Richest 2% own 'half the wealth' in the world

So says an article by the BBC:
The richest 2% of adults in the world own more than half of all household wealth, according to a new study by a United Nations research institute.

The report, from the World Institute for Development Economics Research at the UN University, says that the poorer half of the world's population own barely 1% of global wealth.

Most of the wealth inequality is explained by wealth differences between countries, rather than differences within countries:
Wealth is heavily concentrated in North America, Europe and some countries in the Asia Pacific region, such as Japan and Australia.

Golfer hitting a ball
In richer nations, landowners can afford not to farm their properties

These countries account for 90% of household wealth.

...What they mean by wealth in this study is what people own, less what they owe - their debts. The assets include land, buildings, animals and financial assets.

... The study also finds that inequality is sharper in wealth than in annual income.

...Why does it matter? Because wealth serves as insurance against times when income tends to fall, such as unemployment, sickness or old age.

On this topic let me remind you to visit the immensely interesting and entertainaing animated graphics that show the changing world distribution of income at GAPMINDER.ORG. Click on the income box of the "World Income Trends". You can then view it online or (more impressive yet) download the software to show the demonstrations on your PC. For even more fun follow the Google Tools Gapminder animations which work on your browser. Click on the circle representing 'China' (or any other set of countries) and see its progress over time as you play the animation.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Help the World’s Poor: Buy Some New Clothes

Help the World’s Poor: Buy Some New Clothes : "Back to school shopping leads many people to buy apparel that was made in sweatshops. Rather than feel guilty for “exploiting” poor workers, shoppers should rejoice. Their spending is some of the best aid we can give to people in poorer countries." So says Benjamin Powell on the always provocative AidWatch blog. Liberal New York Times columnist and Economics Nobel Prize international economist Paul Krugman wrote an earlier and now often cited statement along similar lines titled " In Praise of Cheap Labor: Bad jobs at bad wages are better than no jobs at all ." Do you agree with these arguments?
Read more

Krugman, In Praise of Cheap Labor

I know this may be hard for some of you to believe but before Paul Krugman was writing for the New York Times and outraging Bush administration supporters, he was writing for Slate and other publications and ridiculing Clinton administration officials for their 'dangerous obsession' with 'competitiveness' and their 'strangely careless arithmetic.' He was also known for challenging anti-globalization protesters for 'not thinking their position through.' His piece " In Praise of Cheap Labor Bad jobs at bad wages are better than no jobs at all " which appeared in Slate - Dismal Scientist - March 20, 1997 compactly sums up his position on this last point. This piece is on the Eco 340 reading list but I wanted to post it here for those of you in Eco 740 who might be interested, and to open up a space for discussion. Here's a choice excerpt: .... moral outrage is common among the opponents of globalization--of the transfer of technology and ca...
Read more

eco740: PS1 and fixed link

I've posted problem set 1 (due Oct 10th) to Blackboard course documents section. Fixed link: A web link to one of tonight's external readings, Jeffrey Williamson's Globalization, Labor Markets and Policy Backlash from the Past , had not been working, but now it is. See if you can interpret his empirical findings on convergence and changes in income distribution using the Specific Factors Model we were working with last class (but applied to international rather than intra-national labor mobility).
Read more