LESSWRONG
LW

All of subjectobject's Comments + Replies

Universal Basic Income and Poverty
subjectobject10

I rephrased it to provide a hint about the paper's content, making it easier for others to locate and read the original work. I am very familiar with the paper and have studied it to some extent. I didn't want to share 'what I think,' hoping smarter people can make more out of it by reading the whole thing, as I am not active here and don't care about upvotes. However, I was uncertain about the legality of sharing the entire paper or any excerpts/data since I don't hold the rights to it.

I find the reaction quite disappointing because the paper addresses ve... (read more)

Reply
gwern3720

(Note that LLM-written or edited comments are not looked on too kindly on LW2, unless they are making a point, and if you are doing it as a joke, it is likely to backfire.)

Reply1
On Stateless Societies
subjectobject10

In this one there is plenty of archeological evidence as it is co-authored by D.Wengrow who is a Professor of Comparative Archaeology.

I believe Graeber could benefit from a more insistent editor. His writing sometimes seems like ‘stream of consciousness’ and outside of the constraints of academic distinction.

On the other hand, his work and ideas circulate well beyond the discipline or anthropology and well beyond academia which allowed him to write in his own way I guess.

Reply
On Stateless Societies
subjectobject10

I highly recommend the dawn of everything as well. It is probably the most recent, up to date book on stateless societies. 

Why do you have a problem with 'rigor' side in his books?

Reply
2Martin Sustrik
I haven't seen the latest book, but the older ones I've seen were written in the traditional anthropological way, mostly as collections of anecdata. That's not an objection specifically against Graeber. Anthropology was always done that way. But rigor-wise it doesn't compare to more modern stuff, like, say, Joe Henrich.
Perpetual Dickensian Poverty?
subjectobject*10

Not sure how to gain insight by making such a comparison in the first place, twitter is... I agree that using the cost of labor is not the best way to calculate; however, there is an issue with the calculation of poverty for the period prior to 1981.

This paper finds that the $1.90/day (PPP) line is lower than the level of consumption of enslaved people in the United States in the 19th century.  
 

Reply
Is the world becoming better?
subjectobject*10

That data on poverty is misleading.

For the period prior to 1981, the graph relies on estimates of GDP and income distribution from Bourguignon and Morrison.

Unlike household surveys, the B&M data does not provide information on people's access to livelihoods or provisioning, and it does not adequately capture changes in non-commodity forms of household consumption (subsistence, vegetables, fish, game, foraging, commons etc). This becomes problematic because we know that during periods of enclosure and dispossession under colonialism and early industrial... (read more)

Reply