33 ms·

Decline of Global Extreme Poverty Continues but Has Slowed

139 points by dcgudeman 8y ago

shakehar 8y ago
https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2018/09/19/decline-of-global-extreme-poverty-continues-but-has-slowed-world-bank https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2018/09/19/d... Non pay wall link with the same info
- IloveHN84 8y ago
  Thanks..I don't understand why people continue linking WSJ even due the fact that not everybody has a subscription with them
  - dplgk 8y ago
    Perhaps they are WSJ shills.
    - fwn 8y ago
      That's a very unlikely explanation. Newspapers do have a rather wide reach, especially compared with primary sources like the grandparent provided. This is because their content is not only designed to be shared, it's also promoted by the respective brands content platform. That way they get more views and, by extension, get posted on HN/reddit/etc. with a higher frequency.
  - cimmanom 8y ago
    Probably be cause they found an interesting article there and didn’t realize it was available elsewhere (and sometimes it actually isn’t).
- sctb 8y ago
  Thanks! We've updated the link from https://www.wsj.com/articles/world-poverty-falls-below-750-million-report-says-1537366273 https://www.wsj.com/articles/world-poverty-falls-below-750-m....
evilturnip 8y ago
Does anyone know exactly why? I conjecture to say it's broadly the result of capitalism. I really feel like it's a shame that word is almost toxic in intellectual circles.
- zorpner 8y ago
  Does anyone know exactly why? I conjecture to say... With this stunning level of rigor, it's astonishing that you'd be baffled by the discourse in actual intellectual circles.
  - dredmorbius 8y ago
    The personal attack is not necessay. The observation on lack of rigour stands. The question of what actually precipitates, maintains, spreads, or limits growth has in fact been a central question of numerous economic schools of thought and/or ideology; the Physiocrats, Adam Smith, free-market fundamentalists, J.S. Mill's steady-state, Ricardo & George on rents, Schumpeter's creative destruction, Kondratieff's technological waves, North's institutionalsism. Jevons, Adams, Lotke, Soddy, Boulding, Georgescu-Roegen, Meadows et al, Daly, Ayres, Klitgaard & Hall, Smil, and Keen all point to an overwhelmingly dominant role for energy, especially fossil fuels. The full answer has multiple components. Simply chalking "capitalism fixed it" is beyond facile. Particularly when aggreement as to what that term even encompasses is at best exceptionally limited.
- groestl 8y ago
  I also think that (some aspects of) capitalism play a role in this, but another large factor is probably improved access to education, especially education of girls.
  - groestl 8y ago
    Interesting that this is controversial here, but the reasoning goes like this: peace and fewer civil conflicts allow for stronger institutions, such as schools. Education amplifies this even more, and strenghtens trust in institutions. In some places, schools help keeping the children fully fed, making sure they get at least one meal a day. Furthermore, improving education for girls specifically is almost always followed by a reduction of the number of children later in life and a raise in childbearing age. With fewer children, each one gets access to more resources, including education and technology, breaking the cycle of poverty.
ape4 8y ago
Still seems like quite a lot
- dlp211 8y ago
  Consider that we started with nearly everyone in extreme poverty 200 years ago.
  - briga 8y ago
    On the other hand, consider that the world population in the 1800s was about 1/7th what it is today, so the total number of people in extreme poverty probably hasn't changed much between then and now. What has changed is our idea of what wealth is, and what poverty is, and I think these notions will continue to change.
    - egeozcan 8y ago
      Extreme poverty is very clearly defined since 1995. Quoting Wikipedia[0]: > Extreme poverty, abject poverty, absolute poverty, destitution, or penury, was originally defined by the United Nations in 1995 as "a condition characterized by severe deprivation of basic human needs, including food, safe drinking water, sanitation facilities, health, shelter, education and information. It depends not only on income but also on access to services." IMHO, this is a very timeless definition as well. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_poverty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_poverty
      - GW150914 8y ago
        In 2018, "extreme poverty" widely refers to earning below the international poverty line of $1.90/day (in 2011 prices, equivalent to $2.07 in 2017), set by the World Bank. This measure is the equivalent to earning $1.00 a day in 1996 US prices, hence the widely used expression, living on "less than a dollar a day". To be clear, if you earn $760 a year, by the World Bank’s definition, you’re not extremely poor. By that definition homeless beggars in the US don’t live in extreme poverty, because they make more than that panhandling. I really do think it’s worth considering the degree to which this definition is designed primarily to produce “victories” like the ones being celebrated here. @carlosdp: So one of the richest humans of all time approves of a book telling people that the world he helped to create is better than they think? Hm. This is the book by Hans Rosling right? The one that cherry picks data shamelessly to make the point he clearly wanted to make before he researched it? The one panned by Business Insider, not the most notably loon left publication ever? According to Business Insider, Rosling "misses critical wrinkles in the data" and has not presented "the whole story". From Wikipedia: Although Rosling argues that the future will be better than expected because birth rates are stabilizing, life expectancy around the world is increasing, the gender gap is nearly closed, and the extremely impoverished population is shrinking, others point out that populations are still expanding (with many still under-nourished), life expectancy in the US is decreasing, the gender gap is only nearly closed in education and not in employment, and extreme wealth has become more extreme. It seems like being a bit skeptical of people selling Panglossian visions, given how much people want to believe them, might not hurt. That’s not to advocate the kind of doom and gloom which forgets that we have antibiotics, indoor plumbing, and electric lights. It is however worth keeping an eye on worrying trends like antibiotic resistance, climate change, and just how many people don’t have indoor plumbing, safe water, and electric lights.
blocked_again 8y ago
A lot of people seems to be skeptical about this. There is a wonderful book called Factfullness which is written exactly for this kind of audience. In his book, Rosling suggests the vast majority of human beings are wrong about the state of the world. He believes his test subjects think the world is poorer, less healthy, and more dangerous than it is. Bill gates sponsored this book for all the students graduating from college and I can exactly see why by going through this thread.
- camillomiller 8y ago
  As a professional in the media field, I think I have an idea of who’s the first offender in propagating a doomier world view
  - skrebbel 8y ago
    That's... great. Any chance you want to share that idea with us?
    - olig15 8y ago
      I’m guessing he means ‘the media’
      - camillomiller 8y ago
        Well I thought it was quite obvious, but yes. It’s us. As everyone knows, fear sells. Nice good stories about how much better off we are now? Mmm, not so much. This doesn’t mean that huge problems don’t exist in the world. We have the duty to report on them. I personally try to do things differently than this, and I cover tech, so it’s easier and more neutral. If anything good stories about tech and progress still sell. I feel very detached from the trends of my industry, and so do many colleagues of mine with no power to take policy or business decisions.
        hyperpallium 8y ago
known 8y ago
I think credit should go to Globalization;
- thecopy 8y ago
  Yes, globalisation plus free trade and capitalism.
  - m_mueller 8y ago
    IMO that only works when it's coupled with progress in governance. Compare Venezuela to India over the last 30 years, and extrapolate into the near future what will happen there. Edit: Just to anticipate the obligatory "Venezuala communist -> bad outcome" comment: Yes, but why are they communist?
    - thecopy 8y ago
      >Compare Venezuela to India over the last 30 years, and extrapolate into the near future what will happen there. Compare how? What do you mean will happen?
      - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
        > What do you mean will happen? Even in its deepest crises, India's army did not play kingmaker. Furthermore, India's federated structure–while annoying to reformers–checks the power of aspiring dictators. Every uneducated population, it seems, elects populists from time to time. The damage they can do in India appears to be more limited than the damage done to Venezuela by Chavez and Maduro. Venezuela will probably be an impoverished nation for decades; India has a chance of becoming a middle-income or even developed country by 2050.
      - m_mueller 8y ago
        I recommend to look at the following: https://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=621563128 https://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?stor... https://www.gapminder.org/tools/#$state$time$value=2018;&marker$select@$geo=ven&trailStartTime=1985;&$geo=ind&trailStartTime=1985;;;;&chart-type=bubbles https://www.gapminder.org/tools/#$state$time$value=2018;&mar...
kya_isro 8y ago
Well who was to blame for the poverty, the hard working men and women got out off, in the first place. When can we get a report on that?
kya_isro 8y ago
That article should come out of Delhi or Beijing, not Washington. Thanks to the western world, for stopping their evil doing in Asia (excluding Near East). When US/France/UK get their ass out of Africa and Middle East, expect further decline of global poverty. https://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-brought-271-million-out-of-poverty-between-2005-16-similar-to-china-undp-oxford-report-5368980/ https://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-brought-271-mi... Expecting a lot of downvotes in the HN crowd.

139 points by dcgudeman 8y ago

https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2018/09/19/decline-of-global-extreme-poverty-continues-but-has-slowed-world-bank https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2018/09/19/d... Non pay wall link with the same info

IloveHN84 8y ago
Thanks..I don't understand why people continue linking WSJ even due the fact that not everybody has a subscription with them
- dplgk 8y ago
  Perhaps they are WSJ shills.
  - fwn 8y ago
    That's a very unlikely explanation. Newspapers do have a rather wide reach, especially compared with primary sources like the grandparent provided. This is because their content is not only designed to be shared, it's also promoted by the respective brands content platform. That way they get more views and, by extension, get posted on HN/reddit/etc. with a higher frequency.
- cimmanom 8y ago
  Probably be cause they found an interesting article there and didn’t realize it was available elsewhere (and sometimes it actually isn’t).
sctb 8y ago
Thanks! We've updated the link from https://www.wsj.com/articles/world-poverty-falls-below-750-million-report-says-1537366273 https://www.wsj.com/articles/world-poverty-falls-below-750-m....

evilturnip 8y ago

Does anyone know exactly why? I conjecture to say it's broadly the result of capitalism. I really feel like it's a shame that word is almost toxic in intellectual circles.

zorpner 8y ago
Does anyone know exactly why? I conjecture to say... With this stunning level of rigor, it's astonishing that you'd be baffled by the discourse in actual intellectual circles.
- dredmorbius 8y ago
  The personal attack is not necessay. The observation on lack of rigour stands. The question of what actually precipitates, maintains, spreads, or limits growth has in fact been a central question of numerous economic schools of thought and/or ideology; the Physiocrats, Adam Smith, free-market fundamentalists, J.S. Mill's steady-state, Ricardo & George on rents, Schumpeter's creative destruction, Kondratieff's technological waves, North's institutionalsism. Jevons, Adams, Lotke, Soddy, Boulding, Georgescu-Roegen, Meadows et al, Daly, Ayres, Klitgaard & Hall, Smil, and Keen all point to an overwhelmingly dominant role for energy, especially fossil fuels. The full answer has multiple components. Simply chalking "capitalism fixed it" is beyond facile. Particularly when aggreement as to what that term even encompasses is at best exceptionally limited.
groestl 8y ago
I also think that (some aspects of) capitalism play a role in this, but another large factor is probably improved access to education, especially education of girls.
- groestl 8y ago
  Interesting that this is controversial here, but the reasoning goes like this: peace and fewer civil conflicts allow for stronger institutions, such as schools. Education amplifies this even more, and strenghtens trust in institutions. In some places, schools help keeping the children fully fed, making sure they get at least one meal a day. Furthermore, improving education for girls specifically is almost always followed by a reduction of the number of children later in life and a raise in childbearing age. With fewer children, each one gets access to more resources, including education and technology, breaking the cycle of poverty.

ape4 8y ago

Still seems like quite a lot

dlp211 8y ago
Consider that we started with nearly everyone in extreme poverty 200 years ago.
- briga 8y ago
  On the other hand, consider that the world population in the 1800s was about 1/7th what it is today, so the total number of people in extreme poverty probably hasn't changed much between then and now. What has changed is our idea of what wealth is, and what poverty is, and I think these notions will continue to change.
  - egeozcan 8y ago
    Extreme poverty is very clearly defined since 1995. Quoting Wikipedia[0]: > Extreme poverty, abject poverty, absolute poverty, destitution, or penury, was originally defined by the United Nations in 1995 as "a condition characterized by severe deprivation of basic human needs, including food, safe drinking water, sanitation facilities, health, shelter, education and information. It depends not only on income but also on access to services." IMHO, this is a very timeless definition as well. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_poverty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_poverty
    - GW150914 8y ago
      In 2018, "extreme poverty" widely refers to earning below the international poverty line of $1.90/day (in 2011 prices, equivalent to $2.07 in 2017), set by the World Bank. This measure is the equivalent to earning $1.00 a day in 1996 US prices, hence the widely used expression, living on "less than a dollar a day". To be clear, if you earn $760 a year, by the World Bank’s definition, you’re not extremely poor. By that definition homeless beggars in the US don’t live in extreme poverty, because they make more than that panhandling. I really do think it’s worth considering the degree to which this definition is designed primarily to produce “victories” like the ones being celebrated here. @carlosdp: So one of the richest humans of all time approves of a book telling people that the world he helped to create is better than they think? Hm. This is the book by Hans Rosling right? The one that cherry picks data shamelessly to make the point he clearly wanted to make before he researched it? The one panned by Business Insider, not the most notably loon left publication ever? According to Business Insider, Rosling "misses critical wrinkles in the data" and has not presented "the whole story". From Wikipedia: Although Rosling argues that the future will be better than expected because birth rates are stabilizing, life expectancy around the world is increasing, the gender gap is nearly closed, and the extremely impoverished population is shrinking, others point out that populations are still expanding (with many still under-nourished), life expectancy in the US is decreasing, the gender gap is only nearly closed in education and not in employment, and extreme wealth has become more extreme. It seems like being a bit skeptical of people selling Panglossian visions, given how much people want to believe them, might not hurt. That’s not to advocate the kind of doom and gloom which forgets that we have antibiotics, indoor plumbing, and electric lights. It is however worth keeping an eye on worrying trends like antibiotic resistance, climate change, and just how many people don’t have indoor plumbing, safe water, and electric lights.

blocked_again 8y ago

A lot of people seems to be skeptical about this. There is a wonderful book called Factfullness which is written exactly for this kind of audience. In his book, Rosling suggests the vast majority of human beings are wrong about the state of the world. He believes his test subjects think the world is poorer, less healthy, and more dangerous than it is. Bill gates sponsored this book for all the students graduating from college and I can exactly see why by going through this thread.

camillomiller 8y ago
As a professional in the media field, I think I have an idea of who’s the first offender in propagating a doomier world view
- skrebbel 8y ago
  That's... great. Any chance you want to share that idea with us?
  - olig15 8y ago
    I’m guessing he means ‘the media’
    - camillomiller 8y ago
      Well I thought it was quite obvious, but yes. It’s us. As everyone knows, fear sells. Nice good stories about how much better off we are now? Mmm, not so much. This doesn’t mean that huge problems don’t exist in the world. We have the duty to report on them. I personally try to do things differently than this, and I cover tech, so it’s easier and more neutral. If anything good stories about tech and progress still sell. I feel very detached from the trends of my industry, and so do many colleagues of mine with no power to take policy or business decisions.
      - hyperpallium 8y ago

known 8y ago

I think credit should go to Globalization;

thecopy 8y ago
Yes, globalisation plus free trade and capitalism.
- m_mueller 8y ago
  IMO that only works when it's coupled with progress in governance. Compare Venezuela to India over the last 30 years, and extrapolate into the near future what will happen there. Edit: Just to anticipate the obligatory "Venezuala communist -> bad outcome" comment: Yes, but why are they communist?
  - thecopy 8y ago
    >Compare Venezuela to India over the last 30 years, and extrapolate into the near future what will happen there. Compare how? What do you mean will happen?
    - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
      > What do you mean will happen? Even in its deepest crises, India's army did not play kingmaker. Furthermore, India's federated structure–while annoying to reformers–checks the power of aspiring dictators. Every uneducated population, it seems, elects populists from time to time. The damage they can do in India appears to be more limited than the damage done to Venezuela by Chavez and Maduro. Venezuela will probably be an impoverished nation for decades; India has a chance of becoming a middle-income or even developed country by 2050.
    - m_mueller 8y ago
      I recommend to look at the following: https://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=621563128 https://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?stor... https://www.gapminder.org/tools/#$state$time$value=2018;&marker$select@$geo=ven&trailStartTime=1985;&$geo=ind&trailStartTime=1985;;;;&chart-type=bubbles https://www.gapminder.org/tools/#$state$time$value=2018;&mar...

kya_isro 8y ago

Well who was to blame for the poverty, the hard working men and women got out off, in the first place. When can we get a report on that?

kya_isro 8y ago

That article should come out of Delhi or Beijing, not Washington. Thanks to the western world, for stopping their evil doing in Asia (excluding Near East). When US/France/UK get their ass out of Africa and Middle East, expect further decline of global poverty. https://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-brought-271-million-out-of-poverty-between-2005-16-similar-to-china-undp-oxford-report-5368980/ https://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-brought-271-mi... Expecting a lot of downvotes in the HN crowd.