{"id":12550,"date":"2017-03-30t13:10:43","date_gmt":"2017-03-30t13:10:43","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/dpetrov.2create.studio\/planet\/wordpress\/a-natural-u-s-income-distribution\/"},"modified":"2017-03-30t13:10:43","modified_gmt":"2017-03-30t13:10:43","slug":"a-natural-us-income-distribution-0","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"\/\/www.getitdoneaz.com\/story\/a-natural-us-income-distribution-0\/","title":{"rendered":"a natural u.s. income distribution"},"content":{"rendered":"
there is ample evidence that from numerous economic, environmental, and social vantage points, humans are not living sustainably on earth. while the idea of sustainability is simple enough, the specifics are often unclear. just which aspects of our behaviors and practices are sustainable, and which are unsustainable? and with the rapidly changing and complex economic, political, social, technological, and environmental problems before us, how can we truly know what is sustainable and what is not? we need a higher-level understanding of sustainability \u2014 an understanding that clarifies what sustainability is, and how it works in real situations. but where would we find this higher-level understanding? perhaps in nature.<\/p>\n
over millions of years, wild plants and animals have figured out how to sustainably organize in the face of resource limitations, competing interests, and a changing environment. the bottom line in nature is that making excuses and passing the buck aren\u2019t allowed<\/em>\u2014what doesn\u2019t work in nature simply disappears, and what is less sustainable yields gradually to what is more sustainable. this has guided species, natural communities, and ecosystems to create what humans are now seeking to create\u2014highly sustainable economies, communities, occupational groups, governmental systems, environmental relationships, cultures, and physiological patterns.<\/p>\n so, what can we really learn from nature? a lot.<\/p>\n when it comes to many contemporary issues, an understanding of sustainable natural patterns can anchor our debates, and give us focus. as an example, let\u2019s take a look at income parity versus disparity. many people (like the so-called \u201c99 percent\u201d) complain about income disparity. is income disparity a sustainability problem in the usa? what does nature have to say about this topic?<\/p>\n in nature, within a given species, resource acquisition (essentially equivalent to human income) is not equal<\/em>. for example, rabbits are not carefully doled out to coyotes at a rate of one per day. rather, some coyotes are more successful than others in hunting, maintaining territory, raising pups, surviving, etc. and this doesn\u2019t just go for coyotes. the same holds true for most others, like deer, turtles, oak trees, and asters. thus, it appears that nature does not use absolute income parity<\/em> to form its sustainable economic systems.<\/p>\n however, nature does seem to provide limits on how extreme income disparity can become. in nature, a majority of individuals within a species have \u201cincomes\u201d that are similar, i.e., within a ratio of about 2:1. individuals that are rather successful or rather unsuccessful may have incomes that are less equal, but their incomes are still within a ratio of about 5:1. at the extreme ends, the income disparity between a very small percentage of highly successful and highly unsuccessful individuals stills falls within a ratio of about 20:1.<\/p>\n now let\u2019s compare that natural system income distribution to some contemporary human incomes. using u.s. census data from 2014, american wages can be averaged out by average household size, to produce a number that approximates income per person, including children and other non-working family members. when this is done, annual incomes range from almost $0, to many millions of dollars, with a median somewhere around $23,500. the distribution of this income variation looks something like the blue bars in the chart below, although this chart is truncated at $150,000, beyond which a very small percentage of people with even higher annual incomes are difficult to show graphically. then, superimposed upon the chart in green bars is an approximation of how nature would distribute the same amount of money.<\/p>\n