Science topics: Social PolicyInequality

Science topic

# Inequality - Science topic

Explore the latest questions and answers in Inequality, and find Inequality experts.

Questions related to Inequality

Tax cuts to the rich is the prefer idea on how to promote and expand economic growth in supply side economics despite knowing it does not work as expected. Yet, this policy is usually the first choice in supply side run democracies like in the USA or now the UK when supply side promoters are in power.

Any policy that worsens inequality should be expected in practice to negatively affect economic growth as under extreme inequality or worsening inequality the traditional trickle down should be expected to be mute or not to work as intended. And this raises the question,

**tax cuts to the rich and the embudo effect, is that why the trickled down effect does not work as intended?**What do you think?

If for example the position of an electron in a one-dimensional box is measured at A (give and take the uncertainty), then the probability of detecting the particle at any position B at a classical distance from A becomes zero instantaneously.

In other words, the "probability information" appears to be communicated from A to B faster than light.

The underlying argument would be virtually the same as in EPR. The question might be generalized as follows: as the probability of detecting a particle within an arbitrarily small interval is not arbitrarily small, this means that quantum mechanics must be incomplete.

Yet another formulation: are the collapse of the wave function and quantum entanglement two manifestations of the same principle?

It should be relatively easy to devise a Bell-like theorem and experiment to verify "spooky action" in the collapse of the wave function across a given classical interval.

Hi my dynamic model is

Gender Inequality Index(GII) = a+GIIt-1+bFDI+ (ControlV)+U

My control variables are 7. I have used all the control variables and my main explanatory variable as the strictly exogenous ivstyle instruments. Is this correct. I have read somewhere that we can treat all the regressors in ivstyle but i still don't understand why?

xtabond2 GII lag_GII log_FDIinflowreal NaturalresourceRent Generalgovernmentexpenditure GDPGrowth Schoolsecondaryfemale UrbanPopulationControl polity2 Fertilityrate Y*, gmm(GII, lag (0 5) collapse) iv( log_FDIinflowreal NaturalresourceRent Generalgovernmentexpenditure GDPGrowth Schoolsecondaryfemale UrbanPopulationControl polity2 Fertilityrate Y*, equation(level)) nodiffsargan two

> step robust orthogonal small

Dynamic panel-data estimation, two-step system GMM

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Group variable: countrycode Number of obs = 239

Time variable : Year Number of groups = 49

Number of instruments = 24 Obs per group: min = 1

F(17, 48) = 22.88 avg = 4.88

Prob > F = 0.000 max = 9

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| Corrected

GII | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval]

-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------------------------

lag_GII | .4063319 .1660706 2.45 0.018 .0724247 .7402392

log_FDIinflowreal | .0052016 .004571 1.14 0.261 -.0039891 .0143923

NaturalresourceRent | .0001336 .0007056 0.19 0.851 -.0012852 .0015523

Generalgovernmentexpenditure | -.0011517 .0027406 -0.42 0.676 -.0066621 .0043588

GDPGrowth | .0000538 .0011326 0.05 0.962 -.0022235 .0023311

Schoolsecondaryfemale | -.0015661 .0005599 -2.80 0.007 -.0026918 -.0004405

UrbanPopulationControl | .0002386 .000501 0.48 0.636 -.0007687 .0012459

polity2 | .0029176 .00107 2.73 0.009 .0007662 .005069

Fertilityrate | .0172748 .0121555 1.42 0.162 -.0071655 .0417151

Year | -.0002603 .0066672 -0.04 0.969 -.0136656 .013145

Yeardummy1 | .1047832 .1552767 0.67 0.503 -.2074215 .4169879

Yeardummy17 | -.006658 .0432925 -0.15 0.878 -.0937034 .0803874

Yeardummy18 | -.0006796 .0359611 -0.02 0.985 -.0729842 .071625

Yeardummy19 | -.0071339 .0330241 -0.22 0.830 -.0735332 .0592655

Yeardummy20 | -.0066488 .0261336 -0.25 0.800 -.0591938 .0458963

Yeardummy21 | .0021421 .0180578 0.12 0.906 -.0341655 .0384498

Yeardummy22 | .0005937 .0097345 0.06 0.952 -.0189789 .0201663

_cons | .8149224 13.41294 0.06 0.952 -26.15361 27.78345

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Instruments for orthogonal deviations equation

GMM-type (missing=0, separate instruments for each period unless collapsed)

L(0/5).GII collapsed

Instruments for levels equation

Standard

log_FDIinflowreal NaturalresourceRent Generalgovernmentexpenditure

GDPGrowth Schoolsecondaryfemale UrbanPopulationControl polity2

Fertilityrate Year Yeardummy1 Yeardummy2 Yeardummy3 Yeardummy4 Yeardummy5

Yeardummy6 Yeardummy7 Yeardummy8 Yeardummy9 Yeardummy10 Yeardummy11

Yeardummy12 Yeardummy13 Yeardummy14 Yeardummy15 Yeardummy16 Yeardummy17

Yeardummy18 Yeardummy19 Yeardummy20 Yeardummy21 Yeardummy22 Yeardummy23

Yeardummy24

_cons

GMM-type (missing=0, separate instruments for each period unless collapsed)

DL.GII collapsed

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Arellano-Bond test for AR(1) in first differences: z = -1.70 Pr > z = 0.090

Arellano-Bond test for AR(2) in first differences: z = 0.43 Pr > z = 0.669

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sargan test of overid. restrictions: chi2(6) = 18.25 Prob > chi2 = 0.006

(Not robust, but not weakened by many instruments.)

Hansen test of overid. restrictions: chi2(6) = 5.55 Prob > chi2 = 0.475

(Robust, but weakened by many instruments.)

.

we know that we use the following formula to find a turning point in income inequality researches:

Gini=B0 + B1gdp + B2gdp^2 + e

u = exp(-B1/2B2)

Gini=B0 + B1gdp + B2gdp^2 + B3gdp^3 + e;

For the cubic equation there will be two turning points as the derivative will be a quadratic equation.

this is the answer if you look for an answer for that equation

I am working on research related to planning for territorial resilience. I am looking forward to your contribution through discussion on recent planning and research initiatives, citizens' and communities' active engagement and or leadership in such initiatives. How do you see the nexuses and to what extent current planning are addressing these nexuses?

Every electron has a predetermined variable (a fixed quantum state). However, with the magnetic polarization applied in the measurement process, certain amount of energy can be added to each electron subject to the strength of the measurement (the angle of magnetic polarization). Therefore, for those electrons which have energy above the threshold energy, their spins can be flipped to the opposite directions. As a result, the possibility to find opposite spins in the transformation process is determined by the angle of the polarization which is conflict to "Superposition" in quantum theory where both spin up and spin down coexist in any single electron at all times. As to the entangled electrons (having same energy state but in opposite spin directions), because of the same threshold energy applies to both entangled electrons under the same measurement process (same angle of magnetic polarization), therefore, they will both either flip or stay un-flip together such that their entanglement is always maintained. In conclusion, "Superposition" is false meaning "God doesn't play dies". Also there is no talking between entangled electrons no matter how far the distance and how fast the communication are, meaning "No spooky behavior".

Bell’s Inequality is a mathematical theory based on Set Theory. It is true only if all elements in the sample space are equal; stay unchanged no matter of distribution. However, in photon polarization and electron entanglement transformation processes, subject to the polarization strength (the angle of polarization), photon and electron quantum states (Hidden Variables) can be changed by adding energy to the electrons or reducing energy from the photons during the transformation processes. In other words, all elements in the sample space are no longer the same elements. Therefore, Bell’s Inequality cannot be used to prove the existence of Hidden Variables. In fact, Hidden Variables exist simply to obey Locality and Realism. Einstein’s EPR Paradox and Hidden Variables are correct all time long.

Hi,

I want to create an index to measure inequality in education. First of all, it would be necessary to identify the inequality within the 5 educational level. Therefore, I seperated 5 level to calculate index for each one of them. First, I will calculate the indicators and then the dimension index for that education (primary, secondary, etc.) category.

Finally, I will weight each educational category by the total number of individuals in the data set. Or I will compare the general indexes I have obtained with each other considering to educational categories.

My question is, would that be a statistically valid approach? My aim is to create a multidimensional education inequality index using the education level.

(Note: I will use the PCA method to determine indicator and dimensions. The table is for illustrative purposes only)

Esteemed researchers,

I will need more insights and justifications into using "per capita consumption expenditure" as a measure of poverty.

Please refer me to applicable papers.

Thanks as always.

Ngozi

I'm looking into the question about how social uprisings (social movements, revolts, protests, etc.), particularly those who have a substantive violent character, elicit institutional change. I'm specifically interested in democracies (young or middle-aged) that exhibit a relevant degree of perceived unfairness and/or objective structural inequality, and in countries where the status quo institutional arrangement is "rigid" in a sense (many or some gridlocks are present).

Hence, I would be most grateful if you can share with me some references. Additionally, if you know of studies that emphasize quantitative methods, that would be very beneficial to my research.

Many thanks in advance, and I hope this message finds you safe and well.

Ignacio.

It can be said that government support can take different forms depending on the type of liberal democracy, equality based or inequality based. Hence, we should be able to expect to see specific type of government support associated with equality and inequality based liberal democracy, which raises the question, what type of government support should we expect in each case? What do you think?

The past month or so has been super busy as I've moved my lectures from the classroom to the virtual video meeting "room" while naturally been concerned about student welfare. Yet, this new "Coronavirus condition" has forced me to pause for reflection. The result is that I appear to be less preoccupied with conceptual or theoretical questions than with more empirical questions that can demonstrate

*impact*and help to*combat*suffering or social evils.- i.e. for men and women

- tell us first from which country you are from, or which country's situation you would like to share

- you can talk about discrimination in salaries, position/rank, promotion, entry/hiring, opportunities for growth, etc.

Dear colleagues,

do you have some EXCEL template for calculate GINI coefficient and create Lorenzo curve? I find some R packages but I am not sure how to use it on my date with population and income by region.

Inequality in salaries and wages between male and female has been used in all countries, as a competitive advantage by many companies. The strategy consists in paying low salaries to female, so as to reduce prodution cost. Low cost makes companies more competitive at international level.

Do you think gender discrimination is easy to fight? What is the situation in your country?

I have an ongoing ethnographic project on homeless' survival strategies, that I would like to discuss with you in some details and invite you to give me some feedback and just jot down some ideas you have regarding the issues I am raising below.

I am looking at the act of begging at the moment and try do describe it as a gift.

So far, I have come across many possible differentiations and distinctions that all not properly seem to work out in terms of making sense of what I observe and what the beggars themselves are actually telling me.

The classic theory of the gift (as Mauss, Malinowski, Boas) with its heavy emphasize on reciprocity is very hard to defend in the first instance. What are they giving back except for appreciation, a thank you? Might this already be enough to form a 'counter-gift' and in this way create a relationship? Are we to look at what I call a temporal fix - the counter-gift consists in the 'making-it-more-probable' to also get money being in the same situation anytime in the future? Might a 'good conscience' be valued as a counter gift? It additionally seems very problematic to not fall into the trap and perceive of reciprocity in a self-interest fashion - Gouldner's (1960) 'Norm' typology or Sahlin's (1974) continuum might be helpful here to clarify what one means. I am not really content with those ideas so far and none of them seems to hit the core.

So is the gift that one gives to an homeless beggar not really a gift in the classical sense but rather something one might describe as a commodity in Gregory's (1980) words: as an alienable object that is reciprocally independent not creating any relationship in the sense a gift is able to?

It seems as if the debate is again stuck in between the formalism or substantivist problematic that has been driving the discourse for years. But again the question in my particular case is similarly: in what way is it self-interest (as explained in the reciprocity argument above) that drives the giving, in which way is emotion of importance? Is it possible to follow Carrier (1991) and see the two as ends of a continuum in relation to giving to beggars?

In a very general sense I am also intrigued by Weiner's (1985, 1992) idea of inalienable possessions: does one actually give (money, good etc) in order to keep more valuable things (credit cards, marriage rings, a way of life) back? Might this be the 'inalienable possession' in this case? It seems also to link up in a certain way with another distinction that I came across in the course of the research: a beggar's regulars (people that see him regularly) and his one-offs (people that he sees once).

Regulars don't always give money, but rather fulfill certain wishes (often in terms of food) or simply spend some time with the beggar and devote some thought to his well-being. In this way, one might be able to argue, a more enduring and lasting social bond can be created through acts of giving (of time, talk and wishes). Such a regular also does not hold back - to nevertheless keep with Weiner, his gifts can still be inalienable (taking the distinction she draws in her earlier paper Inalienable Wealth: keeping-while-giving (as is the case with the regular) and giving-for-keeping) and contain a part of the owner (just think of time / talk in this way - you present yourself etc). On the other hand, the one-offs often give money and don't care about the beggar in a way a regular does. It might be here where one can introduce the presented notion of inalienable possessions: giving-for-keeping (as also Godelier (1999) puts forward) - they are giving in order to keep the more valuable possessions.

Does this notion seem completely far-fetched for you in this context?

A further issue is obviously the role money plays in this whole process:

what difference does it make that it is money that beggars mainly get?

Is it right as again Gregory (1980) or also Cheal (1987) point out that money destroys gift economies (in the particular sense that he defines them) and is an expression of 'disembodied interest'?

I am calculating a value that is computed by dividing the derivative of the cumulative distribution function by the value of the distribution function at that point. It is of the form:

𝐽=𝐹′(𝑥) / 𝐹(𝑥)

Where 𝐹(𝑥)is the cumulative distribution function. To get the confidence band on 𝐹(𝑥)I can use the DKF Inequality.

**How do I get the confidence bands on J?**It is often argued that even in low- and middle-income countries social protection or, more in general, social policies can improve social cohesion and state-society relationship. However, it is very difficult to find evidence to support this argument. Do you know any empirical study?

I am struggling with measuring inequality in health-workforce between regions based on number of workers in each region and region population using Atkinson index (spreadsheet is in attachment). Is there anyone willing to help me where I made mistake?

Thanks,

AM

Dear All

I have conducted a multilevel model for binary outcome (self-rated health), using Stata .

About 72000 individuals at level 1 are nested within 50 countries at level 2.

The number of countries is rather small, to obtain more robust estimate I performed bayesian melogit and the Deviance Information Criterion (DIC) was used to compare the fit of different models. Is this correct ? or using melogit (instead of MCMC estimate) the result will be robust enough?

Below is the code I have:

bayes, mcmcsize(2500) : melogit Health centered_Age i.Sex i.Marital i.Income i.Percived-Inequality lnGDP GINI || Country: , or

Any comments or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Basing on “potential infinite--actual infinite”, do we have only following three different operating ideas and results of quantitative studying and cognizing on “elements in infinite sets” in present classical infinite set theory?

（1）With the idea of “potential infinite”: Denying the essential differences of infinite set elements’ “special nature, special existing condition, special manifestation and special relationship among each other”, so, elements in all different infinite sets are only heaps of infinite “indiscriminative, nonquantitative, abstract points” and it is unnecessary and impossibale to have any quantitative studying and cognizing on “infinite elements (points) in infinite sets”, the number of elements in all infinite sets are the same and it is just infinite. For example, elements in many infinite mother sets and their sub-sets are in fact all the same stuff of infinite “indiscriminative, nonquantitative, abstract points” without any differences of “nature, existing condition, manifestation and relationship among each other”. The typical cases are “the element numbers in Rational Numbers Set and Natural Numbers Set are equal, the element numbers in Natural Numbers Set and Even Numbers Set are equal and they are just all infinite”. The conclution is: any infinite set has limitless, endlees, infinite elements, so their “one-to-one coresponding operations” of quantitative studying and cognizing on “infinite elements (points) in infinite sets” can be carried on for ever and their element numbers are all “equally infinite”. Going along this train of thought, one can understand and construct those theorms and proofs related to the idea of “different infinite sets, equal element numbers”.

（2）With the idea of “actual infinite”: Affirming the essential differences of infinite set elements’ “special nature, special existing condition, special manifestation and special relationship among each other”, so, elements in all different infinite sets can be “discriminative, quantitative visible and tangible mathematical things” and it is necessary and possibale to have all kinds of quantitative studying and cognizing on “infinite elements in infinite sets”. For example, there are different “special nature, special existing condition, special manifestation and special relationship among each other” betwee elements in Real Numbers Set and Natural Numbers Set, so, these two infinite sets have different element numbers. The typical cases are “the element numbers in Real Numbers Set are more than that of Natural Numbers Set, the element numbers in Power Set are more than that of its original set and they are all inequal”. The conclution is: Different infinite sets may have different element numbers. So, in the “one-to-one coresponding operations” of quantitative studying and cognizing on infinite elements of two different infinite sets, the elements in smaller set with fewer elements are consumed and finished soon, it means the element numbers in such an infinite set are not endlees and limitless at all (fake infinite); but in the begger set, infinite many elements are left during this operations, this means its elements are endlees and limitless (real infinite), never be consumed and finished at all, the “one-to-one coresponding operations” here can never be carried on for ever at all. Going along this train of thought, one can understand and construct those theorms and proofs related to the idea of “different infinite sets, different element numbers”.

（3）With the idea of mixture “potential infinite--actual infinite”: The above different operating ideas and results of quantitative studying and cognizing on “elements in infinite sets” in present classical infinite set theory are both acknowledged “OK” and accepted. This inevitably makes us unable to cognize scientifically and clearly the infinite sets and their elements we are facing to in many situations------- being caught in a paradoxical status of arbitrary, self-contradictory and non-self-justification. So, Russell's Paradox as well as its family members in different periods of time have been generated, developed and suspended. Following two cases are typical examples--------First case: with the idea of “potential infinite”, we claim “certain infinite set with its defined elements can be constructed”, than we claim “some of these elements actually can not be included within this very infinite set” with the idea of “actual infinite” and find out those “belonging to but uncontained elements of this set” to prove all kinds of family members of Russell's Paradox in different periods of time (My stuedies proved that whenever we come to any case of “elements belonging to but impossibly contained in a set, a defined group of things”, we come to a situation of “confusing whole and portion” -------- traped immediately into “potential infinite--actual infinite”. Liar’s Paradox, Post Card Paradox,... are all family members of Russell's Paradox) . Second case: with the idea of “potential infinite”, we have proved “the elements in Rational Number Set are equal to the elements in Natural Number Set”, but at the same time we can prove “the elements in Rational Number Set are infinite more than the elements in Natural Number Set” because just a tiny portionof the rational numbers from Rational Number Set (such as a subset of 1, 1/2, 1/3, 1/4, 1/5, 1/6, …, 1/n …) can map and use up (bijective) well all the numbers in Natural Number Set (1,2,3,...,n,...), so a lot of (infinite) rational numbers are left behind in this one-to-one mapping from the Rational Number Set onto the Natural Number Set and construct the “’Countable-uncountable’ Paradox of Rational Number Set”. Going along this train of thought, one can understand and construct all kinds of family members of Russell's Paradox in different periods of time. The conclution is: the quantitative studying and cognizing theories and operations in present classical infinite set theory are too arbitrary and lack of scientific basic theory.

Hi Folks,

I am looking for a validated survey tool to track changes in participants' notions of power and inequality in society. Rather than reinventing the wheel, I am wondering if anyone has, or has used one that I may be able to draw from in an upcoming study.

In fact, “Inequality” is a common observation in several field among us, as physicist I’m worry about our contributions for future society.

Study this article and let us know your thinking:

Hello,

I have a very interesting case on relationship between poverty and inequality based on the case from Georgia.

International poverty rates are used in the study to measure extreme ($1.25 per day), relative (60% of median consumption) and general ($2.50) poverty rates. Those rates are converted with the exchange rate in Georgian Lari (GEL) and then estimated equivalent monthly average for each threshold.

Poverty rates are measures in terms of average consumption per equivalent adult (PAE).

It turns out that all poverty rates from 2015 to 2017 increased. While inequality measured in terms of per equivalent adult consumption decreased marginally Gini 2015= 0.36 vs Gini 2017=0.35648 (almost no change).

Rural Gini = 2015 - 0.346 ; 2017 - 0.355

Urban Gini = 2015 - 0.365 ; 2017 - 0.354

On national level consumption inequality did not change (change is marginal), whereas Gini in rural areas increased and for urban areas decreased. Meanwhile poverty rates increased. Nationally, real average consumption decreased by 10% between 2015-2017. Especially in the poorest decile.

Question: Can poverty rates increase while Gini decreases? I think increase in Gini does not necessarily means automatic decrease in poverty rates.

Your contributions are very welcomed !!!

Best regards,

Davit

Or any other studies that might be relevant to this topic?

Governments are always looking around for new ways of raising taxes, so here is a new one, a gene tax. It will be greeted with howls of rage, but then so is every new tax proposal. Those with genetic advantages should be taxed proportionately, as they will be so much more successful in later life. This should also be a spur to those few who do not make full use of their abilities for the public good, but are content to be free loaders. At the other end, many have genetic disorders causing chronic distress and poverty, and they should be correspondingly compensated.

In the first step I have used absolute beta convergence models as specified below:

In[Y_( i, t+k)/Y_(i,t) ]= α+β.ln(Y_(i.t) )+ε_it

Where In[Y_( i, t+k)/Y_(i,t) ] is the mean annualized growth rate of the variable Y in state i in the period (t, t+k), Y_(i.t) is the value in the initial time t and ε_it are corresponding residuals.

Then estimated speed of convergence as

The speed of convergence is computed as s = −1/T (ln (1+Tβ). Where s= speed of convergence and Tβ is the β-convergence in T period.

However, when beta value is larger this equation is not yielding any result. What does this indicate?

I am researching racism in France, related policies and their effects, but most of what I find is in English by US authors. I would like to read on this issue in French by French scholars/writers. Also, I am interested in different/opposing pov.

Many thanks

Mary Helen C

I would like to study the opinion of European citizens' on European integration, using a European survey with direct questions in merit and others such as income, preferred political party, and so forth. Then I would like to understand if there is a correlation between the results of this regression and the level of inequality within each country.

I am afraid of using the Gini index (or any other index based on income) to proxy inequality in this second regression, since there could be a problem of correlated variables. What could I possibly do? Is there an alternative index that I could use and that would still make sense?

I want to get the inequality data for developing countries for atleast 30 yrs. and want to use EHII UTIP inequality data. But the problem is this data is latest available from 1968-2008 and i want to use it till 2015. Searching certain papers i find out that some people have expanded this data using world bank data and method "Out of sample" forecasting.could anyone guide me how to expand the available data and details about using this forecasting method.

Thanks

Social closure is an important mechanism leading to inequality in life outcomes. We are particularly interested in items measuring how people feel about processes of social closure, to what extent they feel them legitimate or not.

Thanks!

As New York has mapped the income levels along individual subway lines, earnings range from poverty to considerable wealth, namely income inequality exist obviously.

But how and when such inequality form along the time, i.g. before, in the middle and after the construction of metro? The procedure is rather complex, relating with the change of accessibility, spillover of land price and house price, agglomeration of economic activities, increase of commercial and housing investment, job attraction, etc.

Does this inequality has a spatial pattern? That is the spatial difference of the degree of inequality between the regions near to the metro and the ones slightly far away from the metro. And how does spatial pattern of income inequality evolve or change before, in the middle and after the construction of metro? Maybe the evolution of such income inequality will be impacted greatly by the density of metro, gentrification, sub-urbanization, urban renewal, built environment, etc.

I plan a project. The project's aim is to determine inequality behaviours against students in schools. So I am looking for paper, book etc. about this topic.

1. What are the issues of inequality against the students within or outside the classroom?

Best regards,

Gamze Kasalak

My terminology here is from "Measure Theory" by JL Doob, Springer Graduate Texts in Mathematics, 1994. Metric and pseudometric spaces are described on pages 3 to 5.

My question is what happens if the triangle inequality is an equality so we have the distance formula d(s, u) = d(s, t) + d(t, u). This can only be true if every distance is 1, and 1 = 1 + 1 because every a = a

^{2}.Now if the pseudometric distance formula is d(s, s) = 0, does this follow directly from the triangle equality or is there something else required? Is d(s, s) = 0 the same as the Borel function f(x, y) = 0 where x = y?

What I am hoping is that if there is an algebra of subsets where every set is a singleton, then that by itself makes a pseudometric space with a distribution on the Borel Square [0, 1] x [0, 1]. Does the triangle equality automatically make an L-space?

May be it is not that simple. If the triangle equality metric alone does not make a pseudometric space by itself, what does? A field of zeros? What if I have the algebra formed by the union, intersection, and compliment of an elemental set? What if I have a set, a relation, an agumented frame, and a map?

My goal here is to show that music structures are a pseudometric space where a probability distribution is imposed on pitch values by the set construction operation. This follows my previous question demonstrating that music theory is a 3-fold structure, not two fold as commonly thought. In a 2-fold structure there is no way to understand why every note does not have a probability of 1/12..

looking beyond the conventional measures of poverty, it seems interesting to look at the non economic factors so that a better measure of poverty can be calculated. while going through some of the literature on poverty, I found the inequality of opportunity more interesting to look into the factors which are more due to circumstances than the the level of effort which one puts in. so here the debate is about Circumstances Vs Efforts.

please help me out in getting more literature on this issue. How should I calcute this kind of inequality?

Disaggregated data collection and analysis is recommended for policy development to address race inequality. Moreover it provides a useful tool to address Afro-phobia and other forms of xenophobia.

I'm interested in institutional inequality and structural impediments as they relate to gender and WPS. Anyone have links to good papers/experts or ideas on how to frame the issue?

Anything related to barriers, challenges, benefits and policies

I understand

$$\begin{split} -a^{i,j}D_{i,j}v&= -\eta a^{i,j}D_{i,j}w-2a_{i,j}D_{i}\eta D_{j}w-wa^{i,j}D_{i,j}\eta \\

&\leq \eta(-a^{i,j}D_{i}wD_{j}w+b_{i}D_{i}w+|c|+g)-2a^{i,j}D_{i}\eta D_{j}w-wa^{i,j}D_{i,j}\eta.

\end{split}$$

But I could not understand how the right hand side of above inequality is less than

$$\frac{2}{\eta}a^{i,j}D_{i}\eta D_{j}\eta-w a^{i,j}D_{ij}\eta+(|b|^{2}+|c|+g)?$$

Seeking a brief assessment of material hardship for inclusion in a survey. Considering following Mayer & Jenck's (1989) inclusion of 1) SNAP/food stamp receipt, 2) not enough money for housing, 3) not enough money to pay bills, and 4) not enough money for healthcare. Wondering if anyone has guidance or suggestions based on recent research?

_{ How can I solve Riccati inequality in Matlab using a modified function "care"? See attachment, please. }

If so, what is its form and significance and is there a connection between temporal and spatial Uncertainty? For example, is the temporal uncertainty asymmetric, so that the forward component is associated with greater disorder?

In LP, we define a non-negative dual variable for each inequality constraint, and an unrestricted dual variable for each equality constraints. In this sense, how can I get these variables without formulating the dual model (i.e., only through the results of the primal model)? Is it possible with GAMS?

According to Frances Stewart, horizontal inequalities (inequalities between groups) in its various dimensions (economic, socio cultural and political ) are the main sources of conflict in most conflict stricken countries. It is argued that economic inequalities provide fertile ground for conflict, socio-cultural inequalities bind groups together, and political inequalities provide incentives for leaders to mobilize people for rebellion. Is there a threshold of the extent of such inequalities ( in one or all dimensions) beyond which it spur grievances and mobilize people leading to conflict ? or is it the mismatch between these three dimension driving the violent conflict?

There exist public and private schools,where as the private schools have conditions to their registration,public schools owned and run by the Government do not meet the same standards.

There are expectations that one has to meet in this schools to learn which depend on individual households.

Nationwide the infrastructure that supports learning vary from one school to the other yet they also support learning which is finally examined in a standardized manner.

Surprisingly,even schools with the same number of children do not have the same number of teachers, especially with regards to their location.

I am just starting a research project on this topic (more concretely: ageism and inequality in Ecuador). While I do have some idea on each one of the topics, I have a hard time to bring them together - does anyone of you know about studies on ageism and inequality, maybe with a policy perspective?

without having to suffer the problem of bias associated with endogeniety in a country like Nigeria

I want to calibrate a numerical model of wealth inequality. For this purpose I need data on the current distribution of wealth in the OECD countries (aggregate over all OECD countries is sufficient). The level of detail should comprise at least wealth quintiles.

I am looking for an inequality indicator that can be derived from the distribution of a population in five discrete poverty classes derived from the Latin American NBI (Necesidades Basicas Insatisfechas) methodology. The methodology ascribes each household of a locality (urban or rural) a "NBI index" in function of income, housing, education, etc. and then ascribe it to one of five "poverty classes" , etc, which are "non-poor, poverty line, moderate poverty, indigent, marginal". I have only data on the number of households per class per locality, not the NBI index per household.

Should emerging India be at ease with inequality?

I am now reading Piketty's

*Capital in the 21st Century*. It is a wonderful statistical research work and should be a model that all economists must learn from it. I have no intention to throw any doubt on his fact findings.My question is concerned with

**the logic**which connects the fact*r*>*g*and the rising inequality of income and wealth.In the Kaldor-Pasinetti framework of growth and distribution, we have the following long run relation

*g*=

*s*

_{c}

*r*,

where

*s*_{c}stands for the capitalists' propensity to save (I omit all the necessary conditions for the validity of this equation). See equation (14) of Pasinetti (1962) Rate of Profit and Income Distribution in Relation to the Rate of Economic Growth.*Review of Economics Studies***29**(4): 267-279. , p.272) .In this case the rate of investment and by consequence the rate of accumulation of capital is equal to the growth rate. Then capital assets or the total wealth grow at the same rate as the total income and therefore the workers' income (if we assume that workers' share in the income remains constant).

Can anyone explain Piketty's logic? I want to know in what sense Piketty calls relation r>g the

**driving force of rising inequality**.The topic of inequality and its social as well as economic implications is a very discussed topic (specially after Piketty´s book came out).

Most research I´ve come across with concentrates around the relationship between income inequality and growth. So I´m looking for some good papers on the relationship between wealth inequality and economic growth.

Any suggestions?

Thanks!

The aim is to find how, why and where infrastructure is creating inequality/inequity/disparity?

And is there any easy way, how a town planner should try to remove inequality or inequity from the society - what should be the priority as both have different pros? Is there any way, that political interference can also be reduced while providing infrastructure and prioritizing it?

Case study will help, especially from India.

Has anyone done research by using the literary term Strategic Essentialism, coined by Spivak? Do you think this term has any use? I need some opinions...thanks!

India has demonstrated considerable progress in the past decade on improving primary, school access, infrastructure, pupil-teacher ratios, teacher salaries, and student enrollment.

Nevertheless, student learning levels and trajectories are disturbingly low. Our system is known for encouraging students to memorize rather than foster creativity and independent thinking. Also, even today in India, unfortunately where a child comes from does go on to dictate who he can become. How do we deal with this educational inequity?

What would it take to completely overhaul the system and create equity in education and progressive policies along with a generation of enthusiastic learners and teachers? what do you think?

I am planning a cross-cultural study that includes developed and developing countries. My research questions deal with the effects of the provision of care for labour market participation. Typically, the provision of care is studied in developed countries using Esping-Andersen’s typology and in developing countries using variations of Evers et al (1994) or Razavi 2007 “care diamond”. The Esping-Andersen typology is a poor choice for developing countries but the concept of a care diamond could be an appropriate concept in both developed and developing countries. I am looking for advice about the feasibility of this approach. References on the subject would also be appreciated.

I am looking for the methodology which can be used to estimate the inequality of opportunity using household level data.

Foe years we have come out with wonderful performances of our students, with flying colors. Indeed, the rat race competition helped our children to outperform their best.

Yet, many researches reveal the negative impact of our schools, and no actions have been taken. Students find themselves struggling in an unknown war, consequently, missing their childhood and innocence at early ages.

Are we destroying our species?

In particular, I am interested in (diversity related) interaction, e.g. in management, in museum or educational work, in cooperation structures etc. but I will be glad of any information on organisation research in this field.

What are some experiences of integrating street vendors/workers in developing countries into the formal economy through legal protections to help them continue their endeavors and what suggestions can be made on ways to enhance their business capacities?

Piketty proposes a simple underlying equation r>g, meaning that the return on capital (property, stock and other forms of ownership) is consistently higher than economic growth.

Piketty strongly suggests that the structures of capitalism are not only regenerate worsening inequality, but now drive us toward a system of economic peonage and political autocracy.

Measures and boundaries of middle-class status are controversial. Usually, in assigning a person to the category of middle-class one might employ "objective" measures such as income, wealth, education, occupation, and so on. At the same time, middle-class status has also been studied from a subjective perspective (i.e., subjective definitions or self-identification). Leaving these issues aside, I am looking for commonly used measures of middle-class status using income (and median or mean income). All suggestions and sources are welcome.

I will be conducting both a qualitative and quantitative research for a class in methods this semester for which your help will be greatly appreciated.

Marcel Lenoir (1913) found that the price of gold was the same in 1800 as in 1910, with a 2.8% increase from the mines of the world. Since 1970 gold has dramatically increased and yet inequality has grown dramatically and wages stagnated, while asset classes have exploded in value. Related?. Lenoir, Etude sur la Formation et le Mouvement des Prix, Paris, 1913.

Looking for most influential relations between these two categories. How does discrimination make poverty stronger and vice versa?

Human capital theory suggests that there is a direct relationship between the level of education and income, under this premise, the OECD encourages countries to invest in education to reduce existing wage disparities. However, for developing countries the effects of spending on education tend to be oscillatory. That's when the question arises about whether developing countries should substantially increase the level of spending on education, if so, it would be advisable to do so at all levels?

Finally, it is possible to reach an optimal level of spending on education, which maximize the benefits of society? if so, under what arguments would be valid

What authors, studies, projects, research teams work with this kind of indicators?