4 ms·

I find it interesting that many of the claims to progress cite percentage deltas, but presumably those statistics don't factor in population growth. Could it be

I find it interesting that many of the claims to progress cite percentage deltas, but presumably those statistics don't factor in population growth. Could it be, for instance, that just as many people are in extreme poverty as in the 70's, but that there are simply more well-off people now?

chad_oliver 14y ago
Quite possibly, but on the other hand population growth is inversely correlated with affluence (Higher income results in less children).
akiselev 14y ago
Going from six to seven billion people is a 16% growth whereas a lot of the statistics show much larger changes so even before factoring population the figures are probably still significant. There are nuances such as the exponential effects of the internet and mobile phones (a mobile phone or internet connection can have a massive impact on a remote community) and other unknown factors. If you dive into the academic literature I'm sure you can find some analysis of the figures. I believe the extreme poverty goal used absolute numbers. Percentiles wouldn't make sense to begin with because extreme poverty is largely inherited and as you said could be dwarfed by population growth.
- signalsignal 14y ago
  Is a person in "extreme poverty" with a cell phone?
  - akiselev 14y ago
    Extreme poverty means living on less than $1.25 a day (not sure if it's per family or per person), not what technology you own. I'm sure that there is overlap and that is a testament to how pervasive technology has become. I'm sure mobile phones are playing a big role in raising people out of extreme poverty too.
bhb916 14y ago
Doubtful. The World Bank cites [1] extreme poverty statistics for 1981, 1990, and 2008 as 52%, 43%, and 22% respectively. Using world population statistics that would equal extreme poverty populations of 2.31B, 2.27B, and 1.29B. I imagine a huge percentage of that drop is China. [1] http://go.worldbank.org/4K0EJIDFA0 http://go.worldbank.org/4K0EJIDFA0

chad_oliver 14y ago

Quite possibly, but on the other hand population growth is inversely correlated with affluence (Higher income results in less children).

akiselev 14y ago

Going from six to seven billion people is a 16% growth whereas a lot of the statistics show much larger changes so even before factoring population the figures are probably still significant. There are nuances such as the exponential effects of the internet and mobile phones (a mobile phone or internet connection can have a massive impact on a remote community) and other unknown factors. If you dive into the academic literature I'm sure you can find some analysis of the figures. I believe the extreme poverty goal used absolute numbers. Percentiles wouldn't make sense to begin with because extreme poverty is largely inherited and as you said could be dwarfed by population growth.

signalsignal 14y ago
Is a person in "extreme poverty" with a cell phone?
- akiselev 14y ago
  Extreme poverty means living on less than $1.25 a day (not sure if it's per family or per person), not what technology you own. I'm sure that there is overlap and that is a testament to how pervasive technology has become. I'm sure mobile phones are playing a big role in raising people out of extreme poverty too.

bhb916 14y ago

Doubtful. The World Bank cites [1] extreme poverty statistics for 1981, 1990, and 2008 as 52%, 43%, and 22% respectively. Using world population statistics that would equal extreme poverty populations of 2.31B, 2.27B, and 1.29B. I imagine a huge percentage of that drop is China. [1] http://go.worldbank.org/4K0EJIDFA0 http://go.worldbank.org/4K0EJIDFA0