Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site psuvax1.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!ucbvax!ucdavis!lll-crg!seismo!rochester!cmu-cs-pt!cadre!psuvax1!berman From: berman@psuvax1.UUCP (Piotr Berman) Newsgroups: net.politics.theory Subject: Re: Re: (micromotives & macrobehavior) Message-ID: <1790@psuvax1.UUCP> Date: Sat, 14-Sep-85 16:37:06 EDT Article-I.D.: psuvax1.1790 Posted: Sat Sep 14 16:37:06 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 18-Sep-85 02:38:28 EDT References: <3476@topaz.UUCP> <28200078@inmet.UUCP> Organization: Pennsylvania State Univ. Lines: 29 > > > [Mike Huybenz] > > The fact is that the wealth of a nation does not feed the poor. > > Omit the "not" to get a fact. In the USA, one can eat like a > king off a garbage dump. One hour's work at McDonald's could feed > a 3d world citizen for a week. > > To prove his point, Mike would have to name a rich nation whose > poor are *poor* not by THAT country's standards, but *by poor > country standards*. There's no such place. > > The poor of any nation know they profit by its wealth. Proof: > they seldom or never migrate to poorer countries, at least for > economic reasons. > > Jan Wasilewsky At this moment it is difficult to name an example. The reason is simple: all rich countries have mixed economies with mechanisms for income redistribution. Thus one must invoke 19th century and the first part of 20th century. 19th century gives example of Potato famine in Ireland. The peasants of western Ireland were poor by any standard, in spite of the relative wealth of the Great Britain as the whole. In USA, sharecropers in the South and habitants of Appallachia were also poor, not "poor". Piotr Berman