Really enjoyed the discussion Glenn, although I found some of Professor Kennedy's responses a little underwhelming. But definitely respected hearing his perspective on these matters.
On the subject of crime and how you know it's not because of poverty, I'd just like to reiterate a few observations I made in a prior thread. I'm not an economist so I'm sure my analysis is a bit simplistic, but I noted before that China seems to me to be a clear and obvious counterexample to almost every single left-wing explanation I've heard when it comes to these sorts of discussions.
Given China's current trajectory it's certainly not unreasonable to assume that it could end up joining the league of first world nations as far as per capita GDP over the coming decades, but the fact of the matter remains that for much of the recent few decades it's been a relatively poor country by first world standards. Even today PPP adjusted per capita GDP for China is roughly $19,000 USD. By contrast, according to Wikipedia the per capita income of African Americans was over $23,000 in 2018. I'm sure someone will explain to me how per capita income and GDP aren't quite the same thing and in any case how income isn't the same as wealth. I still contend though that the numbers I'm citing reveal something.
It's universally assumed that somehow poverty is correlated with crime, but that putative correlation let alone any claims about causation doesn't seem to exist when one observes East Asia. According to Wikipedia the intentional homicide rate per 100,000 people is roughly .53 in China. Apart from North Korea and Mongolia, every country in East Asia has an intentional homicide rate per 100,000 people of less than 1. By contrast, I believe the intentional homicide rate per 100,000 people among African Americans is somewhere in the range of 15-20.
If poverty were an insuperable obstacle to progress, it's not clear how one could ever expect countries to lift themselves out of poverty for instance. And yet China has done exactly that over the past few decades, while exhibiting few of the social pathologies that one would normally attribute to relative impoverishment. You can see echos of this in the fact that many of the kids who get into the elite high schools in NYC are from poor immigrant families. Oddly enough you sometimes hear poverty used as an explanation for why certain immigrant groups succeed in America. Their relative impoverishment was a motivating factor for why they strove to excel because they wanted a better life for themselves than what their parents had. I feel like when a single factor can be used to explain anything it ultimately ends up explaining nothing.
The age adjusted homicide rate per 100,000 for african americans hit 30.62 in 2020 (and very likely rose significantly again in 2021) as per the CDC. You were quoting older data about homicide rates being 15 to 20 per 100,000. This was true a few years ago. But sadly no longer. :-(
Non latino African Americans are about 60 times as likely to be murdered as Chinese people who live in China. China also had low crime decades ago when China was a very poor country.
African Americans have arguably been betrayed by the rest of americans (asians, latinos, multi-racial & multi-ethnic, caucasians) and perhaps this rises to the level of a crime against humanity.
To expand upon my prior comment, this might be a bit vague but oftentimes when we look at different ethnic groups or differences among countries we observe some kind of correlation between SES and crime or academic achievement or whatever else. And then we get into discussions about whether correlation necessarily implies causation, etc.
What I have observed though is that these correlations are significantly lessened when you examine people of East Asian descent. I noted above that relatively poor by first world standards China seems to have a per capita rate of intentional homicides comparable to that of wealthier East Asian countries. Likewise China doesn't seem to lag wealthier countries in East Asia when one looks at PISA scores or other sorts of country level measures of achievement. I noted above the prevalence of poor immigrant families among the kids who are testing into the elite high schools in NYC. I'm also reminded of this Guardian article from 10 years ago which I've linked to below pointing out that albeit from a small sample size, the gap in academic achievement between higher SES and lower SES British Chinese pupils was significantly lower than that of other ethnicities in the UK.
Really enjoyed the discussion Glenn, although I found some of Professor Kennedy's responses a little underwhelming. But definitely respected hearing his perspective on these matters.
On the subject of crime and how you know it's not because of poverty, I'd just like to reiterate a few observations I made in a prior thread. I'm not an economist so I'm sure my analysis is a bit simplistic, but I noted before that China seems to me to be a clear and obvious counterexample to almost every single left-wing explanation I've heard when it comes to these sorts of discussions.
Given China's current trajectory it's certainly not unreasonable to assume that it could end up joining the league of first world nations as far as per capita GDP over the coming decades, but the fact of the matter remains that for much of the recent few decades it's been a relatively poor country by first world standards. Even today PPP adjusted per capita GDP for China is roughly $19,000 USD. By contrast, according to Wikipedia the per capita income of African Americans was over $23,000 in 2018. I'm sure someone will explain to me how per capita income and GDP aren't quite the same thing and in any case how income isn't the same as wealth. I still contend though that the numbers I'm citing reveal something.
It's universally assumed that somehow poverty is correlated with crime, but that putative correlation let alone any claims about causation doesn't seem to exist when one observes East Asia. According to Wikipedia the intentional homicide rate per 100,000 people is roughly .53 in China. Apart from North Korea and Mongolia, every country in East Asia has an intentional homicide rate per 100,000 people of less than 1. By contrast, I believe the intentional homicide rate per 100,000 people among African Americans is somewhere in the range of 15-20.
If poverty were an insuperable obstacle to progress, it's not clear how one could ever expect countries to lift themselves out of poverty for instance. And yet China has done exactly that over the past few decades, while exhibiting few of the social pathologies that one would normally attribute to relative impoverishment. You can see echos of this in the fact that many of the kids who get into the elite high schools in NYC are from poor immigrant families. Oddly enough you sometimes hear poverty used as an explanation for why certain immigrant groups succeed in America. Their relative impoverishment was a motivating factor for why they strove to excel because they wanted a better life for themselves than what their parents had. I feel like when a single factor can be used to explain anything it ultimately ends up explaining nothing.
The age adjusted homicide rate per 100,000 for african americans hit 30.62 in 2020 (and very likely rose significantly again in 2021) as per the CDC. You were quoting older data about homicide rates being 15 to 20 per 100,000. This was true a few years ago. But sadly no longer. :-(
Non latino African Americans are about 60 times as likely to be murdered as Chinese people who live in China. China also had low crime decades ago when China was a very poor country.
African Americans have arguably been betrayed by the rest of americans (asians, latinos, multi-racial & multi-ethnic, caucasians) and perhaps this rises to the level of a crime against humanity.
:-(
To expand upon my prior comment, this might be a bit vague but oftentimes when we look at different ethnic groups or differences among countries we observe some kind of correlation between SES and crime or academic achievement or whatever else. And then we get into discussions about whether correlation necessarily implies causation, etc.
What I have observed though is that these correlations are significantly lessened when you examine people of East Asian descent. I noted above that relatively poor by first world standards China seems to have a per capita rate of intentional homicides comparable to that of wealthier East Asian countries. Likewise China doesn't seem to lag wealthier countries in East Asia when one looks at PISA scores or other sorts of country level measures of achievement. I noted above the prevalence of poor immigrant families among the kids who are testing into the elite high schools in NYC. I'm also reminded of this Guardian article from 10 years ago which I've linked to below pointing out that albeit from a small sample size, the gap in academic achievement between higher SES and lower SES British Chinese pupils was significantly lower than that of other ethnicities in the UK.
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2011/feb/07/chinese-children-school-do-well