Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Oxfams report on economic inequality

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Most of that is a play on definitions though. There's even an example of that in the charts: Apparently, 1% in 2014 has had a "basic education" but "are not able to read".

    How does one define "extreme poverty" for example? There is actually a (vague) UN definition for that, but by common standard - since about the same time - it's currently defined as "earning less than 1 USD per day in 1996 dollars". While this is an extremely vague concept and does not even account for PPP, you could reasonably scale that back. However, going by the chart, they might not quite be using that definition either (because otherwise current levels would be twice as high).

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by DOR View Post
      Very well done, whoever did it.
      The website, as per the Logo in the top right hand corner of the picture is 'Our World in Data'. It has a very comprehensive and well designed charts and it's statistical sources appear to be fairly orthodox. Don't know if it has a political agenda of any kind (as Kato noted you can argue about some of the definitions used) but I intend to go back and have a further look. I would be interested in seeing what other people think as well.
      If you are emotionally invested in 'believing' something is true you have lost the ability to tell if it is true.

      Comment


      • #33
        Nice charts. The "political agenda" expressed wouldn't sell newspapers , the 'fear' factor ,weapons or divisiveness.

        Nor would it keep viewers glued to their local news channels.

        Western media wants to control the common man's reality when it comes to media coverage.
        Will the charts be televised 'nationally' if indeed their findings are valid and correct?
        Real eyes realize real lies.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by kato View Post
          Most of that is a play on definitions though. There's even an example of that in the charts: Apparently, 1% in 2014 has had a "basic education" but "are not able to read".

          How does one define "extreme poverty" for example? There is actually a (vague) UN definition for that, but by common standard - since about the same time - it's currently defined as "earning less than 1 USD per day in 1996 dollars". While this is an extremely vague concept and does not even account for PPP, you could reasonably scale that back. However, going by the chart, they might not quite be using that definition either (because otherwise current levels would be twice as high).

          I think you’ll find there’s a whole host of indicators that point in the same direction as this chart. Have a look here, for example: https://sdbs.adb.org/sdbs/

          Life Expectancy in Asia-Pacific is rising 0.5% p.a., in this decade.
          Primary school completion rates in 2000-14 were up 17 percentage points in Central and Western Asia, 25 points in South Asia.


          As for "earning less than a dollar a day," that's a standard measure often adjusted to $1.5 or even $3 a day. Fortunately, it does account for PPP, and is one of the very rare cases where PPP is actually useful ... because, as originally intended, it is being used to measure personal consumption.

          See: http://povertydata.worldbank.org/poverty/home/
          Number of poor at $1.90 a day (2011 PPP)
          1990: 1.84 billion 2013: 766 million
          Trust me?
          I'm an economist!

          Comment

          Working...
          X