Electron Drift and Murder Rates

     I have met with a lot of criticism for my posts on income inequality and muder rates (e.g. here). The primary criticism is that people are far more complex than my posts might suggest and that it is not abstract notions such as 'income inequality' that determine a person's actions but rather their personal history. As a result I am compelled to respond.

     To do so I begin with an (classical) analogy from physics; the notion of drift velocity. Electrons in a conducting wire tend to'wander' about in random directions at approximately 1570 km/s. This random movement is akin to the complex lives of individuals. Impossible to describe and predict, it accounts for most of the movement of the electrons. Likewise, individual events in our lives account for our characters and habits.
     Now, what occurs when we apply an electric field to our copper wire. The electrons dash off! Well........at a speed of the order of roughly one metre per hour (in the wiki example of 1mm diameter copper wire with a current of 3 amps). Clearly this 'drift velocity' is swamped by the random motion of the electron (illustrated well here). In this case the applied field acts as the 'environment' or 'backdrop' for the charges.
       In a similar vein, income inequality forms the backdrop and environment for members of a society. The slow drift of the electrons is comparable to the increase in murder rates. While it is the individual's life and circumstances that determine whether or not they will murder, certain conditions (be they economic or otherwise) tend to make certain experiences, certain viewpoints, certain actions more likely. So to claim that high levels of income inequality affect the homicide rate is not to make a deterministic statement and the remarks "Oh I grew up in such a neighbourhood and yet I'm not a murderer!' miss the point entirely. It is simply the case that certain conditions make certain results more likely. In any case, I strongly recommend reading some papers about income inequality and homicide rates. (A very nice example can be found here).

The Borders of Absurdity

   The inanity of U.S. politics has never ceased to me amaze me but two incidents as of late leave me somewhat stunned. First we have the crashing of a U.S. spy-drone in Iran. While in itself not hugely exciting, what is interesting is the U.S. response, to ask for the drone back. Only in a completely topsy-turvy world could someone ask for a crashed spy-drone back and yet in mainstream media in the U.S. the outrage is over Iran's refusal to return the drone. Even comedians have lashed out at Iran's intransigence. For me this is a symptom of how nonsensical U.S. discourse has become. Consider the contrary situation, an Iranian spy-drone crashes in the U.S. and the Iranian government asks for it back. What would be the likely response? It would receive howls of laughter from the press, it would serve as yet another example of Iran's disconnect with reality.
   The second example I'll give concerns Newt Gingrich's comments about making poor children work as janitors in order to pay for their education. In any reasonable world this should have resulted in his immediate disqualification for office, the newspapers would read "Child Labour Scandal: Gingrich resigns amid howls of fury" (throw a pun in and you might get closer to today's newspapers). In the mad world that is U.S. politics however this comment had little or no impact on Gingrich's election chances. There has been no real media outcry, there has been no backlash.
   These incidents are by no means isolated but rather are indicative of a trend in U.S. (and to a much lesser extent, World) politics. What facilitates this madness however? The psychology is simple. When one encounters an unfamiliar scenario one tends to take their cue from those around them. This effect is well studied and applies across society whether it involves etiquette in a fancy restaurant or whether or not to give to the homeless man ahead. In the case of novel political events or policies the public tends to be primed by the media and tends to judge the outrageousness of any statement based on the outrage expressed in the media. If the media presents such positions as acceptable then the public at large presumes they must be.
     This feeds in to the increasingly absurd and extreme positions held by many candidates, particularly those in the Republican primaries as of late. Interestingly, none of the candidates that have fallen in popularity have done so due to policy positions. Indeed Perry fell not because he wanted to annihilate the Department of Education (surely an extreme position) but instead he fell in the polls due to not being able to remember which departments he would get rid of. Likewise, Cain and Bachmann lost top spot due to gaffes and scandal rather than (in my view) the insanity of the policy positions which they were actually able to communicate.
    We live in a world where increasingly bizarre positions are glossed over by a press which instead concentrates on gaffes. There is no outrage over the idea of getting rid of the Department of Education, instead the outrage is expressed over a bad memory. With this sleight of hand the position becomes legitimised and there is no real examination of the policy itself. In this fashion any position can be made to seem reasonable and can be presented to the public by focusing on trivial points related to it. In this fashion ideas such as child labour, abolishing the Department of Education and the returning of crashed spy-drones all stow their way into public discourse as reasonable ideas, indeed as non-controversial ideas. What do you think?

Where are the protests?

       With unemployment standing at 14.4% and rising, and with the economy still contracting (GNP down by 2.2% last quarter), why on Earth are the the people of Ireland not taking to the streets like their counterparts in countries like Greece and Spain? While some grumble about the poor weather I am inclined to see emigration as the primary dampener, not the rain. Emigration is rather high in Ireland in comparison to the size of the population and has been rising throughout the recession. Furthermore many of these emigrants are young. January to April this year saw a 45% increase on last year with 33,100 emigrants in the 15-24 age group and 34,400 in the 24-44 age group and only 7,200 who were above 44.
   
        Given that the average instigator of a riot tends to be a newly graduated unemployed male it is unsurprising that the high levels of emigrating have, in effect, prevented large scale protest. Not only does the high level of emigrating reduce the overall unemployment rate (thus leaving those who stay less affected) it also saps the country of the energetic and angry youths who would be on the streets in Spain or Greece, or indeed the Arab world. This high level of emigration seems integral to the Taoiseach Kenny's strategy. Not only does it prevent any major protest against his punitive budget cuts but it also leaves an Ireland with a much older population and given that older people tend to vote for Fine Gael that can't be a bad thing in his eyes.