|
|
 Originally Posted by oskar
Have you seen the Harvest of Shame? It's about migrant farm workers in the 60's in the north carolina region. Comes to mind as an example where the producers didn't exactly bear the cost of their discrimination. They reaped the profits of their discrimination would be a more accurate way of describing it.
I shouldn't have given an example, but I did because you asked.
Social "sciences" are very tough to discuss in terms of data. There is always a very large amount of data that tells any story in this field with countless confounding variables.
The heritage of economics is logic. It's a model of mathematical and behavioral constraints.
The Harvest of Shame (and Donald Sterling) are subsets of the whole. Even if the principle that allowing discrimination by businesses to be legal makes discrimination more costly, there will be variation in the data that makes some of the subsets look like they don't demonstrate that principle.
|
Reply With Quote