History of Islam

History of Islam
Menu

Economy

Muslims generally poor

New World Wealth, a marketing research company based in Johannesburg, did a study on religion of millionaires in 2015.   It found there are 13.1 million people in world whose net worth is one million US dollars or more.  Out of them 7.4 million (56.2%) identify themselves as Christian.  0.85 million, 6.5% Identify themselves as Muslims.  0.47 million, 3.6% identify themselves as Hindu and 0.22 million, 1.7% identify themselves as Jew.  Remaining 4.1 million, 31.7% identify themselves ‘other religions.’1  Difference between wealthy Christians and Muslims is much vaster then difference in their populations.  Muslims are generally poor.

We know Christians predominate in Western Europe and North America which are rich regions and Muslims concentrate in Asia and Africa which are poor regions.    This data might be a reflection of the wealth the countries Christians or Muslims broadly live in. We have to look at a country where Muslims and Christians live side by side to clarify the situation.  USA is one of such countries.

Lisa A. Keister is a US researcher.  She analysed a huge data of US population and got her study published in social forces general.  She concluded that religion had something to do with wealth of a group of population.  She found that adherents of Judaism and Episcopalianism are the wealthiest in the USA, followed by Catholics and mainstream Protestants.  Conservative Protestants and Muslims are the least wealthy.2

Similar stats are given by Kosmin & keysar.  They inform us that in 2001 median annual household income of Jews in the USA was 72000 US dollars.  That of Hindus was 51000.  That of Catholics was 47000 (other Christian denominations are not mentioned here).  That of atheists was 46000.  That of Muslims was 31000.  While that of total US population was 42000.  The only religious group that earns less than Muslims in their stats is conservative Protestants (Jehovah’s Witness, Seventh-Day Adventists, Church of God etc.).3

A study done by David Masci for Pew Research Center and published on October 11, 2016 again verifies that the richest religious group in USA are Jews and Hindus.  It is followed by Episcopal Church and Presbyterian Church.  Then come atheists and Agnostics.  Muslims are just near American median and as usual Jehovah’s witness are the poorest.4

Whenever relative economic strength of adherents to different religions living in one country is studied, difference in economic status based on religion has surfaced.  This relationship was first discovered by Max Weber.5

Now the question is why being adherent to a particular religion can be a risk factor for being poor?  Answer is not known yet.  Lisa A. Keister, who strongly argues that it is the beliefs of a particular religion behind wealth disparities, jumps to conclusion that Muslims are poor because they have more children and Muslim women do not work.6  The argument that women’s participation in work equal to men would double the income of a group as compared to when only men are working is boringly mathematical.   If 10 workers take one day to build a wall will 8640 workers take one second to build it?

Others have tried to attach religiosity, rather than belief in a particular religion, as a risk factor for being poor.7  It could be partly true, but we know atheists, who are opposite to religiosity, are not the wealthiest people either.  Moreover studies have found that generally people who attended religious services are wealthier than those who do not (taking into account variations of education and other factors).8  David Masci of Pew Research Center is more objective and admits that level of education, age, race, and ethnicity have all been related with level of income in the USA.  These confounding factors might have affected the survey results showing relative economic strengths of adherents of a particular religion.9

Muslim-majority countries doing better in economic growth

Sum of all the amounts each and every individual of a country has generated in one year is called GDP (gross domestic product). As GDP is usually calculated in local currency and then converted into US dollar notation for comparison with GDP of other countries, sometimes it gives a false impression of wealth of a nation.  Currency of a nation might be able to buy more or less than what a US dollar can buy.  To avoid the problem, the economists have devised another calculation called PPP (purchase power parity).   For this, GDP is calculated in conventional way, then it is given certain weightage high or low, depending upon the currency GDP is being calculated in.  If that particular currency can buy more than a US dollar in local market, figure of PPP is higher than GDP.  If that particular currency can buy less than a US dollar in local market, figure of PPP is lower than GDP.10

By looking at increase (or decrease) of GDP expressed in PPP over a decade or so, one can calculate if wealth of a country is overall increasing or decreasing.

Maria Obiols calculated average GDP growth of many countries and regions over the past ten years (from 2008 to 2017) in light of data provided by International Monitory Fund.  Results were startling. Ex-communist countries are clear winners.  Six countries that top the word ranking are Ethiopia, Turkmenistan, Qatar, China, Uzbekistan and Laos.11  Their success is understandable.  They have recently abandoned policies of government interference into markets and businesses.  But average growth of countries comprising of ‘the West’ is next to nothing.  For example, European Union grew only 0.7% during this period.  Now, if we compare this kind of growth with regions that mainly consist of Muslim-majority countries, it appears they are out pacing Europe.  Average growth rate of Middle East, North Africa, Afghanistan and Pakistan is 3.5 % and growth rate of Sub Saharan Africa during the same period is 4.7 %.12

Factors of growth

The question is what influences economic growth of a country? Yes, religious beliefs of its inhabitants are one factor.  But definitely this is not the only factor.  Economists have worked hard over centuries to discover many other factors that stimulate growth.

Good law and order situation, political stability, least interference of government in markets and businesses etc. are well researched and well known factors that affect growth.13   All of them work at government/societal level.

Apparently there is another set of factors working at grass root level that make a difference in growth of wealth of a nation.  These factors are very little studied.  It is known that more a nation has scientists doing A level research,14 the richer a nation.  It is also known that the more a nation has technologists (for example, engineers) developing new technologies the richer a nation.  But the most powerful force behind economic prosperity of a nation is entrepreneur.  It is he who picks up new technologies and establishes whole new industries based on them.  It is he who generates most of the GDP of a nation.  It is he who personally grows wealthiest member of a society.  It means more the number of successful entrepreneurs in a given nation, the wealthier it is.

Lately characteristics of entrepreneur have come under microscope of economists.  Passion to increase personal wealth, having internal locus of control, capability to take calculated risks, high knowledge of financing and taking sound financial decisions are a few traits which have been discovered in successful entrepreneurs.15  But the most conspicuous characteristic of successful entrepreneur that has come to light is that he is generally married.  In sample of Bradley et. al, for example, 70% of successful American entrepreneurs were married.16  Not only they live in family environment, they were generally raised in family environment.17

Family and its role in growth

Family is group of people who share common past, present and future.  Here key word is ‘future.’  If a group of people has been living together or sharing resources with each other in the past it is not enough to be a family.  If a group is living together and is sharing resources without any accountability at present, still it is not enough to consider it a family.  Family is the group of people who decidedly wish to be together and share their resources with each other without accountability for any length of future.

Family has one unique feature which is not shared by any other socioeconomic entity.   We know competition is the engine of economic progress.  Countries compete with other countries, provinces compete with other provinces, cities compete with other cities, neighbourhoods compete with other neighbourhoods and families compete with other families to get better share of resources.  The pattern stops here.  Family is the smallest competing unit.  Individuals within family do not compete with each other.  Rather they support each other. Economic behaviour of one family member necessarily affects other family members.  Most of the times it affects positively but sometimes it affects negatively.

Old proverbs ‘a woman is behind every successful man’ and ‘a man is behind every successful woman’ might have substance.  Economists have still not studied it.  Economics, from its very birth, is more impressed by physics and still doesn’t get much inspiration from disciplines like psychology and sociology.  Role of family stability in growth of wealth of a nation deserves serious research by economists.

Whatever preliminary research is done in family dynamics and its relation with economic growth, results are promising.  In one study a sample of pre-retirement people was taken.  It was found that those who were cohabiting but never married had on average 78 percent less total wealth (net worth) than those who were continuously married.  And those who were cohabiting and had been divorced or widowed once had 68 percent less wealth than the continuously married.18  Keister suggests that wealth accumulation is shaped by family processes.19

It is now a well-established fact that out of all growth factors operating at government/societal level, maintenance of law and order is the most important.  Who knows one day a scientist establishes beyond doubt that stability of family is the most important out of all growth factors operating at grass root level.  If it happens, it is very likely that a nuclear family with all members supporting each other will be the winner among all other forms of family.  This kind of discovery might shed light on causes of economic stagnation of Western Europe or fast economic growth of Far Eastern Asia.  Then we would be able to explain why Muslim-majority countries are performing comparatively satisfactorily despite being at odd with all other known growth factors.

Muslims are economic migrants

We have already discussed greater birth rate among Muslim communities all over the world.  It particularly holds good for Muslim-majority countries with very few exceptions like Iran.  On the other hand fertility rates in ‘the West’ are constantly dropping.  This is particularly true for ‘old stock’ population of ‘the West’.  Let’s take example of the USA.  In 1970 fertility rate of American born women was 3.46 children per woman.  It has dropped to 3.10 in 2014.  On the other hand annual birth rate among foreign born US women was 0.27 in 1970.  It has increased to 0.90 in 2014.  This data demonstrates that the total increase in fertility rate in the US from 3.74 in 1970 to 4 in 2014 is totally derived by immigrants.20  It means ‘Western countries’ have compulsion to import immigrants.  Otherwise they might reduce to plains, mountains, deserts etc. devoid of humans.  Obviously their easiest option is to get immigrants from countries of good birth rates.

Host country perceives immigrants as threat to their culture.21  Public opinion of host country never favoured immigrants. In the USA, which is known to take immigrants actively, 67% opposed German refugees in 1938, 57% opposed settling Europeans displaced by war in 1947, 55% Americans disapproved Hungarian refugees in 1958, 62% disapproved Indochinese in 1979, 71% disapproved Cubans in 1980, and 53% opposed Syrian refugees in 2015.22  If the US government continues to take immigrants despite public opposition there are definitely compelling reasons for it.

Why do people immigrate?  Pew’s survey in 36 developing countries that export immigrants discovered the reasons.  A prospect of better job is the top reason in all countries except Kuwait.  People of the countries where underemployment is prevalent give this reason more certainly. Second most cited reason is education much behind the first one.  It is more attractive reason in the Middle East and China.  Reason of leaving a country for safety concerns comes only from those countries where violence is prevalent like Lebanon, South Africa and Palestine.  Even from those countries majority leaves for economic reasons.  A handful of people leave their country of origin for the sake of marriage.  Number of people escaping political persecution is insignificant and does not account for main reasons for immigration.23

Immigrants don’t find themselves in greener pasture immediately after reaching the host country.  In the USA immigrant workers make 45% of household workers, 45% of farming workers 45% of fishing workers and 46% of forestry workers.24  Despite getting low paid jobs initially, net flow of immigrants is from developing countries towards ‘the West’.  Very few immigrants return to their home country.

Muslims form main bulk of immigrants to ‘the West’.  For example, USA alone admitted 84995 refugees in fiscal year of 2016.  46% of them were Muslims.25

Saving

A very important dimension in economy of any country is saving rate.  Saving is the difference in money available and money spent in consumption. There are three major role players that save in any given country – government, business, and families/individuals.  Money saved by families/individuals is called household saving and accounts for up to 80% of total saving any nation does in one year.26  It is household saving that ultimately transforms into capital27 and acts as a gasoline of economic engine.

Gross saving is the percentage of GDP that is saved and not spent in one year.  Here are gross savings statistics of select countries provided by World Bank for the year 2017.  Albania: 16.73, Bosnia and Herzegovina 16.26, Azerbaijan 28.28, Kyrgyz Republic 29.82, Turkey 25.38, Mauritania 37.78, Jordan 10.03, West Bank and Gaza 11.41, Pakistan 20.11, Bangladesh 35.24, Indonesia 30.87, Malaysia 28.53, Australia: 21.90, Austria 22.76, United Kindom 13.19, France 22.63, Germany 27.76, Italy 20.00, Netherlands 30.23, Poland 16.31, Portugal 16.31, Russian Federation 26.55, Spain 22.84, Canada 19.93, Suriname 47.51, India 32.10 and China 47.01.28

A glance on these statistics gives an impression that saving rate in ‘the West’ is comparatively low as compared to emerging Asian economies like India and China.  It further gives an impression that, despite low incomes, saving rates of Muslim-majority countries are not bad.

Why people save?

In a large and comprehensive research Grigoli and Herman studied saving trends in 165 countries from 1981 to 2012.  They found that trends differ not only from country to country but also from time to time.  According to this study, people definitely have more capability to save when their income is high and is growing while people suffering from abject poverty hardly save any penny.  The study further found that when income of very poor increases (for example Bangladesh) it goes into consumption but when Income of effluent increases (for example Switzerland) it goes into saving.  But there are numerous other factors which are not related to household income.  For example, more the children in a family, less the saving rate.  More the old people in a family, less the saving rate.29  This study establishes beyond doubt that capability to save is behind household saving but it doesn’t answer what motivates people to save?

Actually, capability to save does not always translate into saving.  People of developing countries save more when their income grows as compared to people of developed countries.30  There is something else that motivates (or demotivates) people to save.

One guess could be that people save to protect themselves against future economic problems. It is known that people tend to save more when they face inflation31  because they see future economic uncertainty in inflation.  Similarly, people living in rural areas and dependent on agriculture save more than urban dwellers32 because they are uncertain about future crops.  Ando and Modigliani found out that saving behaviours differ between young childrenless people, who wish to save, and mature with children who have to spend on children and old who do not save much.33  This kind of argument is called ‘the theory of lifecycle for saving’.  It again verifies that people save for themselves against future odds and their saving rate differs according to their capability to save and their liabilities and future needs.  Fear of future is a reason to save but apparently it is not the full story.  Why people bequeath their savings?  Why some people continue to save up to end of their life when they themselves are sure that their future is over?

One important saving motivation might be to provide children a prosperous life.  ‘I couldn’t afford that particular thing but let my children not miss it,” can be the logic behind saving.  This area is little searched.  Indirect clues come from certain studies.  For example, Guin finds that household saving is influenced by culture.34  Small studies are looking into the matter further.  Ishikawa suggests that phenomenon of saving and spending should be viewed at two generational level.  Parent generation’s decisions of spending and saving are dependent on children’s need of skill development and children’s future comfort.35

If children are a major motivation to save, then naturally family stability is a pre-requisite for it.  It is possible that one day an economist will prove it.  Then there will be full explanation why people in ‘the West’ save less.  Further, it will be possible to explain why people in Muslim-majority countries successfully save despite economic hardships.

Wealth migration

10% of any given population generates more wealth than anybody else in that society.  These rich people are, by definition, minority and have no leverage over government policies.  Many a times government or society becomes hostile to them.  In that case they do not have any other option than to run away from their country along with their assets.

It is difficult to trace pathways and directions of wealth migration, as wealthy tend to hide their wealth.  New World Wealth has taken up this difficult task.  They have found that two countries located in ‘the West’ namely France and UK have lost wealthy people in hoards during 2017.  One Muslim majority country, Turkey, is in the same boat.  On the other hand USA, Canada and Australia were the most popular sanctuaries for the wealthy immigrants in 2017.  One Muslim majority country, Dubai, was also included in this group.36

The researchers of New World Wealth suggest that escape of the wealthy from any country is not a good omen.  It could be the first sign that something is profoundly wrong in that country.  Wealthy have means to escape. Others might be wishing the same but they fail to find means.37  The reasons why wealthy people leave their countries are not well researched.  We can note that the countries from which wealthy people have slipped out en mass in 2017 did not have any law and order situation.  It means wealthy were not running from physical violence.  On the other hand the countries they have landed in are relatively low tax jurisdictions.  One reason of exodus of wealthy from a country could be escape from tax violence.  If correct, high tax burden is ‘something profoundly wrong’ in any economy and is a predictor of further economic woes.

Safety network

Analogy to safety network is a circus.  Aerial acrobats swing higher and higher in the circus and jump to far off trapeze.  If, by chance, one of them falls down as a result of wrong decision there is a net underneath to support him and to prevent him from certain death.  Now imagine that acrobats of real life are participants of economic activities and safety net are philanthropic institutions.

Altruism is human nature.38  It gives pleasure to a donor.39  No societies and no ages were devoid of generous people.  People like giving away voluntarily.  Voluntary almsgiving is still very popular among Muslims.

Ehdi Ambulance

Ehdi Ambulance, Karachi:  Largest ambulance charity in world.40

Problematic is the concept of compulsory giving.  A group of people has always existed who advocate that voluntary altruism is not enough and wish that government should grab from well to do and disperse to the poor. Governments, on their part, have been running small scale ventures in this regard.  Idea of compulsory altruism has historically been popular with potential recipients and has been historically hated by potential donors.

Muslims are not different from other religious groups on this matter.  Pew performed a public opinion survey on 45000 people in 47 nations both Muslim and others.  It demonstrated that majorities support that government should take care of poor who cannot take care of themselves.  Support for a social safety net is widespread across all regions, although slightly weaker in Japan, Jordan and Egypt.41

Environment

Tremendous material development of human race has threatened natural beauty of earth and its fragile environment.  Muslims are concerned about conservation of beauty of earth and protection of environment as much as any other group.  Pew found that there is no difference in public opinion on this matter between Muslim-majority countries and countries lived by other religious groups predominantly.  The study demonstrated that majorities in almost all countries support that environment should be protected and should be given precedence over economic growth.  And that even it means less growth and lesser jobs.42  And like all other countries, this wish has still to be translated into actions in Muslim majority countries.

End Notes:

  1. Robert Frank, “The Religion of Millionaires,” Inside Wealth, Jan. 14, 2015, https://www.cnbc.com/2015/01/14/the-religion-of-millionaires-html.
  2. Lisa A. Keister, “Religion and Wealth: The Role of Religious Affiliation and Participation in Early Adult Asset Accumulation,” Social Forces 82, no 1 (Sep. 2003): 175 – 207.
  3. Barry Alexander Kosmin and Ariela Keysar. Religion in a Free Market. Ithaca, NY: Paramount Marketing Publishing, 2006.
  4. “How income varies among US religious groups,” Pew Research Center. Accessed 16 Feb. 2018, www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/10/11/how-income-varies-among-u-s-religious-groups/.
  5. Max Weber. The Protestant ethics and the “spirit” of capitalism. Trans. Stephen Kalberg. Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing Co., 2002.
  6. Lisa A. Keister, “Religion and Wealth: The Role of Religious Affiliation and Participation in Early Adult Asset Accumulation,” Social Forces 82, no 1 (Sep. 2003): 175 – 207.
  7. “Global index of religiosity and atheism,” Win-Gallup international. Accessed 23 Oct. 2018, https://sidmennt.is/wp-content/uploads/Gallup-International-um-tru-og-truleysi-2012.pdf.
  8. Lisa A. Keister, “Religion and Wealth: The Role of Religious Affiliation and Participation in Early Adult Asset Accumulation,” Social Forces 82, no 1 (Sep. 2003): 175 – 207.
  9. “How income varies among US religious groups,” Pew Research Center. Accessed 16 Feb. 2018, www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/10/11/how-income-varies-among-u-s-religious-groups/.
  10. “Gross Domestic Product: An Economy’s all,” International Monetary Fund. Accessed 23 Oct 2018, https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/basics/gdp.htm.
  11. Maria Obiols, “Countries with highest GDP growth 2017,” Global Financial Magazine, Oct 17, 2018, https://www.gsmag.com/global-data/countries-highest-GDP-growth-2017.
  12. Maria Obiols, “Countries with highest GDP growth 2017,” Global Financial Magazine, Oct 17, 2018, https://www.gsmag.com/global-data/countries-highest-GDP-growth-2017.
  13. W. Arthur Lewis. The Theory or Economic Growth. London: Routledge, 2013.
  14. Search for currently unknown is A level research.
  15. Bradley T. Klontz, Sullivan, Paul, Seay, Martin C, Canale, Anthony, “The Wealthy: A financial psychological profile,” Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research 67, no. 2 (Jun. 2015): 127 – 143. See also: Sari Pekkala Kerr, William R. Kerr and Tina Xu, “Personality Traits of Entrepreneurs: A review of Recent Literature,” Working Paper 18-047. Harvard Business School, 2017: 1 – 52.
  16. Bradley T. Klontz, Mrtin C. Seay, Paul Sullivan and Anthony Canale, “The Psychology of Wealth: Psychological Factors Associated with High Income,” Journal of Financial Planning 27, no. 12(Dec. 2014): 46 – 53.
  17. Charles Cox and Reg Jennings, ‘The foundations of success: the development and characteristics of British entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs,” Leadership & Organization Development Journal 16 no. 7 (1995): 4 – 9.
  18. Janet Wilmoth and Gregor Koso, “Does Marital History Matter? Marital Status and Wealth Outcomes Among Preretirement Adults,” Journal of Marriage and Family 64 (February 2002): 254-268.
  19. Lisa A. Keister, “Religion and wealth: the role of religious affiliation and participation in early adult asset accumulation,” Social Forces 82, no. 1 (Sep. 2003): 175 – 207.
  20. “Demographic trends shaping the US and the world in 2017,” Pew Research Center, Anthony Cilluffo and D’Vera Cohn. Accessed 18 Feb. 2018, www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/27/10-demographic-tredns-shaping-theu-s-and-the-world-in-2017/.
  21. “World publics welcome global trade – but not immigration,” Pew Research Center. Accessed 21 Feb. 2018, www.pewglobal.org/2007/10/04/world-publics-welcome-global-trade-but-not-immigration/.
  22. “US public seldom has welcomed refugees into country,” Pew Research Center, Drew DeSilver. Accessed 23 Feb. 2018, www.pewsearch/fact-tank/2015/11/19/u-s-public-seldom-has-welcomed-refugees-into-country/.
  23. “World publics welcome global trade – but not immigration,” Pew Research Center. Accessed 21 Feb. 2018, www.pewglobal.org/2007/10/04/world-publics-welcome-global-trade-but-not-immigration/.
  24. “Demographic trends shaping the US and the world in 2017,” Pew Research Center, Anthony Cilluffo and D’Vera Cohn. Accessed 18 Feb. 2018, www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/27/10-demographic-tredns-shaping-theu-s-and-the-world-in-2017/.
  25. “Demographic trends shaping the US and the world in 2017,” Pew Research Center, Anthony Cilluffo and D’Vera Cohn. Accessed 18 Feb. 2018, www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/27/10-demographic-tredns-shaping-theu-s-and-the-world-in-2017/.
  26. Francesco Grigoli, Alexander Herman, and Klaus Schimidt-Hebbel, “World Saving”. International Monitory Fund Working Paper No. 14/204 (Washington: International Monitory Fund, November 2014): 1- 55.
  27. M. Feldstein and C. Horioka, “Domestic Savings and international Capital Flows,” Economic Journal 90 (1980): 314 – 29
  28. “Gross savings (% of GDP),” The World Bank. Accessed 21 Oct. 2018, https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GNS.ICTR.ZS
  29. Francesco Grigoli, Alexander Herman, and Klaus Schimidt-Hebbel, “World Saving”. International Monitory Fund Working Paper No. 14/204 (Washington: International Monitory Fund, November 2014): 1- 55.
  30. Norman Loayza, Klaus Schmidt-Hebbel and Luis Serven, “What drives private saving around the World?” In: The Review of Economics and Statistics Vol. 82 (2) (May 2000): 165 – 18.
  31. Francesco Grigoli, Alexander Herman, and Klaus Schimidt-Hebbel, “World Saving”. International Monitory Fund Working Paper No. 14/204 (Washington: International Monitory Fund, November 2014): 1- 55.
  32. Francesco Grigoli, Alexander Herman, and Klaus Schimidt-Hebbel, “World Saving”. International Monitory Fund Working Paper No. 14/204 (Washington: International Monitory Fund, November 2014): 1- 55.
  33. A. Ando and F. Modigliani, “The Life-Cycle Hypothesis of Saving: Aggregate Implications and Tests,” American Economic Review 53, no. 1(1963): 55 – 84.
  34. Benjamin Guin ‘culture and household saving’. Working paper series European Central Bank No 2069. Month 2017. https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/scpwps/ecpwps/ecb.wp2069.en.pdf?a489f1abe4951dd2dbcb48562bc398c.
  35. Tsuneo Ishikawa, “Family Structures and Family Values in the Theory of Income Distribution,” Journal of Political Economy 83, no. 5 (Oct. 1975): 987 – 1008.
  36. “Global Wealth Migration Review: Worldwide wealth and wealth migration trends,” New World Wealth. Accessed 12 Dec. 2018, https://samnytt.se/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/GWMR-2018.pdf
  37. “Global Wealth Migration Review: Worldwide wealth and wealth migration trends,” New World Wealth. Accessed 12 Dec. 2018, https://samnytt.se/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/GWMR-2018.pdf
  38. Felix Warneken and Michael Tomasello, “The roots of human altruism,” British Journal of Psychology 100, no. 3 (Aug. 2009): 455 – 471
  39. J. Andreoni, “Giving with impure Altruism: Applications to Charity and Ricardian Equivalence” Journal of Political Economy 97, no. 6 (1989): 144 – 758.
  40. Photo credit: unknown. Graig Glenday, ed. Guinness World Records 2010. (New York: Bantam Books, 2010) 237
  41. “World publics welcome global trade – but not immigration,” Pew Research Center. Accessed 21 Feb. 2018, www.pewglobal.org/2007/10/04/world-publics-welcome-global-trade-but-not-immigration/.
  42. “World publics welcome global trade – but not immigration,” Pew Research Center. Accessed 21 Feb. 2018, www.pewglobal.org/2007/10/04/world-publics-welcome-global-trade-but-not-immigration/.
error: