3 ms·

Inequality has been increasing in China at a rate far outpacing the rest of the world, and the world at large has seen inequality continually increase despite i

Inequality has been increasing in China at a rate far outpacing the rest of the world, and the world at large has seen inequality continually increase despite improving living conditions for an increasing number of people. From the IMF: "China has moved from being moderately unequal in 1990 to being one of the world’s most unequal countries." https://blogs.imf.org/2018/09/20/chart-of-the-week-inequality-in-china/ https://blogs.imf.org/2018/09/20/chart-of-the-week-inequalit...

kurthr 7y ago
It strikes me that local inequality (e.g. between people in the same country) could be increasing everywhere, while global inequality, which is dominated by national averages decreases. The problem is that we mostly notice the local one (happiness with the Jones's) rather than the global.
- Gibbon1 7y ago
  Simpson's Paradox tells us that this is utterly plausible. Inequality is getting worse everywhere. While aggregate statistics shows inequality is decreasing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simpson%27s_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simpson%27s_paradox
nostrademons 7y ago
This is not inconsistent with global inequality shrinking. The worldwide Gini coefficient was 68 in 2003, 65 in 2013, and is projected to reach 61 in 2035. By contrast, your source lists the Gini coefficient of China at 50. (Higher numbers = more unequal). What's happening is that the inequality within the world is moving from national boundaries to class/occupational ones. It used to be you had rich nations and poor nations. Now you have rich occupations and poor occupations. When a few million Chinese peasants become skilled electrical engineers and earn 20x more, inequality within China widens. If they displace engineers within the U.S., inequality within the U.S. widens as well. However, global inequality has fallen, because there is now a smoother distribution in income levels between "peasant" and "owner of Intel".
- marak830 7y ago
  Thank you, this recently came up in one of my free discussion classes and this is a much better explanation to take to my students.

kurthr 7y ago

It strikes me that local inequality (e.g. between people in the same country) could be increasing everywhere, while global inequality, which is dominated by national averages decreases. The problem is that we mostly notice the local one (happiness with the Jones's) rather than the global.

Gibbon1 7y ago
Simpson's Paradox tells us that this is utterly plausible. Inequality is getting worse everywhere. While aggregate statistics shows inequality is decreasing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simpson%27s_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simpson%27s_paradox

nostrademons 7y ago

This is not inconsistent with global inequality shrinking. The worldwide Gini coefficient was 68 in 2003, 65 in 2013, and is projected to reach 61 in 2035. By contrast, your source lists the Gini coefficient of China at 50. (Higher numbers = more unequal). What's happening is that the inequality within the world is moving from national boundaries to class/occupational ones. It used to be you had rich nations and poor nations. Now you have rich occupations and poor occupations. When a few million Chinese peasants become skilled electrical engineers and earn 20x more, inequality within China widens. If they displace engineers within the U.S., inequality within the U.S. widens as well. However, global inequality has fallen, because there is now a smoother distribution in income levels between "peasant" and "owner of Intel".

marak830 7y ago
Thank you, this recently came up in one of my free discussion classes and this is a much better explanation to take to my students.