5 ms·
It seems that a higher ranking is worse. > The Index presents a ranking of 167 countries based on the proportion of the population that is estimated to be in m
by codehusker 9y ago
It seems that a higher ranking is worse.
> The Index presents a ranking of 167 countries based on the proportion of the population that is estimated to be in modern slavery. [0]
North Korea, with 4.37% in slavery, is ranked 1.
India, with 1.4% in slavery, is ranked 4.
Philippines, with 0.4% in slavery, is ranked 33.
China, with 0.25% in slavery, is ranked 40.
USA, with .02% in slavery, is ranked 52.
[0] https://www.globalslaveryindex.org/findings/ https://www.globalslaveryindex.org/findings/
EDIT: number -> ranking
- smhenderson 9y agoHow is a higher number worse if there is less slavery in countries with a higher number?
- codehusker 9y agoI should have phrased it as a higher ranking rather than a higher number. I assumed 'higher' was clear in the terms of ranks, rather than a larger number. GP's claim makes it seem like they interpreted as I did. > ...countries like North Korea (rank #1) are closer to 0... NK is not close to 0 in relative or absolute slave counts, and I don't see the utility in pointing out that 1 is closer to 0 than 52.
- smhenderson 9y agoYes, I replied before you edited your post, I get your meaning now. Thanks for clarifying.
- barsonme 9y agoI meant 'higher' as in 'larger', sorry.
- mcv 9y agoWhat surprises me is that Netherland, while praised for doing the most to fight slavery, is, at #50, ranked lower than the US, which I believe has forced prison labour. Maybe it has to do with prostitution being legal here. You'd expect licensed and regulated prostitution to reduce slavery in prostitution, but apparently it's still a serious problem. Still, 17,500 people in slavery? That's a lot. I'd like to know where they got that figure.