack thereof) – geographic factors, cultural factors, social factors, and political factors. Geographic factors include location, landscape, climate, waterways, animals, and diseases. Cultural factors include the values, attitudes, and customs of various societies, including the values that certain societies have toward education, commerce/business, and work. Even the receptiveness or openness toward other cultures differs among various societies. The lack of receptiveness toward Western culture may be holding African nations back today; in contrast, the Westernized East Asian nations are developing at phenomenal rates. Sowell’s chapter on social factors discusses the influence (or lack thereof) of population growth, demographics, social and geographic mobility, and innate potential. The chapter on political factors discusses the emergence of nations, the politics of polarizations, and the welfare state.Of course, Sowell admits that these four factors are not comprehensive. And if Sowell merely discussed these four factors and ended his book, I would probably have given it 3 stars – mostly because I think he’s an articulate writer and argues his points very well. Yet the more insightful points in his book are not his discussions about the four factors per se. Rather, the more interesting points were Sowell’s discussion of the underlying assumptions people have when discussing wealth and poverty.First, he mentions that wealthy nations like to focus on the disparity between the “rich” and the “poor”. We hear this all the time in the media. If there is a gap between the “rich” and the “poor”, then it must be because the “rich” are keeping the “poor” down. The assumption is that wealth is the normal condition and poverty is what needs to be explained. Yet Sowell brings to the forefront an important fact – wealth is actually a new phenomenon in world history. Thus, it is wealth that needs to be explained, not poverty. For nearly all of civilization (until very recently), poverty was the norm, both for most societies around the world and for most people within these societies. In the past, the poor were truly poor – i.e. lifespans were short, infant mortality was high, and death from famine and disease was common. Today, many of the “poor” in the United States have air conditioning, refrigeration, television sets, regular meals, fresh water, transportation, and even one or more cellphones. By the standards of past civilizations, today’s “poor” live like kings and queens. In short, we should not confuse inequality with poverty.Second, we often expect equality between societies and peoples within societies; however, it’s easy to forget that variation is the norm. For example, it is obvious that the landscape varies across the different continents and across regions within a continent. There are no two places on Earth that are exactly the same in all respects. These differences have affected the development of societies through history. It is no coincidence that mountain peoples (regardless of where in the world you find them) are typically “backward” relative to those who live in the valleys. Mountain people are often isolated from other groups within a society, and thus, unaware of advances and developments in non-mountain regions. It is also no coincidence that the first great cities arose near rivers, such as the Euphrates, Nile, and Yellow Rivers. Thus, civilization did not develop at the same time in all regions of the world, and differences (in this case, geographic differences) may explain why.Similarly, within a geographic region live a multitude of communities speaking different languages, with different cultures, and various ways of doing things. Within the United States alone, there are different demographics and cultures across the 3,000 mile landscape – differences between the northern and southern states, between eastern and western states, or even within a given state, such as Los Angeles County and Orange County (both located within Southern California). No one expects every person in a society to be the same height, have the same athletic ability, intelligence, or mental temperament. We don’t expect everyone to be a physicist, doctor, phenomenal businessman, or professional basketball player. Everyone is different and differences matter. Yet we expect entire societies (consisting of hundreds of thousands or even billions of individuals) to be equal with other societies, each with different histories, cultures, demographics, landscapes, political systems, etcetera. Moreover, if two societies are not equal, we assume there must be something sinister at work. As Sowell points out, this latter view is especially prevalent among segments of the African American community today. But given the vast differences between societies (and groups within societies), why would anyone expect equal economic outcomes in the first place? Only if these various societies (or groups) were equally prosperous would we require an explanation. In other words, differences are the norm, therefore, different economic outcomes should be expected.Fourth, unlike many books of this genre, Sowell doesn’t focus on any single factor or combination of factors for his explanation. Rather, he emphasizes the interaction between the factors. As already mentioned, geography plays a significant role in economic prosperity, especially in early prosperity. Some societies developed agriculture before others simply because certain locations were more conducive to agriculture under the given conditions at a given point in time. As a result, certain geographic locations developed cities before other places. But as human knowledge developed – e.g. irrigation, animal domestication, development of the plow, and so forth – societies were able to expand the locations that could support agricultural societies. Thus, geography wasn’t a determining factor; rather, it was one factor that interacted with other factors to create a specific outcome at a given time. As that interaction changed, so did the outcome. Similarly, prior to the 15th century, the Atlantic Ocean posed a geographic barrier between Europe and the Americas. Yet developments from East Asia and the Middle East brought the compass, navigation techniques, Arabic numerals, and the technology of large, ocean vessels to Europe, spawning the Age of Exploration. In turn, after considerable advances in European culture, when that culture interacted with the now “backward” East Asian societies, it enabled these less prosperous societies to begin their own rise onto the world stage – e.g. Japan, Singapore, S. Korea, and even China (in China's case, it is a rise back to prosperity). Yet, it isn’t any single factor or combination of factors that makes a society prosperous. Rather, it is the relationship between many factors that matter, and those relationships are not static.One criticism: I wish Sowell gave a little more discussion to the influence of innate potential. He doesn’t dismiss innate potential, but doesn’t give much weight to it as an explanation either. Yet over the past few years, there have been a small handful of books by academicians that view innate potential as a good explanation for wealth disparity (e.g. The 10,000 Year Explosion; A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race, and Human History). Moreover, anyone who has pursued a science or mathematics-related degree knows that many students find these subjects very difficult, despite diligent work habits and hours of study. Others seem to grasp difficult concepts almost immediately. At competitive universities, the drop-out rates in these disciplines can be very high. In fact, in our modern world, greater remunerative value is placed on these subjects than the humanities, which means those who excel in these subjects often find good paying jobs. Thus, while innate potential is unlikely to explain everything, I wish Sowell would’ve developed his reasons more and provided counterarguments to these other authors, if he disagrees with them. Nonetheless, I did not consider this a big criticism given what this book was attempting to explain.In summary, I found Sowell’s book a quick, insightful, and entertaining work. I do want to mention that there are a few spelling errors (for those grammatically sensitive) and there were a few spots where his sentences get a bit wordy. However, the latter is Sowell’s writing style and gives the book a certain character. Overall his book was very enjoyable. If you have read other books on this topic, most of the information may not be new, but Sowell’s use of facts, his arguments, and his integration of other scholarly works make this book worth reading. I highly recommend it.

While this book has recently appeared in an expanded edition, those who have read both versions prefer this one because of its concise arguments. It is typical Thomas Sowell: absolutely lucid (despite the complexity of the subject) and filled with hard facts and common sense.The title suggests a larger subject, but it is really an examination of a small but very important subject, written from an unusually broad perspective. The subject, ultimately, is the plight of urban minorities and the degree to which that plight is the result of the actions of others. ‘Systemic racism’, e.g., is the cry of the academic and the black ‘leader’/race hustler. Sowell demonstrates, to the contrary, that urban minorities were in far better condition before the welfare statism of the 1960’s, even though actual racism was deeper and broader. He also demonstrates the global practices of minority ‘leaders’—preaching discontent, division and the blame of others in an attempt to feather their own nests and sustain their own livelihood.A major theme of the book is the negative impact of isolation. Those outside of the educational and cultural mainstream, e.g., suffer as a result of that condition and Sowell extends the discussion in fascinating ways. Western Europeans, e.g., have been more wealthy and more successful than Eastern Europeans in part because their rivers flow to the sea and connect them with other people, with whom they can trade and from whom they can acquire knowledge, including the discovery of new technologies. When the British encountered the Maoris in Australia, e.g., they found that they were living in the stone age, even though Australia is rich in natural resources. Jews did not ace standardized tests when their language was confined to Yiddish and when they were discriminated against by college admissions offices. The Chinese led the world in many ways, until one of their medieval emperors decided to sink their ships and cut off contact with the rest of the world.Sowell loves to pull the beards of the self-confident who lack facts, e.g., those who claim that minority students are discriminated against on standardized tests because the tests contain ‘white bias’. If that is the case, why are the whites taking the tests consistently eclipsed by Asians?He argues from unexpected data bases. When decrying the notion of equality of result, e.g., he suggests that certain endeavors are simply not amenable to eutopian plans and desires. Those on the PGA tour, e.g., seldom win tournaments. Those who do generally only win a small handful, and yet, Arnold Palmer, Jack Nicklaus and Tiger Woods have won hundreds. He talks about the Sander theory of mismatch with regard to affirmative action but then points out that blacks (and the Irish before them, who faced great discrimination) succeeded in both athletics and entertainment, fields that are ruthlessly competitive and endlessly meritocratic. They entered those fields because other doors were closed, but they did not need to have expectations reduced in their favor.Broadly speaking, this is popular economics done well; he utilizes geography, sociology, history and other branches of social science to construct compelling arguments. In some cases his argument is compelling because the standard arguments made overlook key facts that are enormously important. Just one example: those who agonize over gaps and disparities in income tend to look at groupings that are actually moving targets. When they talk about the poor, the rich and those with middle incomes they are not talking about living/breathing human beings. They are talking about statistical aggregates that change; they often change because the government redefines poverty. In America, it has often been said, the poor live lives comparable to those of the upper middle class in Mexico.Actual people move between the statistical categories. We all tend to make less money when we enter the workforce than when we have decades of experience and acquired skills. Actually, a striking number of individuals move from the bottom deciles to the top ones and those in the top are often there for very brief periods of time because they have specific periods of windfall, through investments, inheritance, and so on. He draws a distinction between income and wealth. Income may be much higher when we are in our 50’s, e.g., but wealth can be greater among the retired because their houses are paid off and they have accumulated goods over a lifetime. In the course of the book he takes aim at such commentators as Thomas Piketty, John Rawls, Paul Krugman and Nicholas Kristof and many of the results are delicious.Bottom line: this is TS at the top of his game and this is a book that would make a perfect Christmas gift for friends and relatives who need to clear their minds of cant.

Explica e estrutura ideias que temos soltas na cabeça.

This book has shown me a totally different way of looking at the world, how to dissect facts and figures to see what they are really showing.It explains how the geography of where you are born may help or hinder your ability to be successful.How shows over and over how your mindset changes outcomes, not always for you, but for your children.Every chapter introduce you to a new issue/concept, leaving you with a good understanding of the topic and allowing you to decide how to use or not use the information.A good read

Ibrahim X Kendi would have you believe that all unpleasant social disparities are the product of anti-black racism. This is nonsense. There are disparities but indicting math, for example, as racist because of the relative under performance of black students is not going to improve academic outcomes.This book has the courage to examine the disparities and explain why they exist and persist. The book is excellent, replete with cross cultural, cross historical comparisons.I can’t recommend the book more strongly.

Another great read from Thomas Sowell.

Das Buch war super. Ich lese Thomas Sowell seit vielen Jahren und alles was er schreibt ist wert die Zeit zu lesen.