8 ms·

It is always nice to see such narratives based on robust data. For similar stories backed by data I can also recommend the book "Factfulnes" by Hans Rosling [1]

It is always nice to see such narratives based on robust data. For similar stories backed by data I can also recommend the book "Factfulnes" by Hans Rosling [1]. When we talk about basic needs, our global community is making tremendous progress. At the same time, we should not forget that the same system that abolishes poverty also creates enormous inequality, which not only makes people unhappier, but also leads to enormous social tensions within whole societies. So while we should be celebrating the decline in poverty, we are somewhat also left with a sour taste about the side effects that occur. [1] https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/34890015-factfulness https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/34890015-factfulness

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
pchangr 5y ago
It’s a shame I don’t know Max’s handle in HN but if you follow him on Twitter you’ll see he’s a very big fan of that book. I think it’s mentioned in the about page of OWID.
greysphere 5y ago
>we should not forget that the same system that abolishes poverty also creates enormous inequality Is this true? The post uses Sweden as the exemplar, which has the lowest poverty (on its chart) and also one of the lowest inequalities as measured by the Gini coeffcient (30). This page [1] seems to offer a handful of data, but nothing that outlines a clear 'higher Gini -> less poverty.' If anything it seems pretty uncorrelated. It does posit the related: higher average income _allows_ for a higher Gini because there's a limited amount of poverty people can suffer before dying. A bit more research into Sweden specifically reveals that its Gini has gone up a bit the last 30 years, but seems like it was trending toward more equality before then [2]. [1] https://ourworldindata.org/income-inequality https://ourworldindata.org/income-inequality [2] https://www.chartbookofeconomicinequality.com/inequality-by-country/Sweden/ https://www.chartbookofeconomicinequality.com/inequality-by-...
- dustintrex 5y ago
  You could argue that the wealth of Swedes comes from the (indirect) exploitation of the poor. IKEA and H&M are household names that give Swedes and the world cheap clothing and furniture, virtually all of which is made by comparatively much poorer people in China, Bangladesh, etc.
  - guerrilla 5y ago
    I think that's definitely true but we have some heavier examples than the ones you listed and at the same time massive natural resources which include iron (and many other metals), hydro and timber as well as significant local value generation in high-tech and services. The lack of inequality comes definitely from the very strong labor movement though. > The main industries include motor vehicles, telecommunications, pharmaceuticals, industrial machines, precision equipment, chemical goods, home goods and appliances, forestry, iron, and steel > The 20 largest Sweden-registered companies by turnover as of 2013 were Volvo, Ericsson, Vattenfall, Skanska, Hennes & Mauritz, Electrolux, Volvo Personvagnar, Preem, TeliaSonera, Sandvik, ICA, Atlas Copco, Nordea, Svenska Cellulosa Aktiebolaget, Scania, Securitas, Nordstjernan, SKF, ABB Norden Holding, and Sony Mobile Communications AB
    - e4e78a06 5y ago
      Volvo - exploits poorly paid non-union workers in countries like Mexico to make cars and/or car parts Ericsson - charges telecom companies a fortune for crappy gear because there's only 2-3 leading edge 5G equipment providers, which in turn makes it more expensive for people to get telecom service H&M - sweatshop labor for clothes manufacturing I only went through the first half but there are a number of companies in there that exploit poor people. I'll also add this link [0] which shows Sweden has very low corporate income tax and most of Swedish government income comes from taxes on labor and goods (VAT), which is hardly the high corporate tax model that most left wing Democrats are pushing today. [0]: https://www.oecd.org/ctp/tax-policy/revenue-statistics-sweden.pdf https://www.oecd.org/ctp/tax-policy/revenue-statistics-swede...
      - 5y ago
kryogen1c 5y ago
> creates enormous inequality i dont know why everyone keeps getting away with statement like this. the proposition of equality as a meaningful metric is absurd at every level of examination. no one is equal to anyone else except on the most trivial and simplistic terms about anything. do you feel inferior to rich people? do you feel superior to poor people? what hogwash. i reject this axiom that inequality is bad. people don't hate inequality - they hate unfairness. they hate having their house repossesed because they took a loan they couldnt afford while the banks get a taxpayer bailout for making financial decisions THEY couldn't afford. people don't hate gates, jobs, buffet, or bezos; they love and idolize them. but if the system that purports to give commoners a path to wealth like those people instead shackles them with 200k in debt you have to fucking die to get rid of... things start feeling a little rebellious. the problem doesnt have anything to do with equality. there is a loss of control, of autonomy. no chance of growth or the ability to change your circumstances.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- boucher 5y ago
  Inequality has nothing to do with feeling superior or inferior to others (though, our culture absolutely does encourage those beliefs). In a world with limited resources, huge levels of inequality necessarily means that a small group of people are consuming vastly more of the available resources than everyone else. It also tends to concentrate political power in the same small group. Many people would say there is something inherently unfair about this. I think these things aren't as separate from your concerns as you make them out to be.
  - kragen 5y ago
    The world has limited natural resources, but it doesn't have limited human welfare or enjoyment or wealth. Moreover, natural resources are not consumed, except for helium, energy, and the contents of spacecraft. The natural resources in a big plate glass window are a double handful of sand. The natural resources in a Rembrandt are the sunlight and rainfall needed to grow a sheaf of flax and a handful of powdered colorful rocks. The natural resources in a bottle of the finest wine are half a handful of sand, and the sunlight and rainfall needed to grow a bunch of grapes. The natural resources in an anti-malaria bed net are what is needed to grow a single cotton plant. A Rolls-Royce contained the same natural resources as a large Yugo. Poverty comes from lack of opportunity (usually due to centralization of control), perverse incentives (often due to lack of centralization of control), ignorance, delusion, and other kinds of mental problems, not from limited natural resources or from "a small group of people consuming vastly more."
Abishek_Muthian 5y ago
Wealth is a zero sum game, And when 1% holds more than 50% of entire wealth then inequality becomes the root cause of every social issue as the 1% has enough incentives to preserve the status-quo. If declining poverty means at the end forced to serve that 1% by shitting in bags because there's no toilet breaks, Then I'm not sure 'celebrating the decline in poverty' is on their minds.
rogue7 5y ago
This book is very biased, see for instance the "one-hump world": https://www.jasonhickel.org/blog/2019/3/17/two-hump-world https://www.jasonhickel.org/blog/2019/3/17/two-hump-world For a full review (in french): https://paulboosz.github.io/2020/analyse-nouveaux-optimistes-factfulness/ https://paulboosz.github.io/2020/analyse-nouveaux-optimistes...

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

pchangr 5y ago

It’s a shame I don’t know Max’s handle in HN but if you follow him on Twitter you’ll see he’s a very big fan of that book. I think it’s mentioned in the about page of OWID.

greysphere 5y ago

>we should not forget that the same system that abolishes poverty also creates enormous inequality Is this true? The post uses Sweden as the exemplar, which has the lowest poverty (on its chart) and also one of the lowest inequalities as measured by the Gini coeffcient (30). This page [1] seems to offer a handful of data, but nothing that outlines a clear 'higher Gini -> less poverty.' If anything it seems pretty uncorrelated. It does posit the related: higher average income _allows_ for a higher Gini because there's a limited amount of poverty people can suffer before dying. A bit more research into Sweden specifically reveals that its Gini has gone up a bit the last 30 years, but seems like it was trending toward more equality before then [2]. [1] https://ourworldindata.org/income-inequality https://ourworldindata.org/income-inequality [2] https://www.chartbookofeconomicinequality.com/inequality-by-country/Sweden/ https://www.chartbookofeconomicinequality.com/inequality-by-...

dustintrex 5y ago
You could argue that the wealth of Swedes comes from the (indirect) exploitation of the poor. IKEA and H&M are household names that give Swedes and the world cheap clothing and furniture, virtually all of which is made by comparatively much poorer people in China, Bangladesh, etc.
- guerrilla 5y ago
  I think that's definitely true but we have some heavier examples than the ones you listed and at the same time massive natural resources which include iron (and many other metals), hydro and timber as well as significant local value generation in high-tech and services. The lack of inequality comes definitely from the very strong labor movement though. > The main industries include motor vehicles, telecommunications, pharmaceuticals, industrial machines, precision equipment, chemical goods, home goods and appliances, forestry, iron, and steel > The 20 largest Sweden-registered companies by turnover as of 2013 were Volvo, Ericsson, Vattenfall, Skanska, Hennes & Mauritz, Electrolux, Volvo Personvagnar, Preem, TeliaSonera, Sandvik, ICA, Atlas Copco, Nordea, Svenska Cellulosa Aktiebolaget, Scania, Securitas, Nordstjernan, SKF, ABB Norden Holding, and Sony Mobile Communications AB
  - e4e78a06 5y ago
    Volvo - exploits poorly paid non-union workers in countries like Mexico to make cars and/or car parts Ericsson - charges telecom companies a fortune for crappy gear because there's only 2-3 leading edge 5G equipment providers, which in turn makes it more expensive for people to get telecom service H&M - sweatshop labor for clothes manufacturing I only went through the first half but there are a number of companies in there that exploit poor people. I'll also add this link [0] which shows Sweden has very low corporate income tax and most of Swedish government income comes from taxes on labor and goods (VAT), which is hardly the high corporate tax model that most left wing Democrats are pushing today. [0]: https://www.oecd.org/ctp/tax-policy/revenue-statistics-sweden.pdf https://www.oecd.org/ctp/tax-policy/revenue-statistics-swede...
    - 5y ago

kryogen1c 5y ago

> creates enormous inequality i dont know why everyone keeps getting away with statement like this. the proposition of equality as a meaningful metric is absurd at every level of examination. no one is equal to anyone else except on the most trivial and simplistic terms about anything. do you feel inferior to rich people? do you feel superior to poor people? what hogwash. i reject this axiom that inequality is bad. people don't hate inequality - they hate unfairness. they hate having their house repossesed because they took a loan they couldnt afford while the banks get a taxpayer bailout for making financial decisions THEY couldn't afford. people don't hate gates, jobs, buffet, or bezos; they love and idolize them. but if the system that purports to give commoners a path to wealth like those people instead shackles them with 200k in debt you have to fucking die to get rid of... things start feeling a little rebellious. the problem doesnt have anything to do with equality. there is a loss of control, of autonomy. no chance of growth or the ability to change your circumstances.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
boucher 5y ago
Inequality has nothing to do with feeling superior or inferior to others (though, our culture absolutely does encourage those beliefs). In a world with limited resources, huge levels of inequality necessarily means that a small group of people are consuming vastly more of the available resources than everyone else. It also tends to concentrate political power in the same small group. Many people would say there is something inherently unfair about this. I think these things aren't as separate from your concerns as you make them out to be.
- kragen 5y ago
  The world has limited natural resources, but it doesn't have limited human welfare or enjoyment or wealth. Moreover, natural resources are not consumed, except for helium, energy, and the contents of spacecraft. The natural resources in a big plate glass window are a double handful of sand. The natural resources in a Rembrandt are the sunlight and rainfall needed to grow a sheaf of flax and a handful of powdered colorful rocks. The natural resources in a bottle of the finest wine are half a handful of sand, and the sunlight and rainfall needed to grow a bunch of grapes. The natural resources in an anti-malaria bed net are what is needed to grow a single cotton plant. A Rolls-Royce contained the same natural resources as a large Yugo. Poverty comes from lack of opportunity (usually due to centralization of control), perverse incentives (often due to lack of centralization of control), ignorance, delusion, and other kinds of mental problems, not from limited natural resources or from "a small group of people consuming vastly more."

Abishek_Muthian 5y ago

Wealth is a zero sum game, And when 1% holds more than 50% of entire wealth then inequality becomes the root cause of every social issue as the 1% has enough incentives to preserve the status-quo. If declining poverty means at the end forced to serve that 1% by shitting in bags because there's no toilet breaks, Then I'm not sure 'celebrating the decline in poverty' is on their minds.

rogue7 5y ago

This book is very biased, see for instance the "one-hump world": https://www.jasonhickel.org/blog/2019/3/17/two-hump-world https://www.jasonhickel.org/blog/2019/3/17/two-hump-world For a full review (in french): https://paulboosz.github.io/2020/analyse-nouveaux-optimistes-factfulness/ https://paulboosz.github.io/2020/analyse-nouveaux-optimistes...