[two characters are talking]
Vaccines have saved millions of lives you know
[a blue character points at them proudly]
Heh, look at those idiots over there, they believe in the most obvious propaganda
[the blue character is shown doing various faces]
Anyway, did you know communism killed 100 million people?
I’ve seen that 20% of the people commit 80% of the crime
Our military keeps the world a safer place
Everyone starts with opportunities, you have to earn your place in society, work harder
[sixteen variations of the blue character are shown on a multicolored grid]
Crime is out of control and keeps getting worse
Men are natural leaders, women’s nature is to nurture
Billionaires create jobs
Poor people just keep making bad decisions in life
Migrants are taking our jobs
Socialism is when we all share the same paycheck
If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear
If minimum wages go up, everyone will get fired, it’s math
We brought modernity to the countries we colonized
The wage gap is a myth you’re just looking at it wrong
Immigration mathematically causes crime
Developing countries are poor because of corruption
We are the good guys
If workers were worth more, they would be paid more
Universal healthcare is communism
Patriotism means supporting the troops
[a large drawing of a serious Garfield is surrounded by the infinitely repeating phrase]
YOU ARE NOT IMMUNE TO PROPAGANDA
of course it is not, i am not (and no one sane is) saying it is and if that is someone’s interpretation, that is just misunderstanding of what pareto principle is. it just speaks about distribution inside of the subset.
so inside of the subset of criminals, there will be 20% of them responsible for majority of all the individual crimes.
or i believe it is quite likely (although i don’t have data for that on hand), that you could find that 20% of criminals are responsible for 80% of monetary damage caused by the crime. these are the white collar criminals, who will often escape the punishment, because it is easier to lock up the bottom 80% who can’t afford expensive layers. but the fact that someone sees this as injustice (and i do agree it is) is not a reason to reject some mathematical principal, who just describes it without passing any judgement.
lot of bullshit does not have to be included for this. the rule just makes a prediction about distribution in the specific set, no matter how you define it. it will be true on the set of murderers, it will be true on the set of people with speeding tickets and it will be true on set of people riding a train without a ticket.
the pareto rule doesn’t say how many people in the population have ever ridden without a ticket.
but if you take a set of people who ever did, they will follow roughly the same pattern.
there will be group who does that on a daily basis and these will have many individual transgressions on their account and there will be these who has done that occasionally, every once in a while.
and the rule isn’t specifically about crime.
example from another field: for the isp (internet service provider), 20% of their customers will be responsible for 80% of the total traffic in the network. you don’t have to wonder whether it seems plausible, this is empirically proven fact.
it doesn’t say everyone (or 20% of all people) in their area of operation is their customer. it doesn’t even say 20% of people in that area uses internet at all.
but their customers will follow that pattern. the isp could even decide (if the law permits) to just let these customers go and make their life easier. the profit vs expenses ratio will increase. of course, the rest of the customers they keep will still follow the same pattern, so they can repeat this process until they are left with no customers at all.