Share

Twenty Questions: Social Justice Quiz 2008

by: Bill Quigley, t r u t h o u t | Perspective

photo
In its 2007 Annual Homeless Report to Congress, HUD reported that nearly one in four people in homeless shelters are children 17 or younger. Bill Quigley's "Social Justice Quiz 2008" challenges us to look through the eyes of those less fortunate and educate ourselves about how liberty, opportunity, income and wealth are distributed in the US and around the world. (Photo: Ryan Orr / Flickr)

    We in the US who say we believe in social justice must challenge ourselves to look at the world through the eyes of those who have much less than us.

    Why? Social justice, as defined by John Rawls, respects basic individual liberty and economic improvement. But social justice also insists that liberty, opportunity, income, wealth and the other social bases of self-respect are to be distributed equally unless an unequal distribution is to everyone's advantage and any inequalities are arranged so they are open to all.

    Therefore, we must educate ourselves and others about how liberty, opportunity, income and wealth are actually distributed in our country and in our world. Examining the following can help us realize how much we have to learn about social justice.

    1. How many deaths are there worldwide each year due to acts of terrorism?

    Answer: The US State Department reported there were more than 22,000 deaths from terrorism last year. Over half of those killed or injured were Muslims. Source: Voice of America, May 2, 2008. "Terrorism Deaths Rose in 2007."

    2. How many deaths are there worldwide each day due to poverty and malnutrition?

    A: About 25,000 people die every day of hunger or hunger-related causes, according to the United Nations. Poverty.com - Hunger and World Poverty. Every day, almost 16,000 children die from hunger-related causes - one child every five seconds. Bread for the World. Hunger Facts: International.

    3. 1n 1965, CEOs in major companies made 24 times more than the average worker. In 1980, CEOs made 40 times more than the average worker. In 2007, CEOs earned how many times more than the average worker?

    A: Today's average CEO from a Fortune 500 company makes 364 times an average worker's pay and over 70 times the pay of a four-star Army general. Executive Excess 2007, page 7, jointly published by Institute for Policy Studies and United for Fair Economy, August 29, 2007. The 1965 numbers from State of Working America 2004-2005, Economic Policy Institute.

    4. In how many of the more than 3,000 cities and counties in the US can a full-time worker who earns the minimum wage afford to pay rent and utilities on a one-bedroom apartment?

    A: In no city or county in the entire USA can a full-time worker who earns minimum wage afford even a one-bedroom rental. The US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) urges renters not to pay more than 30 percent of their income in rent. HUD also reports the fair market rent for each of the counties and cities in the US. Nationally, in order to rent a two-bedroom apartment, one full-time worker in 2008 must earn $17.32 per hour. In fact, 81 percent of renters live in cities where the Fair Market Rent for a two-bedroom rental is not even affordable with two minimum-wage jobs. Source: Out of Reach 2007-2008, April 7, 2008, National Low-Income Housing Coalition.

    5. In 1968, the minimum wage was $1.65 per hour. How much would the minimum wage be today if it had kept pace with inflation since 1968?

    A: Calculated in real (inflation-adjusted) dollars, the 1968 minimum wage would have been $9.83 in 2007 dollars. Andrew Tobias, January 16, 2008. The federal minimum wage is $6.55 per hour effective July 24, 2008, and will be $7.25 per hour effective July 24, 2009.

    6. True or false? People in the United States spend nearly twice as much on pet food as the US government spends on aid to help foreign countries.

    A: True. The USA spends $43.4 billion on pet food annually. Source: American Pet Products Manufacturers Association Inc. The USA spent $23.5 billion in official foreign aid in 2006. The US government gave the most of any country in the world in actual dollars. As a percentage of gross national income, the US came in second to last among OECD donor countries and ranked number 20 at 0.18 percent behind Sweden at 1.02 percent and other countries such as Norway, Netherlands, Ireland, United Kingdom, Austria, France, Germany, Spain, Canada, New Zealand, Japan and others. This does not count private donations, which, if included, may move the US up as high as sixth. The Index of Global Philanthropy 2008, pages 15-19.

    7. How many people in the world live on $2 a day or less?

    A: The World Bank reported in August 2008 that 2.6 billion people consume less than $2 a day.

    8. How many people in the world do not have electricity?

    A: Worldwide, 1.6 billion people do not have electricity and 2.5 billion people use wood, charcoal or animal dung for cooking. United Nations Human Development Report 2007/2008, pages 44-45.

    9. People in the US consume 42 kilograms of meat per person per year. How much meat and grain do people in India and China eat?

    A: People in the US lead the world in meat consumption at 42 kg per person per year, compared to 1.6 kg in India and 5.9 kg in China. People in the US consume five times the grain (wheat, rice, rye, barley, etc.) as people in India, three times as much as people in China, and twice as much as people in Europe. "THE BLAME GAME: Who is behind the world food price crisis," Oakland Institute, July 2008.

    10. How many cars does China have for every 1,000 drivers? India? The US?

    A: China has nine cars for every 1,000 drivers. India has 11 cars for every 1,000 drivers. The US has 1,114 cars for every 1,000 drivers. Iain Carson and Vijay V. Vaitheeswaran, "Zoom: The Global Race to Fuel the Car of the Future" (2007).

    11. How much grain is needed to fill an SUV tank with ethanol?

    A: The grain needed to fill an SUV tank with ethanol could feed a hungry person for a year. Lester Brown, CNN.Money.com, August 16, 2006.

    12. According to The Wall Street Journal, the richest one percent of Americans earns what percent of the nation's adjusted gross income? Five percent? Ten percent? Fifteen percent? Twenty percent?

    A: "According to the figures, the richest one percent reported 22 percent of the nation's total adjusted gross income in 2006. That is up from 21.2 percent a year earlier, and it is the highest in the 19 years that the IRS has kept strictly comparable figures. The 1988 level was 15.2 percent. Earlier IRS data show the last year the share of income belonging to the top one percent was at such a high level as it was in 2006 was in 1929, but changes in measuring income make a precise comparison difficult." Jesse Drucker, "Richest Americans See Their Income Share Grow," Wall Street Journal, July 23, 2008, page A3.

    13. How many people does our government say are homeless in the US on any given day?

    A: A total of 754,000 are homeless. About 338,000 homeless people are not in shelters (live on the streets, in cars or in abandoned buildings) and 415,000 are in shelters on any given night. The 2007 US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Annual Homeless Report to Congress, page iii and 23. The population of San Francisco is about 739,000.

    14. What percentage of people in homeless shelters are children?

    A: HUD reports nearly one in four people in homeless shelters are children 17 or younger. Page iv, the 2007 HUD Annual Homeless Report to Congress.

    15. How many veterans are homeless on any given night?

    A: Over 100,000 veterans are homeless on any given night. About 18 percent of the adult homeless population are veterans. Page 32, the 2007 HUD Homeless Report. This is about the same population as Green Bay, Wisconsin.

    16. The military budget of the United States in 2008 is the largest in the world at $623 billion per year. How much larger is the US military budget than that of China, the second-largest in the world?

    A: Ten times. China's military budget is $65 billion. The US military budget is nearly 10 times larger than the second leading military spender. GlobalSecurity.org

    17. The US military budget is larger than how many of the countries of the rest of the world combined?

    A: The US military budget of $623 billion is larger than the budgets of all the countries in the rest of the world put together. The total global military budget of the rest of the world is $500 billion. Russia's military budget is $50 billion, South Koreas is $21 billion, and Irons is $4.3 billion. GlobalSecurity.org.

    18. Over the 28-year history of the Berlin Wall, 287 people perished trying to cross it. How many people have died in the last four years trying to cross the border between Arizona and Mexico?

    A: At least 1,268 people have died along the border of Arizona and Mexico since 2004. The Arizona Daily Star keeps track of the reported deaths along the state border, and it reports 214 died in 2004; 241 in 2005, 216 in 2006, 237 in 2007, and 116 as of July 31, 2008. These numbers do not include deaths along the California or Texas borders. The Border Patrol reported that 400 people died in fiscal 2206-2007, while 453 died in 2004-2005 and 494 died in 2004-2005. Source The Associated Press, November 8, 2007.

    19. India is ranked second in the world in gun ownership with four guns per 100 people. China is third with third firearms per 100 people. Which country is first and how widespread is gun ownership?

    A: The US is first in gun ownership worldwide with 90 guns for every 100 citizens. Laura MacInnis, "US most armed country with 90 guns per 100 people." Reuters, August 28, 2007.

    20. What country leads the world in the incarceration of its citizens?

    A: The US jails 751 inmates per 100,000 people, the highest rate in the world. Russia is second with 627 per 100,000. England's rate is 151, Germany's is 88 and Japan's is 63. The US has 2.3 million people behind bars, more than any country in the world. Adam Liptak, "Inmate Count in US Dwarfs Other Nations'" New York Times, April 23, 2008.

  

»


Bill Quigley is a human rights lawyer and law professor at Loyola University New Orleans. He can be reached at quigley77@gmail.com.

Comments

This is a moderated forum.  It may take a little while for comments to go live. Be civil and on-topic, don't threaten or advocate violence, please keep it under 300 words. Thanks for participating.

"social justice also insists

"social justice also insists that liberty, opportunity, income, wealth and the other social bases of self-respect are to be distributed equally" Are you kidding? You would not have a toilet or a computer upon which to write this stuff.

You would think that with

You would think that with today's wealth and technology we would be able to prevent 25,000 deaths a day from hunger and poverty. If there was no aid at all, what would the number be?

This article starts off with

This article starts off with making an assumption, and we all know what it means to "Ass u me". John Rawls statement of Social justice is just that. A statement of HIS opinion. It bears no relation to the Basic Foundations of this country. Social wealth sharing were not part and parcel to this country's beginnings. It should not be. When run as a true Republic with Free Markets, this country would not have issues of forced homelessness. People could work, survive and share with others without being forced to part with any of their wealth by the Government. The more government regulates our lives, the less Liberty, Freedom and choices we have. Those that earned more because they worked harder, are entitled to keep the fruits of their labor. History has shown that those who do earn more, and are not forced to "pay others" in actuality share more with those in need. All the above statistics are significant in that the more regulated we all become world wide, the more there is poverty and disease. The United States is not the keeper of the world. We should be the example of what could be if all the world was truly free. We however are no longer the guiding light as we have been over regulated and stripped of many of our rights, and with our mighty military, have become the "Bully" on the block. Look at where Dictators, and others rule and you will find poverty and disease. Lets look first no further than in our own country, before we look to the rest of the world. Get this country back to its basics and we the citizens of this country will ALL be better off.

In 2003, the CIA World

In 2003, the CIA World Factbook figures showed that if wealth were equally distributed, each person would make $8,200 per year. For a fam of 4, that's almost $33k per year, which is quite enough to have a toilet and a computer. As for the question of "if there was no aid at all, how many would go hungry?" the answer is probably LESS people would go hungry because the U.S. provides aid in order to create dependency on U.S. grains and destroy small farmers in poor countries. The E.U. gives straight cash and so is better in this respect. But the U.S. dominates the aid industry.

The previous writer

The previous writer says: "social justice also insists that liberty, opportunity, income, wealth and the other social bases of self-respect are to be distributed equally" Are you kidding? You would not have a toilet or a computer upon which to write this stuff. The writer neglects the next clause: " unless an unequal distribution is to everyone's advantage" The claim is not that everyone should receive equal income and wealth, but rather that inequalities need to be justified to those who have less. Otherwise we live in a society in which some have more, at the expense of others having less. That's exploitation.

This article is Marxist

This article is Marxist nonsense, and a perfect example of the 'false choice' politics. If I work harda nd earn a good living for myself and my family, my money should be STOLEN by the government and redistributed at their whim. I don't think so.

You don't have to agree with

You don't have to agree with the crypto-Marxist philosophical stuff in the first couple of paragraphs to be dismayed and embarrassed by the twenty points in the quiz. Unfortunately most Americans probably would NOT say they believe in social justice-- and also haven't a clue as to the facts presented here.

This article starts

This article starts with...what kind of historical dope are you smoking? Where can I get some that?

great questions for

great questions for everyone Thanks for raising questions that the corporate media avoids

The writers of the "basic

The writers of the "basic foundations of this country" and "crypto-Marxist" posts don't understand American history. The political philosophy of John Rawls is based on the "social contract", the philosophy at the basis of the American Revolution. Bill Quigely extends this and illustrates today's injustices with hard to argue facts. Bill's also a remarkable activist.

I started out liking this

I started out liking this article but then I found it to be preposterous, i.e., the questions seem unrelated to the point the author is trying to make. Specifically: #6: The USA spends $43.4 billion on pet food annually. Source: American Pet Products Manufacturers Association Inc. My question is: Is this the money spent on actual pet 'food' or does it include other pet products such as toys, litter boxes, dog clothes, etc.? Am I to be deemed socially unjust because I care and feed for my pets? I don't buy clothes (or toys for that matter) for my dog but I provide him with food and shelter, and love. #9: A: People in the US lead the world in meat consumption at 42 kg per person per year, compared to 1.6 kg in India... My question is: Is this a trick question? Isn't the cow held sacred in India? The U.S. sent beef to India before but because of religious practices it was not consumed and was left to rot on the docks because they don't eat beef. (Not too bright on our part not to have considered that fact first.)

"Life, Liberty and the

"Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" Remember that? "Life" has to include health - by our own sacred documents, universal health care seems mandated. And health care, by a logical extension of the "Bush doctrine", must include preventive medicine: shelter, food, clothing and all the rest. All you rugged individualists out there: do you grow your own food? did you find your job entirely on your own? did you pay your own way through school? did you attend good schools where you were taught the skills you need to prosper? did you learn to read on your own? speak English? write? do math? think? dream of a better tomorrow? Can we abandon the tired, and NEVER true, American phantasy of the lone guy who provides everything he and his family need through his own hard work and integrity? Humans are social animals. NOTHING IMPORTANT WAS EVER CREATED BY ONE PERSON ACTING ALONE. EVER. There is no such thing, and never was, as the solitary human animal, facing the world on his own. Oh yeah: "Government of the people By the people FOR THE PEOPLE" You call yourself Americans!?

Funny. This article didn't

Funny. This article didn't push me in the direction of wanting greater taxation of U.S. citizens (as one commenter appeared to think it would). It did push me toward thinking the minimum wage should be raised. And it also makes me very aware of the power of the corporatocracy in the U.S. We also tend to believe our country is incredibly generous to other countries when, in fact, it falls farther down the list. And at the same time, corporations push their technologies and unhealthy consumerism (e.g., genetically modified, fattening, sugar-laden foods and drinks and unsustainable agricultural technology) on other countries to increase their already incredibly high bottom lines.

The author of "This article

The author of "This article starts off" simply doesn't understand history. Currently we are living in a world where neo-conservatives have cut back on government intervention in the market and have been living like this since Reagan, Thatcher, and Bush. Moreover, when we had laissez-faire capitalism, it didn't produce jobs and homes for people. It produced poverty. People do work hard, but if they aren't paid a living wage, which this article shows they are not, then they won't be able to afford any of the basic liberty that is part and parcel of the American dream. I simply can't understand how this republican, conservative rhetoric has taken hold of the country despite the obvious evidence to the contrary in history and in current times. Reagan sounded nice, but he was wrong, and the last 25 years have proven it. For the author of "social justice also insists": why would social justice not include those items. Are you saying they shouldn't be distributed equally? Why not? The current distribution is so unfair it sickens. But, more important, the current distribution allows so many to die every day. How can any human being look at a starving person and deny that social justice needs to step in? I'm talking about the retired woman who didn't have a high school education and couldn't get a decent job because her family needed her to work on the farm. Now she depends on social security and has to watch every penny.

Excellent article Bill

Excellent article Bill Quiqley. Sad that so many readers don't "get it." Not only are they ignorant of these statistics (and of philosophy as well), they seem to think statistics can be blown off as preposterous. These are peer-reviewed, published statistics and econometrics by economists. They can be challenged as any peer-reviewed scientific article can be challenged, but you better know your sh*t to do so - and have letters after your name. These journals don't accept articles from just anyone and they don't offer "comments" sections for the general public. Here is another statistic: The education system of the United States ranks below every other developed nation. That is now considered common knowledge because it has been reported for so long by so many economists. And you all just proved it.

Thank you very much for the

Thank you very much for the article. I don't think about the answers to those questions enough.

I have believed in social

I have believed in social justice, as Rawls defines it, all my life and appreciate your analysis of the US “point of view” on the subject, evidenced by our practices. I want to send this article to many of my friends and acquaintances, who are clueless to these discrepancies between what we say we believe in and what we actually allow to be the case in our collective lives. With inquisitive and challenging minds, I anticipate they will question why, in some of the items, the US is compared to China and India without the reason they were chosen to compare to. Is it safe to say it is because of population stats? If so, why was the European Union - ranked third over the US, left out? (The European Union may not be considered a “country” by the US citizens, but that is because we have been systematically kept in the dark about the 60+ yr old plan that will soon debut the North American Union, shredding our Constitution, but that’s a different article. See details in the movie Zeitgeist – free online) And to you, “I started out liking this…”. You’re being defensive, personalizing the point and missing it in the meantime. Chill, and read it again. We SELL beef. We don’t care who buys it or whether they let it rot after they get it.

"If I work harda nd earn a

"If I work harda nd earn a good living for myself and my family, my money should be STOLEN by the government and redistributed at their whim. I don't think so." If you pay taxes and Ross Perot and most of the richest people in this country and the oil companies in particular are getting tax credits do not, then don't you think that this is exactly what is happening. Your hard earned money is sucked up in taxes (income, sales taxes, fuel taxes, tariffs, etc.) and then spent to subsidize oil companies, large agricultural corporations, military arms manufacturers, and bridges to nowhere that benefit companies, their officers, and shareholders who generously contribute to the coffers of the members of Congress and the White House and federal agencies (like the Dept. of the Interior). The past 7 years have been a massive fraud and rape of the working class of this country. Unfortunately most appear to be watching Fox and MSNBC and think they get the "news" instead of right wing propaganda. The bigger and more incredible the lies the more plausible and believable they are to purposely ignorant and self-delusional populace - the true believers. It takes the true believers to keep people like Stalin, Mao, and Bush in power and loyally follow orders even when it involves theft, torture, and murder, all in the name of patriotism. Some things never change.

Amazed by the sheer

Amazed by the sheer stupidity of some of the comments here. I remember Papa Bush saying the American Way of Life is non-negotiable. Well it's certainly not sustainable, and that's not negotiable. So if we go on filling our SUVs, not caring what the f... happens in the world, and being paranoid about anyone who seems to care about others we're heading straight into a brick wall without airbags or seatbelts. Stating the obvious raises cries of "Marxist!" or "Liberal!", often, astoundingly, by the very victims of capitalism run amok. I'd like to ask a few other questions: How many Iraqi deaths are attributed to our invasion of Iraq? How many refugees fled the country? How many did we accept into America, compared to other countries? How many chritians were in Iraq before the war, and how many are left? How much did the war cost in dollars? How much would universal health insurance for children in the US cost? How much oil did we use up to now in the war? Finally, an open-ended question: What if we had not waged the war in Iraq, and used the money we saved as follows: 20% for nuclear power, 20% for solar and wind power, 20% for drilling at home, 20% to develop fuel efficient and electric cars (using nuclear and solar/wind) and simply not spent (borrowed) the rest? Does that make me a marxist?

What a juxtaposition! We see

What a juxtaposition! We see hope here (in that a very wide range of personal viewpoints are in discussion) and at the same time we can see the [hackneyed] age-old contest between displays of neanderthal jungle machismo and visionary opportunism. Let me say that human over[consuming]population seems the problem we need to face and act equitably upon, now. What are are our [human] goals? Greed? Bland socialism? Aspiring to Organized "Heavens" of one ilk or another?Empire? Sanity? All seen here - I love it!

I don't disagree with the

I don't disagree with the validity of these statements, but am appalled at the apparent belief that the rich are at fault or to blame for the plight of the poor. Is this suggesting that we should tax the rich and give it to the poor? Here's something that anyone who ever studied economics knows: when you tax the rich, just like when you tax everyone, they produce less wealth. With taxes for the highest brackets for married couples at over .50 per dollar, people are less inclined to work for basically 1/2 the pay, sine that's how much they take home. What we're left with is everyone making less. This idea of essentially communism doesn't make everyone equal: it makes everyone poor.

Cries of "Marxism" miss the

Cries of "Marxism" miss the point of fairness. A worker should be rewarded for his work in a way that enables him to live rather than a way that maximizes the income of the person in control. National subsidies and tariffs have made it possible for Americans to make more at the expense of others in the world, and those others suffer disproportionally because they begin with less. N.B. The question " 10. How many cars does China have for every 1,000 drivers? India? The US?" might be better asked as "How many cars does China have for every 1,000 PEOPLE? India? The US?" I suspect the answer would be even more appalling that the question as stated.

This is a thought-provoking

This is a thought-provoking collection of data. However, I'm still having just a bit of difficulty with the connection the author establishes between 25,000 people starving worldwide each day and we Americans having the gall to... uh... eat what we eat. OK, I'll admit that a stroll through any given mall indicates that some of us eat a little too much, but it seems like he's implying that we need to adopt a two-meals-of-rice-n-beans-per-day diet so people in the Congo can eat... er, so their dictator can feed his pigs with the grain instead. Maybe I'll just be more thankful that we have it good here in the US of A. So, please excuse me for having the gall to graciously accept God's blessings!

I do not object to wealth.

I do not object to wealth. But wouldn't it be a lovely world where those with a surplus would voluntarily, happily and joyfully give it for the betterment of the world? The world needs virtuous people. Wealthy virtuous people could do a lot of good