5 ms·

Where is the documentation for worldwide inequality falling? According to this page for instance GINI (a measure of inequality) has been rising in most countrie

by capisce 13y ago

Where is the documentation for worldwide inequality falling? According to this page for instance GINI (a measure of inequality) has been rising in most countries since the 1980s: http://geo-mexico.com/?p=5044 http://geo-mexico.com/?p=5044

nostrademons 13y ago
The stat I've heard (in soundbite form; I don't have solid data for this) is that inequality within countries is rising across the board, but inequality between countries is falling. In other words, a rich Chinese person is now much richer than a poor Chinese person, a rich Mexican is now much richer than a poor Mexican, and a rich American is much richer than a poor American. However, a rich Chinese person or Mexican is now almost as rich as a rich American, while a poor American is now nearly as poor as a poor Mexican. And a rich Chinese person is significantly wealthier than a poor American, while it used to be that poor Americans were significantly wealthier than even wealthy Chinese. There's plenty of anecdotal evidence to support this, eg. the richest person in the world was Mexican from 2010-2013, and it also makes a lot of sense when you consider how globalization works.
- sundaeofshock 13y ago
  Forgive me for asking, but are you suggesting this is a good thing?
  - keebz 13y ago
    How is it not? Or are you saying there is some sort of nationality inferiority that should drive the attainment of non-Americans below that of all others? Over the past half century, China has brought the most people out of poverty in world history. These are the forces at play.
    - Spooky23 13y ago
      Depends on your worldview. Do you care about some kid in rural China, or your unborn grandchild? A globalized economy will eventually pull everyone towards the mean. That's not good news for your descendants if you live in the west. It's a dark moral place. It's also why realpolitik rules the day.
      - capisce 13y ago
        Inequality within a country is a far greater (inverse) predictor of your unborn grandchild's standard of living than worldwide inequality. There's enough wealth in the world to go around if evenly distributed.
    - capisce 13y ago
      Decreasing inequality between nations is surely a good thing. However, the increasing inequality inside nations is dangerous not just because of a sense of injustice - concentrated wealth implies concentrated power, and concentrated power tends to be at odds with a democratic model. Also, China may have brought a lot of people out of poverty but they're doing so partially by sacrificing the health and in effect lives of hundred of millions of citizens with pollution way off the safety scale.
  - nostrademons 13y ago
    I wasn't suggesting anything with my original post, merely stating a hypothesis about how the world is. It's possible to have a fact without a value judgment. ...but now that you ask, yes, I do think this is a good thing. It strikes me as a ridiculous injustice that the biggest single determinant of your lifetime income is the geographic location of your birth. Anything that makes that less arbitrary and more under your control will lead to a more just world, in my book. Yes, that means that the economic system is chaotic at present and some people are getting left behind. However, it's far easier to pick up the skills needed to survive in today's economy than it was to move to the U.S. and get American citizenship in past generations.
    - jshen 13y ago
      In America social mobility is declining. Just another fact for this thread
AndrewKemendo 13y ago
World Bank report 2012[1]: For the first time since this monitoring task began, the data indicate a decline in both the poverty rate and the number of poor in all six regions of the developing world Kings College 2013[2]: In this paper we explore who have been the winners and losers from global growth since 1990 Economist Special Section 2012[3] - More nuanced and could offer a slightly alternative if generally positive example [1] http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPOVCALNET/Resources/Global_Poverty_Update_2012_02-29-12.pdf http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPOVCALNET/Resources/Gl... [2] http://www.kcl.ac.uk/aboutkings/worldwide/initiatives/global/intdev/people/Sumner/Inequality-Paper-%2810June2013%29.pdf http://www.kcl.ac.uk/aboutkings/worldwide/initiatives/global... [3] http://www.economist.com/node/21564414 http://www.economist.com/node/21564414

by capisce 13y ago

nostrademons 13y ago

The stat I've heard (in soundbite form; I don't have solid data for this) is that inequality within countries is rising across the board, but inequality between countries is falling. In other words, a rich Chinese person is now much richer than a poor Chinese person, a rich Mexican is now much richer than a poor Mexican, and a rich American is much richer than a poor American. However, a rich Chinese person or Mexican is now almost as rich as a rich American, while a poor American is now nearly as poor as a poor Mexican. And a rich Chinese person is significantly wealthier than a poor American, while it used to be that poor Americans were significantly wealthier than even wealthy Chinese. There's plenty of anecdotal evidence to support this, eg. the richest person in the world was Mexican from 2010-2013, and it also makes a lot of sense when you consider how globalization works.

sundaeofshock 13y ago
Forgive me for asking, but are you suggesting this is a good thing?
- keebz 13y ago
  How is it not? Or are you saying there is some sort of nationality inferiority that should drive the attainment of non-Americans below that of all others? Over the past half century, China has brought the most people out of poverty in world history. These are the forces at play.
  - Spooky23 13y ago
    Depends on your worldview. Do you care about some kid in rural China, or your unborn grandchild? A globalized economy will eventually pull everyone towards the mean. That's not good news for your descendants if you live in the west. It's a dark moral place. It's also why realpolitik rules the day.
    - capisce 13y ago
      Inequality within a country is a far greater (inverse) predictor of your unborn grandchild's standard of living than worldwide inequality. There's enough wealth in the world to go around if evenly distributed.
  - capisce 13y ago
    Decreasing inequality between nations is surely a good thing. However, the increasing inequality inside nations is dangerous not just because of a sense of injustice - concentrated wealth implies concentrated power, and concentrated power tends to be at odds with a democratic model. Also, China may have brought a lot of people out of poverty but they're doing so partially by sacrificing the health and in effect lives of hundred of millions of citizens with pollution way off the safety scale.
- nostrademons 13y ago
  I wasn't suggesting anything with my original post, merely stating a hypothesis about how the world is. It's possible to have a fact without a value judgment. ...but now that you ask, yes, I do think this is a good thing. It strikes me as a ridiculous injustice that the biggest single determinant of your lifetime income is the geographic location of your birth. Anything that makes that less arbitrary and more under your control will lead to a more just world, in my book. Yes, that means that the economic system is chaotic at present and some people are getting left behind. However, it's far easier to pick up the skills needed to survive in today's economy than it was to move to the U.S. and get American citizenship in past generations.
  - jshen 13y ago
    In America social mobility is declining. Just another fact for this thread

AndrewKemendo 13y ago

World Bank report 2012[1]: For the first time since this monitoring task began, the data indicate a decline in both the poverty rate and the number of poor in all six regions of the developing world Kings College 2013[2]: In this paper we explore who have been the winners and losers from global growth since 1990 Economist Special Section 2012[3] - More nuanced and could offer a slightly alternative if generally positive example [1] http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPOVCALNET/Resources/Global_Poverty_Update_2012_02-29-12.pdf http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPOVCALNET/Resources/Gl... [2] http://www.kcl.ac.uk/aboutkings/worldwide/initiatives/global/intdev/people/Sumner/Inequality-Paper-%2810June2013%29.pdf http://www.kcl.ac.uk/aboutkings/worldwide/initiatives/global... [3] http://www.economist.com/node/21564414 http://www.economist.com/node/21564414