INEQUALITY GINI-COEFFICIENT

Discussion in 'Economics & Trade' started by LafayetteBis, Dec 3, 2019.

  1. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Since quite a while, the key observational (meaning calculable) bit of data that best indicates a country's Economic Fairness (in terms of the distribution of Income and therefore Wealth) is called the Inequality Coefficient (defined below). It was developed by economists and is maintained by the OECD, which has probably the best comparable economic-data on earth.

    Americans should think twice come next November about whether they want this present scoundrel of a PotUS to maintain/increase Income Disparity in America - which is already the worst of any developed nation. (And lest we forget he already lowered upper-income taxation considerably.)

    Don't care to believe that accusation? Then, see the OECD-chart here !

    What is meant by the inequality of Income/Wealth? Try this explanatory infographic on for size (with the UK as an example): Inequality Gini Coefficient - and note especially Item 7 on the list.

    And for a more exact definition (for serious economists) then link to the original site given above for this definition of Income Inequality:
    PS: Just what are the consequences of the Upper-income Tax reduction? For a damn good answer see Bloomberg article here: A Year After the Middle Class Tax Cut, the Rich Are Winning
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2019
  2. Natural Citizen

    Natural Citizen Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2015
    Messages:
    319
    Likes Received:
    109
    Trophy Points:
    43
    We're Keynesian. Democrat. Republican. Doesn't matter. They're all trustees in the same failed monetary policy. That's the problem.
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2019
  3. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    IT'S ALL ABOUT THE E-TO-P RATIO

    Well that aint gonna change until American's wake up to their Upper-income Tax problem. It is far too low and for as long as they continue to believe the BS from the the Rightist Dorks nothing will change.

    I've lived in both France and Europe, and I can attest to the fundamental reason why the two are so different.

    Because of an excessive emphasis on Wealth in US. If there ever were a "conventional adage" that most typified the US it is this: Money can get you everything. Which is true enough, but overlooks the fact that to have decent lives "We don't NEED everything". Yet, what we MOST NEED is Income Fairness - and the country is far from achieving that objective!

    It all started with JFK, when he lowered Upper-income Taxation that was at 90-percent level. He did not even get to sign the law into force - LBJ was PotUS. Who signed the law into existence and that's how all his Texan-magnates gave him money to get reelected. (Of course, the nation at the time could not get beyond the death and a grieving presidential wife. So taxation when back to far-from-first-place in the minds of Americans.)

    Reckless Ronnie came along and became "Saint Ronnie of-the-Right" by making them even more ridiculously lower. Which, explains, why (by means of existing measures) there is such high Income Disparity in America.

    One must suppose that is what they want - but that is not what is needed. The US should have noticed that the SubPrime Mess would have been a non-event had it not triggered the Great Recession. Which the Replicants (who obtained a majority in the HofR by winning the 2010 midterms) refused to address with further Stimulus Spending.

    But there was also occurring a confluence of two-factors. High unemployment and the lack of will to address it with stimulus-spending - but also the fact that fundamental economic rules-of-the-game were changing. When the dust settled, the US's Employment-per-population ratio had fundamentally altered historically. This graphic of the E-to-p Ratio shows here how it recovered from the Great Recession and from 2013 on earned ground. But, it is still nowhere near where it was at the turn of the 21st century.

    Until now, today. See this chart here showing the E-to-p Ratio in quarterly-terms. It's uptrend has stopped and a down-trend is currently forecasted for Q4. Will this turn out to be true and perhaps even worse longer-term?

    Only time will tell.


    But if it doesn't I would not like to be a PotUS trying to get reelected next year ...
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2019
  4. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,640
    Likes Received:
    11,208
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What happens if one country, say Mexico, offloads its poor population into another country, say the US.
    Would that be an example of international Gini coefficients becoming equalized between two countries?

    Also, how much do Gini coefficients actually have to do with the extremely rich, and how much do they simply have to do with the number of poor people in a country?
    Some closer analysis may be deserved here.
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2019
  5. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    FAR UP HIS BACKSIDE!

    That is not the purpose of the Gini-number analysis. To my mind it is a simple example of the US unable to fence in its frontiers. Note that Canada does not have any closure either but neither are Canadians flooding into the US to work.

    There should be no jobs going to illegal-entries into the country. The US already has plenty of high-calibre Indian-migrants with education-credentials. The only real-problem is itinerants that might find work in parts of the US requiring farm-workers. Which is purely seasonal work. As I never tire of saying, only 12% of all workers are found in the Good-Producing Industries (see here). All other work is in Services Industries, where Americans mostly work.

    The US has had a succession of employment-needs that have changed significantly ever since the end of the 18th century (and the birth of the nation). Come the steam-engine and tractors were being employed to farm the land. Then the Industrial Age required immigrant-workers right up the latter part of the 20th century. Today what America needs is highly-educated people from abroad. Why abroad. Because we don't EDUCATE enough of our own.

    And whyzzat?

    BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE UNCLE SAM IS UNFAIR! Why in heaven's name should we be hiring highly-skilled personnel from abroad who obtained their degrees nearly free, gratis and for nothing. But for our own people, they must pay (in a state post-secondary school) on average $14K a year to study - which our poorest cannot even afford!*

    Uncle Sam has his head far up his backside on that one ... !

    *This was the major factor that prompted Hillary to address by having the Federal government subsidize post-secondary education. But, NO! Donald Dork simply furthered even more government-debt by increasing the DoD-budget. (So "his friends" could send him "his cut" in order to fund his reelection.)
     

Share This Page