7 ms·

The world is more equal than you think

23 points by andsoitis 9mo ago

andsoitis 9mo ago
…in the 21st century the world economy has kept getting more equal. …Spending inequality within countries can tell a different story. Some rich countries became more unequal in the late 20th century even as global inequality fell. In the past decade the richest 10% have pulled away from the poorest 50% in Japan, Denmark, Iceland and Sweden.
- throwawayqqq11 9mo ago
  > even as global inequality fell Real economists would consider separating statistical outliers like china. > https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0305750X19300968 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03057... > Without China and India, global interpersonal income inequality in 143 countries was higher in 2015 than in 1988. > https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/nov/23/china-us-poverty-income-inequality https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/nov/23/china-us-pov... > The Chinese did rather well in the age of globalization. In 1990, 943 million people there lived on less than $3 a day measured in 2021 dollars – 83% of the population, according to the World Bank. By 2019, the number was brought down to zero. Unfortunately, the United States was not as successful. More than 4 million Americans – 1.25% of the population – must make ends meet with less than $3 a day, more than three times as many as 35 years ago. > https://wir2022.wid.world/executive-summary/ https://wir2022.wid.world/executive-summary/ > Income and wealth inequalities have been on the rise nearly everywhere since the 1980s, following a series of deregulation and liberalization programs which took different forms in different countries. The rise has not been uniform: certain countries have experienced spectacular increases in inequality (including the US, Russia and India) while others (European countries and China) have experienced relatively smaller rises. This article is deceitful. I dont understand why you get downvotes.
aswegs8 9mo ago
https://archive.is/20260204074047/https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2026/02/03/the-world-is-more-equal-than-you-think https://archive.is/20260204074047/https://www.economist.com/...
RobotToaster 9mo ago
"The Economist, a journal that speaks for the British millionaires" - Lenin Guess the only thing that's changed is inflation.
- consp 9mo ago
  Inflation in Lenin's time was either negligible or astronomical. Just depends on what country and coinage you look at.
- breppp 9mo ago
  The context of the quote was criticism of the Economist pacifism, while Lenin was trying to use the war to instigate a revolution that will end with the deaths of millions
- kjshsh123 9mo ago
  I always find it sad when people choose to quote mass murderers and dictators as if they were knowledgeable. You have access to more knowledge, luxuries, and opportunities than kings in the past. Real wealth is consumption and leisure. Even Marx, though generally wrong, got close to this with his description of use value (he just didn't seem to understand marginal utility or leisure).
giacomoforte 9mo ago
[flagged]
- simianwords 9mo ago
  It’s a really good caveat against the tired old cliche that inequality is always rising. I found it interesting that while wealth inequality increases, the poor and rich are starting to consume more equally. Why do you not find it relevant?
lonespear 9mo ago
The ratio of spending is a poor metric to measure equality. All it really shows is that the “poor” are getting milked for everything they earn and own. Energy costs, fuel, water, basics like bread and butter, insurance, even doing something nice - all at sky-high prices driven by nothing else but greed. Oh, and farewell to the middle class…
- vidarh 9mo ago
  Yeah, that struck me too. Measuring wealth by spending disguises inequality because higher earners have less reason to spend more, and the difference in freedom to choose not to spend more is a large part of the inequality. There are interesting aspects to the data, but they overstate what the numbers they present tell us about inequality.
  - simianwords 9mo ago
    What would you rather use then? Ultimately you have money to spend right? What other point?
    - graemep 9mo ago
      Power. Why do you think people who already have huge amounts of money want more? Money is a way of acquiring power. That is why billionaires typically give money away by putting it in foundations they control (so they keep the power) rather than just giving it to poor people (which would be more effective as people could spend it on what they most need).
      - daymanstep 9mo ago
        Marx said that concentration of wealth can be a good thing as rich people can invest their money in capital heavy things, such as factories, whereas poor people tend not to do that.
        vidarh 9mo ago
N_Lens 9mo ago
Middle class in rich countries is getting impoverished and converging with the poor countries, I guess that’s one way to become “more equal”.
- simianwords 9mo ago
  [flagged]
  - aydyn 9mo ago
    middle class is shrinking https://www.pew.org/en/trust/archive/fall-2024/the-state-of-the-american-middle-class https://www.pew.org/en/trust/archive/fall-2024/the-state-of-...
    - simianwords 9mo ago
      [flagged]
      - aydyn 9mo ago
        it literally is
        simianwords 9mo ago
        > Households in all income tiers had much higher incomes in 2022 than in 1970, after adjusting for inflation ?
        ProllyInfamous 9mo ago
        >after adjusting for inflation "Lies, damn lies, statistics." In 1970 1 oz of gold was ~$35 (by statute); today gold is $5,100; a few years ago it was well under two thousand dollarydoos. Almost everybody is broke. A better way to look at this is to realize that 2025 was the highest year of spending by the Top [whatever-percentage] of consumers. The US fiat dollar's superior global position is waning, and this'll rot all economies & classes. We're literally watching the final steps of "Trickle Down Economics" — where the wealth falls up [first slowly, then fast]. Add in some thinking machines — and it's just 21st century "slavery... with extra steps" (–R&M)
deleted 9mo ago
[deleted]
nim_chimpsky 9mo ago
Let us all be very happy about "The World" since the libertarians at the Economist tell us we are living in a egalitarian world. It is only a minor anomaly that a very small group of Billionaires decide our political agendas and tell our Governments what to do. And now that "Big Governments" are being down sized even the wildest dreams of the libertarians at the Economist are coming true. What could be better than this ?
- burnt-resistor 9mo ago
  Gaslighting in mass media, pseudo-literati form to manufacture the desired sentiment against the interests of ordinary people.
mrjay42 9mo ago
You can very probably obtain a much different result and most likely more accurate by doing this: Looking at a few metrics should be enough for you to understand that this article from The Economist is some kind of "everything is going well"-centrist-propaganda. Suggested metrics: 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_inequality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_in... Based on the Gini Coefficient https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Dev... Based on the HDI: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index 3. And finally: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nomi... --- All of the above are criticizable indices, by themselves. However, if you take the time to superpose those statistical markers, you'll get a much better picture than whatever The Economist is trying to say in this article
sceptic123 9mo ago
Given that this is about "global consumption spending" my take is that the richest people are finding new ways to hide their expenditure. Doesn't help when the source data is not available to better understand what the claims made here are actually based on.
- sceptic123 9mo ago
  > … the main household survey used to estimate consumption in the UK has a low sample size, and there appears to be a growing problem of undercoverage of expenditure … the fact that undercoverage has grown over time means that it is not clear whether the relatively modest recorded changes in consumption inequality since 1991 are genuine, or just due to an increased inability to pick up the expenditure of high-spending households. From: https://academic.oup.com/ooec/article/3/Supplement_1/i103/7477701 https://academic.oup.com/ooec/article/3/Supplement_1/i103/74...
RickJWagner 9mo ago
Well, yeah. Billionaires carry the same phone you do. Their cars have nicer trim, but the powertrain lasts about as long as yours. Their home air temperature is likewise similar to yours…. We’re all richer these days.
1vuio0pswjnm7 9mo ago
Text-only, works where archive.md does not: x=www.economist.com echo "GET /graphic-detail/2026/02/03/the-world-is-more-equal-than-you-think HTTP/1.0|@User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 14) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/127.0.6533.103 Mobile Safari/537.36 Lamarr|@Host: $x|@"|tr '|@' '\r\n'|busybox ssl_client -n $x $x > 1.htm firefox ./1.htm There are no further details provided about "World Data Lab, a research firm" in the images https://infographics.economist.com/2026/20260131_WOC222/20260131_WOC222-Artboard_1.png https://infographics.economist.com/2026/20260131_WOC222/2026... https://infographics.economist.com/2026/20260131_WOC222/20260131_WOC222-Artboard_1_copy.png https://infographics.economist.com/2026/20260131_WOC222/2026... https://infographics.economist.com/2026/20260131_WOC222/20260131_WOC222-Artboard_1_copy_2.png https://infographics.economist.com/2026/20260131_WOC222/2026... https://infographics.economist.com/2026/20260131_WOC222/ https://infographics.economist.com/2026/20260131_WOC222/

23 points by andsoitis 9mo ago

…in the 21st century the world economy has kept getting more equal. …Spending inequality within countries can tell a different story. Some rich countries became more unequal in the late 20th century even as global inequality fell. In the past decade the richest 10% have pulled away from the poorest 50% in Japan, Denmark, Iceland and Sweden.

throwawayqqq11 9mo ago
> even as global inequality fell Real economists would consider separating statistical outliers like china. > https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0305750X19300968 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03057... > Without China and India, global interpersonal income inequality in 143 countries was higher in 2015 than in 1988. > https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/nov/23/china-us-poverty-income-inequality https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/nov/23/china-us-pov... > The Chinese did rather well in the age of globalization. In 1990, 943 million people there lived on less than $3 a day measured in 2021 dollars – 83% of the population, according to the World Bank. By 2019, the number was brought down to zero. Unfortunately, the United States was not as successful. More than 4 million Americans – 1.25% of the population – must make ends meet with less than $3 a day, more than three times as many as 35 years ago. > https://wir2022.wid.world/executive-summary/ https://wir2022.wid.world/executive-summary/ > Income and wealth inequalities have been on the rise nearly everywhere since the 1980s, following a series of deregulation and liberalization programs which took different forms in different countries. The rise has not been uniform: certain countries have experienced spectacular increases in inequality (including the US, Russia and India) while others (European countries and China) have experienced relatively smaller rises. This article is deceitful. I dont understand why you get downvotes.

aswegs8 9mo ago

https://archive.is/20260204074047/https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2026/02/03/the-world-is-more-equal-than-you-think https://archive.is/20260204074047/https://www.economist.com/...

RobotToaster 9mo ago

"The Economist, a journal that speaks for the British millionaires" - Lenin Guess the only thing that's changed is inflation.

consp 9mo ago
Inflation in Lenin's time was either negligible or astronomical. Just depends on what country and coinage you look at.
breppp 9mo ago
The context of the quote was criticism of the Economist pacifism, while Lenin was trying to use the war to instigate a revolution that will end with the deaths of millions
kjshsh123 9mo ago
I always find it sad when people choose to quote mass murderers and dictators as if they were knowledgeable. You have access to more knowledge, luxuries, and opportunities than kings in the past. Real wealth is consumption and leisure. Even Marx, though generally wrong, got close to this with his description of use value (he just didn't seem to understand marginal utility or leisure).

giacomoforte 9mo ago

[flagged]

simianwords 9mo ago
It’s a really good caveat against the tired old cliche that inequality is always rising. I found it interesting that while wealth inequality increases, the poor and rich are starting to consume more equally. Why do you not find it relevant?

lonespear 9mo ago

The ratio of spending is a poor metric to measure equality. All it really shows is that the “poor” are getting milked for everything they earn and own. Energy costs, fuel, water, basics like bread and butter, insurance, even doing something nice - all at sky-high prices driven by nothing else but greed. Oh, and farewell to the middle class…

vidarh 9mo ago
Yeah, that struck me too. Measuring wealth by spending disguises inequality because higher earners have less reason to spend more, and the difference in freedom to choose not to spend more is a large part of the inequality. There are interesting aspects to the data, but they overstate what the numbers they present tell us about inequality.
- simianwords 9mo ago
  What would you rather use then? Ultimately you have money to spend right? What other point?
  - graemep 9mo ago
    Power. Why do you think people who already have huge amounts of money want more? Money is a way of acquiring power. That is why billionaires typically give money away by putting it in foundations they control (so they keep the power) rather than just giving it to poor people (which would be more effective as people could spend it on what they most need).
    - daymanstep 9mo ago
      Marx said that concentration of wealth can be a good thing as rich people can invest their money in capital heavy things, such as factories, whereas poor people tend not to do that.
      - vidarh 9mo ago

N_Lens 9mo ago

Middle class in rich countries is getting impoverished and converging with the poor countries, I guess that’s one way to become “more equal”.

simianwords 9mo ago
[flagged]
- aydyn 9mo ago
  middle class is shrinking https://www.pew.org/en/trust/archive/fall-2024/the-state-of-the-american-middle-class https://www.pew.org/en/trust/archive/fall-2024/the-state-of-...
  - simianwords 9mo ago
    [flagged]
    - aydyn 9mo ago
      it literally is
      - simianwords 9mo ago
        > Households in all income tiers had much higher incomes in 2022 than in 1970, after adjusting for inflation ?
        ProllyInfamous 9mo ago
        >after adjusting for inflation "Lies, damn lies, statistics." In 1970 1 oz of gold was ~$35 (by statute); today gold is $5,100; a few years ago it was well under two thousand dollarydoos. Almost everybody is broke. A better way to look at this is to realize that 2025 was the highest year of spending by the Top [whatever-percentage] of consumers. The US fiat dollar's superior global position is waning, and this'll rot all economies & classes. We're literally watching the final steps of "Trickle Down Economics" — where the wealth falls up [first slowly, then fast]. Add in some thinking machines — and it's just 21st century "slavery... with extra steps" (–R&M)

deleted 9mo ago

[deleted]

nim_chimpsky 9mo ago

Let us all be very happy about "The World" since the libertarians at the Economist tell us we are living in a egalitarian world. It is only a minor anomaly that a very small group of Billionaires decide our political agendas and tell our Governments what to do. And now that "Big Governments" are being down sized even the wildest dreams of the libertarians at the Economist are coming true. What could be better than this ?

burnt-resistor 9mo ago
Gaslighting in mass media, pseudo-literati form to manufacture the desired sentiment against the interests of ordinary people.

mrjay42 9mo ago

You can very probably obtain a much different result and most likely more accurate by doing this: Looking at a few metrics should be enough for you to understand that this article from The Economist is some kind of "everything is going well"-centrist-propaganda. Suggested metrics: 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_inequality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_in... Based on the Gini Coefficient https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Dev... Based on the HDI: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index 3. And finally: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nomi... --- All of the above are criticizable indices, by themselves. However, if you take the time to superpose those statistical markers, you'll get a much better picture than whatever The Economist is trying to say in this article

sceptic123 9mo ago

Given that this is about "global consumption spending" my take is that the richest people are finding new ways to hide their expenditure. Doesn't help when the source data is not available to better understand what the claims made here are actually based on.

sceptic123 9mo ago
> … the main household survey used to estimate consumption in the UK has a low sample size, and there appears to be a growing problem of undercoverage of expenditure … the fact that undercoverage has grown over time means that it is not clear whether the relatively modest recorded changes in consumption inequality since 1991 are genuine, or just due to an increased inability to pick up the expenditure of high-spending households. From: https://academic.oup.com/ooec/article/3/Supplement_1/i103/7477701 https://academic.oup.com/ooec/article/3/Supplement_1/i103/74...

RickJWagner 9mo ago

Well, yeah. Billionaires carry the same phone you do. Their cars have nicer trim, but the powertrain lasts about as long as yours. Their home air temperature is likewise similar to yours…. We’re all richer these days.

1vuio0pswjnm7 9mo ago

Text-only, works where archive.md does not: x=www.economist.com echo "GET /graphic-detail/2026/02/03/the-world-is-more-equal-than-you-think HTTP/1.0|@User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 14) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/127.0.6533.103 Mobile Safari/537.36 Lamarr|@Host: $x|@"|tr '|@' '\r\n'|busybox ssl_client -n $x $x > 1.htm firefox ./1.htm There are no further details provided about "World Data Lab, a research firm" in the images https://infographics.economist.com/2026/20260131_WOC222/20260131_WOC222-Artboard_1.png https://infographics.economist.com/2026/20260131_WOC222/2026... https://infographics.economist.com/2026/20260131_WOC222/20260131_WOC222-Artboard_1_copy.png https://infographics.economist.com/2026/20260131_WOC222/2026... https://infographics.economist.com/2026/20260131_WOC222/20260131_WOC222-Artboard_1_copy_2.png https://infographics.economist.com/2026/20260131_WOC222/2026... https://infographics.economist.com/2026/20260131_WOC222/ https://infographics.economist.com/2026/20260131_WOC222/