The longer walk to equality

Dat's rayciss, coming here with your factual tendencies
 
Oh my word...

There is so much wrong information missing from that graphic it's scary. Pertinent information to the subject,
like "Dates where sanctions were imposed and lifted."

Another thing: All the pertinent information (and I believe the point of a graph like this existing), is to show more detail of key areas around the "transition" periods. (that cause major shifts in the graph's trends).
Like the period after 1999.

Another piece of information missing is a comparative graph showing world trends.

Not the best information by the CIA... er... I mean the Economist.
 
OverKill69 said:
Oh my word...

There is so much wrong information missing from that graphic it's scary. Pertinent information to the subject,
like "Dates where sanctions were imposed and lifted."

Another thing: All the pertinent information (and I believe the point of a graph like this existing), is to show more detail of key areas around the "transition" periods. (that cause major shifts in the graph's trends).
Like the period after 1999.

Another piece of information missing is a comparative graph showing world trends.

Not the best information by the CIA... er... I mean the Economist.
Click to expand...
Why is any of that necessary or relevant to this particular graph that shows quite clearly the widening gap between rich and poor and shows that this still occurs along racial lines - according to the graph, black people in SA are only slightly better off than they were and white people, are much better off than they were.
 
joelus said:
Why is any of that necessary or relevant to this particular graph that shows quite clearly the widening gap between rich and poor and shows that this still occurs along racial lines - according to the graph, black people in SA are only slightly better off than they were and white people, are much better off than they were.
Click to expand...

Because they're linking income per capita to events in Mandela's life.
Insinuating that his refusal of PW's offer had more of an effect on different race's average income than... let's say... international sanctions being tightened because of South Africa's policies at the time.

The graph is linking race, economics and Mandela. Drawing inference that events in Mandela's life were the proponents for the increase or decrease in different racial groups' earning potential.
Instead of economic and political policy.

Taken out of context, this graph could be misinterpreted by narrow minded individuals to believe that "the Economist" actually believes that black south africans earn way less than white and asian south africans on average JUST BECAUSE OF MANDELA.

Not saying there are any of those narrow minded individuals on this forum at ALL!

EDIT:

Thought I'd give an example of what I mean:
1999 - mandela steps down as president and the graphs go bananas! If someone unfamiliar with South African's economic policy shift at the time, one could surmise that it was MANDELA'S STEPPING DOWN ALONE that caused asians to suddenly earn WAY more and blacks earn a little less.

It might have had something to do with the change in the BEE status of Chinese South Africans... just maybe? But... the title of the graphic, the data, and the fact that we're looking at the graph in isolation means; what will someone unfamiliar with South Africa's BEE policy shift think to himself/herself?

Isn't it best practice to add extra information on pivotal trend changes? and let's face it, he post 1999 section of the graph shows THE MOST TREND CHANGE!

I just think it's a poor use of statistics with bad motivation and insufficient justification. A trend that we're likely to see more of in the days ahead while everyone jumps on the bandwagon of a 95 year old man (who I hold in high regard - I was even lucky enough to have shaken his hand) "suddenly dying".
 
Last edited:
joelus said:
I think it also shows how much we as a country have failed.
Click to expand...

nonsense, I accept absolutely no responsibility for the government's inability to act to those who voted for them. Turning responsibility into collective guilt is a way to escaping accountability.
 
Nicodeamus said:
nonsense, I accept absolutely no responsibility for the government's inability to act to those who voted for them. Turning responsibility into collective guilt is a way to escaping accountability.
Click to expand...

+1. Always with the "groupthink"
 
At that population growth rate, I can clearly determine why there is so much “said” entitlement to land… Imagine they add ten calculated years to that graph… Okay, let’s be realistic, the whole purpose in black empowerment, where will they be able to create a suitable vacancy when the numbers look like this, the other ethnic groups are DWARFED in relation.

That graph do tell a story, one being that there is no more capacity in regard with a viable income. We urgently need entrepreneurs (in reason to create opportunities in a already saturated marketplace)… but FIRST, education.
 
All I see from that infographic is that the black population is growing at a stupid rate which is always going to scew the figures.
The mentality is scary, "O hey guys there arent enough jobs for everyone so lets have 15 kids each"
It just further buggers everything up and makes for higher unemployment numbers.
It does a good job of keeping the ANC in power though if you have so many uneducated people to mindlessly continue voting for you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X