Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Explore Wealth and Income Inequality in the World Wealth and Income Database

wid.world

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 248 posts

Re: Explore Wealth and Income Inequality in the World Wealth and Income Database

#231

Post by ttoinou »

sokoloff wrote: post #125
splintercell wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or the argument can be made that the world is moving away from poverty at the back of 1%ers. The point being that 1% is getting richer than the average person of their own country, by lifting the poorest person of a poor country upwards. The only loser here is the middle class of rich countries, not middle or poor class of poor countries.

The middle class in America today is wildly, wildly better off than 100, 50, 25, or 10 years ago, IMO. 100 years ago, they didn't have phase-change refrigeration, instead relying on ice. (That's why your grandmother might still call it an "ice box".) 50 years ago, they didn't have air conditioning. 25 years ago, they didn't have cars that would reliably run for 250K miles with airbags, anti-lock brakes, traction cont…

All great results of relatively free markets.

And we have people complaining about housing and healthcare.... I know the solution to theses issues

Re: Explore Wealth and Income Inequality in the World Wealth and Income Database

#232

Post by ttoinou »

clairity wrote: post #151
dmix wrote: post #52

Changing the graph from "Share %" to "Average Income or Wealth" shows a much more optimistic looking chart, with every country ramping upwards, almost at an exponentially positive rate. The world as a whole is moving away from poverty and quality of life is improving which IMO is the most important metric here. Far more important to the average person than the relative wealth ratios at the top vs the bottom, which ye…

progress has no bounds. it's like water, finding a route where none existed before. even if you try to dam up some portion, the pressure mounts, and the dam breaks. do not worry about stifling advancement, especially through economic means. when it comes to wealth (in)equality, you basically want to balance greed on one side and anger on the other. sure, allow the greedy to amass a little weath to promote their playi…

Wealth is produced, not distributed. You earn stuff you created, not stolen from someone else

Re: Explore Wealth and Income Inequality in the World Wealth and Income Database

#233

Post by retailbuyout »

ttoinou wrote: post #228
retailbuyout wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think the total size of the pie matters so much as the proportion. Also, it’s relative positioning that determines happiness—i’d much rather live in a place where I can look my neighbor in the eye than one where I can leverage my privileges to provide myself many times a better life than my neighbor. I’m american; my quality of life could plummit without affecting my happiness much at all. But I have no idea…

It's all about envy, then ?

How do you figure? Happiness is not enviness of those less fortunate than you....

Re: Explore Wealth and Income Inequality in the World Wealth and Income Database

#234

Post by collinmanderson »

This seems like a misleading graph. The map compares income share to _area_? Wouldn't comparing to density or capita be more helpful?

I happen to know China has more population so seeing it lighter says something to me, but having a better way to compare to the number of people would be helpful.

Re: Explore Wealth and Income Inequality in the World Wealth and Income Database

#236

Post by fjsolwmv »

ameister14 wrote: post #113
euyyn wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a good metric for success at giving everyone equal opportunity at birth.

Not really. You can have low income inequality through redistribution of wealth and still have massive differences in opportunity at birth based on other, non-monetary societal factors.

Theoretically only.

Re: Explore Wealth and Income Inequality in the World Wealth and Income Database

#237

Post by euyyn »

ameister14 wrote: post #205
euyyn wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree: You're describing what fans of him will think of his son. But in this kid's day-to-day life after graduating, unless he becomes famous on his own, nobody will know who he is. They'll just see a dude that dresses well, lives in a well-off neighborhood, and got an education like everybody else. He won't have been raised in a violent neighborhood with poor access to education. And no employer will think twic…

That's possible, yes. However if his father is not a football player but instead is a bookkeeper, the education and accent may end pulling him out of the racial association he is in just as easily.

Yeah, agreed, I was thinking of the footballer because it's a real-life case I know of. But it's not necessary to have rich parents, just not being poor helps with those other societal factors you mentioned that hinder equal opportunity.

Re: Explore Wealth and Income Inequality in the World Wealth and Income Database

#238

Post by euyyn »

ctdonath wrote: post #226
euyyn wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Following that argument, if we taxed them, their ways to not escape poverty would be even less sustainable. Victory! Ridiculous conclusion from a simplistic argument.

Way to miss the point by leaving out half of it. We're giving people reasons to stay in poverty: don't work, and their food/housing/healthcare will be provided for; start working, and all that gets yanked away and whatever is earned is diminished by taxation (direct and indirect). Faced with that, there's little reason to "escape poverty". "Stop subsidizing so much" does not equate to "start taxing them". I'm all for…

You're talking now of an effective marginal rate > 100%, which is not what you said originally ("If you want less of something, tax it. If you want more of something, subsidize it.").

I agree marginal rates should always be < 100% for the obvious reasons. I haven't seen numbers that it ever happens, but it is to be avoided in theory, yes.

Re: Explore Wealth and Income Inequality in the World Wealth and Income Database

#239

Post by collyw »

milcron wrote: post #133
collyw wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing is being produced when rent seeking.

That's a good point, which potentially leads to Georgism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism > Georgism, also called geoism and single tax, is an economic philosophy holding that, while people should own the value they produce themselves, economic value derived from land (including natural resources and natural opportunities) should belong equally to all members of society. > Any natural resource which is inheren…

That actually matches my current political views fairly accurately. I didn't know the name for it (or that there was a name for it).

Re: Explore Wealth and Income Inequality in the World Wealth and Income Database

#240

Post by RepressedEmu »

tuna-piano wrote: post #224
croon wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bernie Sanders type economies are Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland, Germany, etc... I took your initial posts as a sound argument I disagree with, now I think you're trolling.

I don’t ever hear Sanders saying one good thing about capitalism. I don’t hear his supporters saying anything nice about it easier- i really do feel like it needs defending. In 2011, Bernie Sanders explained that "These days, the American dream is more apt to be realized in South America, in places such as Ecuador, Venezuela and Argentina..." http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/bernie-sanders-jeremy-corb...

Most people don't jump up to "defend capitalism" because it is already the status quo in America. It is already being aptly defended by the oligarchy of big business that profit off of the inequality being discussed here.

You argue in another comment that "you just want it to be said" that modern American poor are better off than the poor people in Laos in the 1800's. Congratulations, you've won that strawman argument.

Now you should move on to how to solve the actual current problems of the modern poor and the hollowing out of the American middle class rather than wasting your breath defending the current status quo and arguing against improving people's lives. It might be a better use of brainpower.

Post reply on HN