4 ms·

Worldwide poverty has not been increasing. The rest of those statements are pretty clearly facts. A statement like this is very a matter of statistical interpr

Worldwide poverty has not been increasing. The rest of those statements are pretty clearly facts. A statement like this is very a matter of statistical interpretation. A lot of the claims of decreasing world poverty stem from a decrease in those said to make "pennies per day" however, such a group could also be describes as "those outside the money economy" and thus an increase in assigned earnings to this group represent decreased poverty is debatable. See: Bill Gates says poverty is decreasing. He couldn’t be more wrong https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/29/bill-gates-davos-global-poverty-infographic-neoliberal https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/29/bill-g...

Supermancho 6y ago
Indeed. Of course more people are better off historically than cavemen, but that's not an indication that poverty is decreasing.
- luckylion 6y ago
  You'll need to define what you mean by poverty. Is someone poor that cannot feed and clothe themselves? Are they poor if they are not certain that they will be able to feed and clothe themselves for the foreseeable future? Are they poor if they have less than x% of the average personal wealth of those within some distance? And I believe almost all people are better off than cavemen, not just more.
m463 6y ago
Unfortunately, like "Justice" or "Freedom", poverty is an ambiguous term. Two people can be using the term in a conversation and be talking about radically different things. For example, are you talking about the inability for people to find food, shelter and clothing? Or about level of lifestyle once those needs are met?
zpeti 6y ago
"Prior to colonisation, most people lived in subsistence economies where they enjoyed access to abundant commons – land, water, forests, livestock and robust systems of sharing and reciprocity. They had little if any money, but then they didn’t need it in order to live well – so it makes little sense to claim that they were poor. This way of life was violently destroyed by colonisers who forced people off the land and into European-owned mines, factories and plantations, where they were paid paltry wages for work they never wanted to do in the first place." Really? Back in the 1400 life was just an awesome experience without money, everyone living off unlimited land and having a great time, not worrying about anything, sitting in the jungle or the beach with plenty of food. Yeah, damn, take me back to 1400, life was so awesome then for everyone.
creddit 6y ago
A more nuanced discussion: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/eTMgL7Cx8TsA9nedn/is-the-world-getting-better-a-brief-summary-of-recent-debate https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/eTMgL7Cx8TsA9nedn/is-the-wor...

Supermancho 6y ago

Indeed. Of course more people are better off historically than cavemen, but that's not an indication that poverty is decreasing.

luckylion 6y ago
You'll need to define what you mean by poverty. Is someone poor that cannot feed and clothe themselves? Are they poor if they are not certain that they will be able to feed and clothe themselves for the foreseeable future? Are they poor if they have less than x% of the average personal wealth of those within some distance? And I believe almost all people are better off than cavemen, not just more.

m463 6y ago

Unfortunately, like "Justice" or "Freedom", poverty is an ambiguous term. Two people can be using the term in a conversation and be talking about radically different things. For example, are you talking about the inability for people to find food, shelter and clothing? Or about level of lifestyle once those needs are met?

zpeti 6y ago

"Prior to colonisation, most people lived in subsistence economies where they enjoyed access to abundant commons – land, water, forests, livestock and robust systems of sharing and reciprocity. They had little if any money, but then they didn’t need it in order to live well – so it makes little sense to claim that they were poor. This way of life was violently destroyed by colonisers who forced people off the land and into European-owned mines, factories and plantations, where they were paid paltry wages for work they never wanted to do in the first place." Really? Back in the 1400 life was just an awesome experience without money, everyone living off unlimited land and having a great time, not worrying about anything, sitting in the jungle or the beach with plenty of food. Yeah, damn, take me back to 1400, life was so awesome then for everyone.

creddit 6y ago

A more nuanced discussion: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/eTMgL7Cx8TsA9nedn/is-the-world-getting-better-a-brief-summary-of-recent-debate https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/eTMgL7Cx8TsA9nedn/is-the-wor...