[RD] Daily Graphs and Charts

Status
Not open for further replies.
The plague of solar panels encroaching into Australian cities

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2013/10/14/climate/solar-pv-plague-pictures

Melbourne:

11_47.png


Sydney:

22_25.png


Brisbane:

33_6.png
 
"How it's weighted?" What do you mean?

Isn't it just an observation of what happens in English to "letters"?

And, I'm guessing, the utility lies in its place in the overall analysis of the written language. Somewhere.
 
The scale is not a linear scale, Borachio.
 
Ah!!! You're right. I missed that.

Does it make any difference? Because it's not really a scale, is it? Isn't it more of a key?

Nope. That's not it.

I don't understand it, either, then.

*sigh*

Linguistics. Complicated. Synonyms.
 
Piketty in One Graph
This graphic summarizes the key inequality and policy trends (for the U.S.) traced in Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Scrolling through the inequality metrics suggest the key themes in Piketty’s examination of the U.S. case: the now-familiar “suspension bridge” of income inequality, dampened only by the exceptional economic and political circumstances of the decades surrounding World War II; the growing share of recent income gains going to the very high earners (the 1% or .01%); the stark inequality within labor income (see the top 1% and top 10% wage shares) generated by the emergence of lavishly-compensated “supermanagers”; and a concentration of wealth that fell little over the first half of the twentieth century and has grown steadily since then.

Scrolling through the policy metrics suggests some of the causal forces at work: a precipitous decline in the top inheritance and income tax rates (lifting the ceiling on high incomes); and the collapse of labor standards and bargaining power (lowering the floor for everyone else). I have added here one data series—the trajectory of union density—on which Piketty is curiously silent (his chapter on income inequality uses the minimum wage as a surrogate for bargaining power more generally).

http://www.cepr.net/index.php/graphic-economics/graphic-economics/piketty-in-one-graph
 
The US lost 420,000 and took out 12 m i l l i o n Germans/Japanese? :mischief:
 
Spoiler :
DCB0qf2.jpg

But "Poland" above, includes only Jews and ethnic Poles from Poland (not e.g. Poles from Germany or the USSR). Ethnic Belarusians, Ukrainians, etc. from Poland (Western Ukraine / Belarus) are counted as Ukraine / Belarus. Germans from Poland (annexed / occupied in 1939) are counted as "Germany". Etc.

Strangely, Poland's losses are counted as % of population of Poland in its pre-war borders - which included Western Belarus and Ukraine; minorities, etc. - but these losses do not include ethnic Belarusians, Ukrainians, etc. who were Polish citizens. They are counted as deaths of Ukraine and Belarus, etc.

So in reality, % losses of Poland should be higher.

=======================

Among France's 550 thousand deaths in WW2, vast majority were:

1) French Jews
2) French soldiers and resistance fighters

Number of ethnic French non-Jewish civilians who died in WW2 was minimal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom