information aesthetics.Where form follows data.
2 different movies depicting the US income distribution. "picture the population of the United States lined up on a football field. the poorest person on the far left, & the riches person on the far right. the vertical scale is income, represented by stacks of $100 bills".
now, also picture a Giant Sequia Tree, & while you are at it, the Mount Everest.
[link: lcurve.org]
 |
 |
 |
| Data Flow: Visualising Information in Graphic Design Klanten et al. |
Visual Thinking for Design Colin Ware |
Algorithms for Visual Design Kostas Terzidis |
| information aesthetics shop » | ||
Published with Movable Type 4
Content protected by Creative Commons License
Designed and Maintained by AVM
Time and Date follows EDT Time Zone (Sydney)
Income and Wealth are not the same thing. BTW Wealth distribution I thing is much harder to measure.
I prefer the first video, is more original.
although they are not the same, they seem quite similar. yes, some exceptions exist.
Both movies are based on the false premise that the sum of all income and wealth in the U.S. is (or should be) owned by the collective whole. They twist the idea of wealth "distribution" from a mathematical concept to a social concept.
There is no finite collective wealth from which Americans receive a slice. If one person earns more income (or has more wealth) doesn't mean another person will earn less as a result. Capitalism doesn't work that way.
It would be interesting to see a similar example illustrating income "distribution" within the old U.S.S.R. My guess is there would be a very very thin stack across the entire length of the field.
The authors of both movies ignore human behavior and economic reality.
There is no finite collective wealth from which Americans receive a slice. If one person earns more income (or has more wealth) doesn't mean another person will earn less as a result. Capitalism doesn't work that way.
The first one is much better.
http://hovers.org
Don't think anyone is saying the field should be level it is a visual aide to understand something pretty large.
---------------
"There is no finite collective wealth from which Americans receive a slice."
True but there is in Alaska...in alaska there is collective wealth from which ALL Alaskans receive a slice.
----------------
"If one person earns more income (or has more wealth) doesn't mean another person will earn less as a result."
I didn't see anywhere in either video that implies the result you speak of
-------------------
"The authors of both movies ignore human behavior and economic reality."
It's an illustration in visual terms. It isn't a discussion of human behavior or an indepth discussion which would need to occur in order to cover "economic reality"
--------------------
Bottom line is if the middle of the field keeps shrinking we're screwed...Oh wait a sec...WE already ARE!