Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
interestrateripoff

Scourge Of Inequality Is Getting Worse And Worse

Recommended Posts

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jeremywarner/100010097/scourge-of-inequality-is-getting-worse-and-worse/

Here’s an instructive graphic (click to enlarge), produced for social affairs ministers at an OECD seminar in Paris over the last few days on rising income inequality. You don’t need the OECD to tell you that extreme social inequality is a growing scourge, and that it tends to be highest as far as advanced economies are concerned in the English speaking nations, particularly the US and the UK.

But what this chart shows is that it is growing almost everywhere, and that includes places where you least expect to find it. Countries such as Denmark, Germany, Sweden and Finland, which traditionally have had low inequality, are no longer spared from the trend. In fact, they’ve all had a rather bigger increase in inequality than even the UK over the past twenty years. Levels of inequality seem to be converging at a common and higher average.

chart-social-inequality.jpg

More at the link.

So the effects of globalisation has been the rich have got richer and the poor get left behind. I don't remember the great globalisation sales pitch stating it was going to benefit one particular group. Although most with enough capacity to think it through realised jobs where going to be shipped out to the lowest cost countries, leaving of course only highly paid service jobs......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jeremywarner/100010097/scourge-of-inequality-is-getting-worse-and-worse/

More at the link.

So the effects of globalisation has been the rich have got richer and the poor get left behind. I don't remember the great globalisation sales pitch stating it was going to benefit one particular group. Although most with enough capacity to think it through realised jobs where going to be shipped out to the lowest cost countries, leaving of course only highly paid service jobs......

If this is true, it's great news. One of the biggest things wrong with Britain is that the lazy scroungers are as well or better off than the hard workers. If a gap, however small, is opening up then we should celebrate.

Also, if we take away your bias by looking at equality over all, rather than within countries (ask Injin for details) then we see equality increasing as hard-working Hungarians and Turks narrow the gap between themselves and our unemployed Somalians.

I'll drink to that. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jeremywarner/100010097/scourge-of-inequality-is-getting-worse-and-worse/

More at the link.

So the effects of globalisation has been the rich have got richer and the poor get left behind. I don't remember the great globalisation sales pitch stating it was going to benefit one particular group. Although most with enough capacity to think it through realised jobs where going to be shipped out to the lowest cost countries, leaving of course only highly paid service jobs......

Not just globalisation per se. Some of the attendant internal policies have also had large effects. New Zealand for instance, turned on a dime in the late 1980s due to political decisions concerning restructuring of how things worked "at home." An absolute tragedy in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to disagree yet again, but check this out:

http://krusekronicle.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451b14d69e2012877a526f0970c-400wi

"World poverty is falling. Between 1970 and 2006, the global poverty rate has been cut by nearly three quarters. The percentage of the world population living on less than $1 a day (in PPP-adjusted 2000 dollars) went from 26.8% in 1970 to 5.4% in 2006 (Figure 1)."

"Although world population has increased by about 80% over this time (World Bank 2009), the number of people below the $1 a day poverty line has shrunk by nearly 64%, from 967 million in 1970 to 350 million in 2006. "

So from the parochial point of view of us westerners, yes inequality has gone up. However from a whole species perspective, inequality has gone down.

http://krusekronicle.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451b14d69e2012877a539af970c-400wi

Chew on that one...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this is true, it's great news. One of the biggest things wrong with Britain is that the lazy scroungers are as well or better off than the hard workers. If a gap, however small, is opening up then we should celebrate.

Also, if we take away your bias by looking at equality over all, rather than within countries (ask Injin for details) then we see equality increasing as hard-working Hungarians and Turks narrow the gap between themselves and our unemployed Somalians.

I'll drink to that. :rolleyes:

Inequality is not a measure of how poor the employed poor are relative to the unemployed poor. It's a measure between rich and poor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to disagree yet again, but check this out:

http://krusekronicle...526f0970c-400wi

"World poverty is falling. Between 1970 and 2006, the global poverty rate has been cut by nearly three quarters. The percentage of the world population living on less than $1 a day (in PPP-adjusted 2000 dollars) went from 26.8% in 1970 to 5.4% in 2006 (Figure 1)."

"Although world population has increased by about 80% over this time (World Bank 2009), the number of people below the $1 a day poverty line has shrunk by nearly 64%, from 967 million in 1970 to 350 million in 2006. "

So from the parochial point of view of us westerners, yes inequality has gone up. However from a whole species perspective, inequality has gone down.

http://krusekronicle...539af970c-400wi

Chew on that one...

Devaluation of dollar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If this is true, it's great news. One of the biggest things wrong with Britain is that the lazy scroungers are as well or better off than the hard workers. If a gap, however small, is opening up then we should celebrate.

I had you down as a hard bitten cynic- but the fact that you seem to believe that there is some correlation between hard work and reward in the current setup places you amongst the most starry eyed of HPC posters.

Hard work isn't the route to riches any more- the hard working are merely there to provide the capital used by the speculators- it's they who reap the rewards- and if they screw up it's the workers who provide the funds to make good their bets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It could just be that the upper caste are becoming more intelligent and proactive, the lower caste are becoming dumber and lazier.

Thats the feeling I get on the local high street anyway.

Handily summarised by the Daily Mail for your delictation. The dude on the far right is your run of the mill chav, next in your typical eton type.

evolutionPA_800x326.jpg

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-489653/Human-race-split-different-species.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It could just be that the upper caste are becoming more intelligent and proactive, the lower caste are becoming dumber and lazier.

Thats the feeling I get on the local high street anyway.

Handily summarised by the Daily Mail for your delictation. The dude on the far right is your run of the mill chav, next in your typical eton type.

evolutionPA_800x326.jpg

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-489653/Human-race-split-different-species.html

And presumably the one that they couldnt fit in due to not enough space on the left was Gordon Brown?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It could just be that the upper caste are becoming more intelligent and proactive, the lower caste are becoming dumber and lazier.

Thats the feeling I get on the local high street anyway.

Yup, same impression I get.

Meanwhile the HPCers form their own sub-species...

Iron_Elder_by_Andead.jpg

"Still waiting for those 1995 prices!"

Edited by Mr Deflation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jeremywarner/100010097/scourge-of-inequality-is-getting-worse-and-worse/

More at the link.

So the effects of globalisation has been the rich have got richer and the poor get left behind. I don't remember the great globalisation sales pitch stating it was going to benefit one particular group. Although most with enough capacity to think it through realised jobs where going to be shipped out to the lowest cost countries, leaving of course only highly paid service jobs......

...what this doesn't highlight is that in the UK many people without jobs or those working part time are better off than people working in full time employment due to the last Labour governments policies ...all the above data is smartly produced but if it misses or glosses over the key issues and causes of our national decline ...then it is worthless...and that it is...... :rolleyes:

Edited by South Lorne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to disagree yet again, but check this out:

http://krusekronicle...526f0970c-400wi

"World poverty is falling. Between 1970 and 2006, the global poverty rate has been cut by nearly three quarters. The percentage of the world population living on less than $1 a day (in PPP-adjusted 2000 dollars) went from 26.8% in 1970 to 5.4% in 2006 (Figure 1)."

"Although world population has increased by about 80% over this time (World Bank 2009), the number of people below the $1 a day poverty line has shrunk by nearly 64%, from 967 million in 1970 to 350 million in 2006. "

So from the parochial point of view of us westerners, yes inequality has gone up. However from a whole species perspective, inequality has gone down.

http://krusekronicle...539af970c-400wi

Chew on that one...

Well go back 100 years and people were on 10p a day living now 2011 there is no one below the poverty line, but factor in inflation and theres a different story now lets say $5.76 how many are earning that a day?

Edited by crash2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to disagree yet again, but check this out:

http://krusekronicle.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451b14d69e2012877a526f0970c-400wi

"World poverty is falling. Between 1970 and 2006, the global poverty rate has been cut by nearly three quarters. The percentage of the world population living on less than $1 a day (in PPP-adjusted 2000 dollars) went from 26.8% in 1970 to 5.4% in 2006 (Figure 1)."

"Although world population has increased by about 80% over this time (World Bank 2009), the number of people below the $1 a day poverty line has shrunk by nearly 64%, from 967 million in 1970 to 350 million in 2006. "

So from the parochial point of view of us westerners, yes inequality has gone up. However from a whole species perspective, inequality has gone down.

http://krusekronicle.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451b14d69e2012877a539af970c-400wi

Chew on that one...

Agreed.

I do find it odd that the people who complain about the advantages enjoyed by the "lucky sperms" within a country are the very same people who are rabidly trying to maintain the advantages of the "lucky sperms" across countries.

Some people are fortunate to be born to the right parents. Some people are fortunate to be born in the right country. Over time the effects of this good fortunate are shrinking as it should.

The scourge is poverty and not inequality. Poverty is absolute and not relative.

A more accurate headline would be : "The scourge of global poverty lessening"

Edited for completeness

Edited by LuckyOne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to disagree yet again, but check this out:

http://krusekronicle.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451b14d69e2012877a526f0970c-400wi

"World poverty is falling. Between 1970 and 2006, the global poverty rate has been cut by nearly three quarters. The percentage of the world population living on less than $1 a day (in PPP-adjusted 2000 dollars) went from 26.8% in 1970 to 5.4% in 2006 (Figure 1)."

"Although world population has increased by about 80% over this time (World Bank 2009), the number of people below the $1 a day poverty line has shrunk by nearly 64%, from 967 million in 1970 to 350 million in 2006. "

So from the parochial point of view of us westerners, yes inequality has gone up. However from a whole species perspective, inequality has gone down.

http://krusekronicle.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451b14d69e2012877a539af970c-400wi

Chew on that one...

Did you actually read what I posted? Are those countries where people live on $1 a day in the OECD?

The graph was about those nations within the OECD.

Member list for the dummies at the back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Almost everyone has a pound (even if its in benefits), not everyone has a car, house or shares.

Ergo a policy that destroys the former to save the latter is a policy that helps the haves over the have nots.

I wonder what the charts would look like for the UK if we had not reduced interest rates or indeed had then 1% over the rate of inflation I hazard than the difference woud have drastically reduced since 2007.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Almost everyone has a pound (even if its in benefits), not everyone has a car, house or shares.

Ergo a policy that destroys the former to save the latter is a policy that helps the haves over the have nots.

I wonder what the charts would look like for the UK if we had not reduced interest rates or indeed had then 1% over the rate of inflation I hazard than the difference woud have drastically reduced since 2007.

A very interesting observation. I cannot see the Krugmanites of the world admitting that low interest rates are socially unjust because they protect those with large debts at the expense of those who are just getting by on low incomes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A very interesting observation. I cannot see the Krugmanites of the world admitting that low interest rates are socially unjust because they protect those with large debts at the expense of those who are just getting by on low incomes. everyone else.

Corrected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this is true, it's great news. One of the biggest things wrong with Britain is that the lazy scroungers are as well or better off than the hard workers. If a gap, however small, is opening up then we should celebrate.

Actually, it's more a case of the top 10% moving away from the rest, who get more and more crammed together, and the top ~1% powering into the stratosphere. Outside of these groups, working makes less and less sense; actually moving into the two groups mentioned is also getting harder and harder as well due to barriers to entry. Cameron-approved nepotism combined with tuition fees, unpaid internships and - should you try to start your own business - a banking sector focused entirely on mortgages and speculating make it harder and harder to change your lot through work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A more accurate headline would be : "The scourge of global poverty lessening"

No, because my post clearly shows a significant decline in world gini, which is a measure of inequality.

But yes, it is hypocritical to moan about inequality in ones back yard while covertly advocating a maintainance or increase of inequality between the west and the rest!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you actually read what I posted? Are those countries where people live on $1 a day in the OECD?

The graph was about those nations within the OECD.

Member list for the dummies at the back.

See above. If inequality has increased in the OECD and decreased elsewhere, for an overall net decrease in inequality globally, then that is a good outcome for the species.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A very interesting observation. I cannot see the Krugmanites of the world admitting that low interest rates are socially unjust because they protect those with large debts at the expense of those who are just getting by on low incomes.

If a person has a pound and two pounds of debt, then the fact they have a pound is not material.

Low interest rates don't penalise people 'just getting by' with low income, they penalise lazy rentiers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> I don't remember the great globalisation sales pitch stating it was going to benefit one particular group. Although most with enough capacity to think it through realised jobs where going to be shipped out to the lowest cost countries, leaving of course only highly paid service jobs......

In my country (Canada), they said globalization would create winners and losers, but that retraining and other subsidies would be directed to the losers to make them whole. However, none of that has happened. Instead, asset bubbles have and continue to be blown so that the losers who happen to own assets (and houses in particular) are distracted and don't complain loudly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the settling of scores that the proletariat inflicted on the bourgeoisie in the aftermath of WWII, there was an artificial narrowing of the gap between the rich and the poor.

And quite right too.

That gap is returning to more normal historic levels.

I think it's to be expected and lets face it, the poor have all had the vote since 1918/1928 (men/women), so I suppose that despite the bleating its what they want.

And why shouldn't they?

They're all a lot richer now than they were in 1928.

Edited by indirectapproach

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 311 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.