1) Income inequality; 2) Politics; 3) History; 4) Soccer.
Author of "Global inequality" and "Capitalism, Alone" (2019).
Stone Center, CUNY; LSE, London
Branko Milanovic
Loading...
Look at the dots.
Curing U.S. Healthcare -- read Part I of @pkrugman.bsky.social's series, originally published in his Substack newsletter and now on the Stone Center site, to learn about why markets can’t be trusted to deliver healthcare, routes to universal healthcare, and what works.
This one is a longer read than my usual reviews. So maybe sit down with a beer or a coffee. Here’s a taste—as you can see, I’ve got questions for historians, for economists, and for methodological navel-gazers!
Not because Chinese growth is now less, but because China has become too rich. Whether global inequality will go down, or, as I am afraid, up in this century will crucially depend on whether India and populous African countries can accelerate their rate of growth.
No data here use approximations, extrapolation, guesses and the like. They are all based on documented national and IMF/World Bank data.)
What is the bottom line?
The period when mostly Chinese growth had driven global inequality down has come to an end.
but has now stopped decreasing and in the last available year (2023) it even went slightly up.
(Concept 3 ineq is not available annually b/c many countries do not produce survey data every year. So, we have to use a benchmark year, approximately every five years.
Finally, the most important: dots showing global inequality (aka Concept 3 inequality) include (almost) all world population that enter into calculation with their individual incomes as estimated from household surveys. That inequality has also gone down starting around the turn of the century,
