[RD] Daily Graphs and Charts

[kronic]

My best guesses as to the legend (not provided by source):
x-axis: length of time a stock is held in seconds
y-axis: trade volume (time unit unknown)

No, I think the x-axis shows the opening hours. AFAIK, NYSE is opened 9.30 am to 4 pm. The y-axis should represent HFT volume.

 

[Monsterzuma]

That makes a lot of sense. Post edited.

 

[Winner]

Is the US finally approaching the standards of the civilized world?

 

[luiz]

Another interesting development in the US:

Showing once again that crime is not caused by unemployment, poverty, etc.

 

[Mise]

I don't know anyone who says that violent crime is caused by unemployment or poverty. Acquisitive crimes, such as burglary, may be partly caused by economic problems such as unemployment and poverty.

There is inconclusive evidence that burlgaries and petty thefts are on the rise due to the recent recession: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14151775

 

[luiz]

I know a lot of people who say violent crime is caused by poverty and unemployment. In fact it's the "common knowledge" explanation for Brazil's bizarre violence rates. It's also completely wrong.

 

[Mise]

Well, don't just say "unemployment does not cause crime", because numerous studies (and studies of studies) have in fact shown that unemployment and property/acquisitive crime are strongly correlated, both at an absolute level (region vs region) and when unemployment increases or decreases in the same region. Indeed, the police themselves use the relationship between changes in the unemployment rate and increases in acquisitive crimes to allocate policing resources during recessions.

Violent crime is at any rate a relatively small subset of overall crime rates. If you want to say that "unemployment does not affect overall crime rates", then you would be better off posting a graph of overall crime rates, which IIRC have continued to fall in the UK during the recession.

And if you wanted to show that violent crimes in Brazil aren't caused by economic factors, then you'd be better off posting a graph from Brazil, and not the US.

 

[luiz]

To my amend my original point I should only add the word "violent". Violent crime is not affected by poverty and unemployment in the US, Brazil, Madagascar and anywhere else.

I am also not convinced that unemployment and poverty are primary drivers of non-violent crime. I think there might be endogoneity at play, as times of high unemployment and increase in poverty may also be times of cuts in police budgets. I'm pretty convinced that if those cuts do not happen no significant increase in overall crime would be observed. And the burden of proof lies with those who say that they are primary drivers.

 

[Traitorfish]

Isn't a lot of violent crime related to acquisitive crime anyway? A mugging would be a direct example, while violence between rival criminal organisations would be indirect one. I'm not sure how realistically they can be deal with as two wholly distinct phenomena, as Luiz is implicitly doing.

 

[luiz]

Isn't a lot of violent crime related to acquisitive crime anyway? A mugging would be a direct example, while violence between rival criminal organisations would be indirect one. I'm not sure how realistically they can be deal with as two wholly distinct phenomena, as Luiz is implicitly doing.

Mugging is a violent crime that should not increase in times of high unemployment and increased poverty. A honest worker does not go around mugging passer-byes because he lost his job. Thugs do that, and they'll do that regardless of the economic environment. In fact some kinds of mugging may increase during times of prosperity (more people walking around with fancy watches and whatnot).

 

[Mise]

In the main, perhaps, but on the margins, not really. Imagine unemployment rates rise by 1%; this means that a fair chunk of normally law-abiding people have fallen on hard times. These normally law abiding people might make the leap from taking home office stationary from work to, say, stealing a phone or wallet that's been left on a pub table, or even stealing a TV from the back of an open lorry. But it's a much bigger leap from "normally law abiding with a job" to "violently mugging someone in the street".

edit: x-post with luiz.

 

[Winner]

I think the prevalence of violent crime is largely a cultural issue - some societies simply have a very high tolerance for violence. The more I know about the general Anglo-Saxon culture, the more horrified I am by its violent undercurrent. Czechs are wussies in comparison.

(A Brit lecturer on my Uni once described to us how surprised he was when he came to the Czech Republic and found that it is safe to walk around towns at night and that there aren't any no-go areas in our cities. Maybe he was exaggerating, but he seemed quite sincere.)

 

[Quackers]

..and despite all that anecdotal evidence you presented with us Winner, the data tells us the UK, Ireland and Canada all have a lower "intentional homcide" rate then the Czech Republic. I'm always so horrified about the violent undercurrent in Slavic-Czech culture!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate#2010s

 

[luiz]

I think the prevalence of violent crime is largely a cultural issue - some societies simply have a very high tolerance for violence. The more I know about the general Anglo-Saxon culture, the more horrified I am by its violent undercurrent. Czechs are wussies in comparison.

The prevalence of violent crime is in my opinion mostly influenced by cultural issues and the efficiency policing / prison system.

São Paulo reduced it's violent crime rate in 70% in the last decade, while it boomed in many other regions of Brazil, basically by drastically increasing policing and building lots of new prisons to keep the bad elements there. Lots of sociologists were shocked to realize that locking up violent criminals reduces violent crime.

 

[Winner]

..and despite all that anecdotal evidence you presented with us Winner, the data tells us the UK, Ireland and Canada all have a lower "intentional homcide" rate then the Czech Republic. I'm always so horrified about the violent undercurrent in Slavic-Czech culture!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate#2010s

As funny as it is to see you acting as a little child would after getting a lollipop, I wasn't talking just about homicides. And even if I was, the difference is nothing compared to the one between Czechia and the United States (which is the main representative of the Anglo-Saxon culture in contemporary world, whether you like it or not).

What I meant was the general proclivity towards violence, such as that which manifested itself recently in London.

The prevalence of violent crime is in my opinion mostly influenced by cultural issues and the efficiency policing / prison system.

Agreed.

AFAIK Brazil has a problem with "gangland culture" that has been established among certain groups of people and is hard to get rid of. Fortunately, although the Roma in this country steal a lot (in many languages the word "gypsy" is nearly synonymous with petty theft), but they don't generally engage in violent crime.

 

[Yeekim]

I know a lot of people who say violent crime is caused by poverty and unemployment. In fact it's the "common knowledge" explanation for Brazil's bizarre violence rates. It's also completely wrong.

Mugging is a violent crime that should not increase in times of high unemployment and increased poverty. A honest worker does not go around mugging passer-byes because he lost his job. Thugs do that, and they'll do that regardless of the economic environment. In fact some kinds of mugging may increase during times of prosperity (more people walking around with fancy watches and whatnot).

Well, how do people become thugs? Respectable middle-class people usually don't go mugging passer-byes either.

If poverty and unemployment last decades, then they definitely do cause violent crime as well.

 

[Cutlass]

Actually, the drops in crime are a factor of more and more effective policing. So poverty is effective in one direction, effectiveness of policing drives the trend in the other. Neither exist in isolation.

 

[Traitorfish]

But how do we produce catchy political slogans if the world isn't black and white?

(And I'm getting at bleeding heart lefties as much as law-and-order types, sae huid yer whisht. )

 

[luiz]

Well, how do people become thugs? Respectable middle-class people usually don't go mugging passer-byes either.

If poverty and unemployment last decades, then they definitely do cause violent crime as well.

People become thugs not because of poverty and unemployment, but because of cultural factors and a prevailing sense of impunity. And note that the prevailing sense of impunity has a "cultural" influence, which may reverse if the impunity comes to a sustained end.

If you look at some ultra-violent countries, like Brazil of the late 90's or Venezuela today, you'll note that they aren't the poorest around. Quite the opposite. Peru and Bolivia are much poorer (and also every bit as unequal, so that sociological line of explanation fails as well) and are also quite safe. In fact, Peru has a lower murder rate than the US (the richest country in the world), and it has been poor for centuries.

Why is Peru both much poorer and much safer than Brazil, its neighbor? Well, I don't want to pull another crackpot sociological theory, but I dare say the bulk of the explanation lies in the aforementioned culture and punishment. Brazilians are far more likely to resort to violence and far more likely to tolerate crime (some popular musicians sing with pride about stealing from supermarkets ). Also, the chance of getting sent to prison for doing a crime in Brazil is very, very little (outside of São Paulo). In Rio only 10% of the murderers end up in prison. Peru OTOH not only has a far more negative outlook on crime as a far more efficient police/court/prison system (as surprising as that may seem).

I am not ready to categorically state that poverty and unemployment can play no role in violent crime, but I will say that such is necessarily trivial compared to culture and policing.

 

[Monsterzuma]

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/8925