3 ms·
As far as I'm aware the World Bank doesn't collect this data very often. If you have more recent data feel free to post it. The data you are citing is restrict
by yummyfajitas 11y ago
As far as I'm aware the World Bank doesn't collect this data very often. If you have more recent data feel free to post it.
The data you are citing is restricted to a slice of the top 20% of the world. Indians and Chinese (i.e. the bottom 50% or so) don't count?
Also note that you cite data on productivity for the economy as a whole, but hourly compensation only for "production and nonsupervisory workers". That's a weird comparison to make - what if the increase in productivity was caused primarily by people outside this narrow group?
- Retric 11y agoI think I found the source of that chart. When we line up all individuals in the world, from the poorest to the richest. http://www.voxeu.org/article/global-income-distribution-1988 http://www.voxeu.org/article/global-income-distribution-1988 So, it says just about nothing about the US income distribution. PS: I suspect that bump is basically China + India, and the Dip is the US/EU middle class. Yes, outsourcing and free trade is great for other people.
- yummyfajitas 11y agoWhat tipped you off, the label on the X-axis? It's not great for wealthy people who were enjoying economic rents by excluding desperately poor people from the global economy. So what? Do people earning $2,000/year (1/10 of what a poor American consumes) not count?
- Retric 11y agoHelping the global poor is a great soundbite, but there are plenty of ways to do the same thing without harming the vast majority of Americans. Of note the rich got a free ride while breaking the US middle class. That's actually bad for long term economic growth. It also entrenched and entrenched authoritarian governments around the world ex: China.