tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38545607.post6929460483245243199..comments2024-03-09T10:26:48.789+00:00Comments on economics, psychology, policy: Inequality and health: the non-causal linkEmma Watsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11466193733741012673noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38545607.post-14401089659860741912010-07-12T20:11:08.288+00:002010-07-12T20:11:08.288+00:00I'd need to read those papers more closely. Bu...I'd need to read those papers more closely. But one would need to distinguish between the variation between my income & others and the pure variance. <br />So in the example I gave, why would an increase in the variance between my income & Liam's stress you out ? (You don't have to answer that btw).<br />One might also think that these stress effects are asymmetric: I'm stressed because certain people are paid more than me. That certain others are paid less than me doesn't bother me unduly. Frankly, I can see an upside. Variance is neutral between up and down, of course.<br />So without really having read the literature, I am inclined to think this is quite a 'mare of a problem to get to grips with.Kevin Dennyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17891633553910348880noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38545607.post-49935802147633864862010-07-11T16:28:53.142+00:002010-07-11T16:28:53.142+00:00Are they not making the argument that your health ...Are they not making the argument that your health depends on the variance of income because stress levels are higher (given any particular income, and the Whitehall studies show this holds even in well off cohorts), the greater the distance between you and the individuals above you in the distributionMark McGovernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17133619200829364366noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38545607.post-7218170606680114152010-07-09T21:29:22.288+00:002010-07-09T21:29:22.288+00:00Mark, my understanding of those papers is that the...Mark, my understanding of those papers is that they are saying thats its stressful for you if you are at the bottom of the pile so the health of i depends on rank of i, say. Thats not too controversial. <br />Whereas the W&P argument is, as I understand it, that individual health is affected by characteristics of the distribution of health so the health of i is affected by the variance, say. So, in that case, lets say my income and Liam's income become more different then this would be bad for your health. Thats quite a different proposition. One thats hard to rationalize too.Kevin Dennyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17891633553910348880noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38545607.post-48862990453764191962010-07-09T15:10:58.533+00:002010-07-09T15:10:58.533+00:00The authors were in Dublin around this time last y...The authors were in Dublin around this time last year, and were interviewed on <a href="http://www.tv3.ie/videos.php?video=10218&locID=1.65.169&page=7" rel="nofollow"> Vincent Browne </a> (where else?). Hard evidence is difficult to come by, however I think the Whitehall studies are pretty compelling in showing a link between health and social status/stress e.g. <a href="http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/314/7092/1472" rel="nofollow">this paper</a>. Probably deserves a separate post.<br /><br /> I was at their presentation, and of course they “prove” nothing, but I personally find that the descriptive stats present an important challenge to social scientists. They are very consistent; you can pick pretty much whatever indicator you like, infant mortality, obesity, teenage pregnancy etc. And more unequal societies are not more innovative. Some examples from <a href="http://www.equalitytrust.org.uk/resources/slides" rel="nofollow">here</a>. At least they were using Stata.Mark McGovernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17133619200829364366noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38545607.post-70708565435691730932010-07-08T15:09:27.058+00:002010-07-08T15:09:27.058+00:00Yes, the statistical artefact argument does imply ...Yes, the statistical artefact argument does imply that redistribution of the sort you describe should increase overall health. What Deaton and others have also tried to do is to see if there is any pathway whereby say an increase in inequality could lead to a deterioration in someone's health (holding their income constant) and this is where they run into problems. Its also worth pointing out that W&P suggests that inequality plays a role in a lot of other "social pathologies" like crime etcDavid Maddennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38545607.post-3397995356540308802010-07-08T12:44:30.018+00:002010-07-08T12:44:30.018+00:00Nice to know I am in good company. Actually, calli...Nice to know I am in good company. Actually, calling it "non-causal" as I did is a bit misleading: there is an effect but its a very different mechanism. So where W&P argue that inequality affects individual health & therefore the mean, with this route it has no individual effect but still affects the mean.<br />So the argument is that if you take a few thousand from such rich guy like Denis O'Brien (or a few million in the case of Adam Clayton) he's not going to notice and so if you give it to some homeless people you will increase the health of the poor by more than you diminish that of the rich, given concavity. <br />So its just boring old diminishing returns. But it still provides an argument for reducing inequality to improve health. So thats not really just a statistical artifact or is this different from the aggregation argument?Kevin Dennyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17891633553910348880noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38545607.post-58045729562035075772010-07-08T11:56:37.344+00:002010-07-08T11:56:37.344+00:00You are right, Kevin. This particular link betwee...You are right, Kevin. This particular link between health and income inequality has been labelled the "statistical artefact" by Hugh Gravelle (I think) and is also referred to by Angus Deaton in a number of his articles on this issue. What Deaton (and others) have tried to do is to come up with a convincing link between income inequality and health outcomes apart from this statistical artefact. My reading of the literature is that so far they have met with only limited success. But as I have said elsewhere, the jury is still out on this question.David Maddennoreply@blogger.com