You will find more infographics at Statista
There is increasing recognition that GDP measures or GDP per capita are insufficent when it comes to understanding the true economic well-being of households. That has resulted in research becoming increasingly focused on household income with a higher emphasis on income inequality. A recent OECD paper analyzed the distribution of household wealth across 28 countries and it found that wealth inequality is twice the level of income inequality on average.
One of its key findings was that the wealthiest 10 percent of households hold 52 percent of total household wealth on average. By contrast, the 60 percent least wealthy households only own about 12 percent. The situation is by far the worst in the United States where th richest 10 percent of households own 79 percent of the wealth. The bottom 60 percent of American households only own 2.4 percent of household wealth.
The situation is the same in Europe where the inequality gap is particularly wide in some countries. In the Netherlands, 68 percent of wealth is owned by the top 10 percent of households while in Denmark, the figure is 64 percent. The OECD found that in both countries, the share of wealth held by the bottom 60 percent of households is negative, meaning that on average, they have liabilities exceeding the value of their assets.
Hmm. Seems like capitalist countries produces wealth inequalty. Maybe they should all become Zimbabwe and be equally farking poor.
You think this will end well?
Maybe we should start a propaganda campaign in central America and Mexico,…”don’t come to the USA,, only the rich have money and the rest of us are working slaves” include a bunch of pictures of laborers picking strawberries, putting on roofs and cutting grass in the hot sun,.
It’s not Capitalism, it is Cronyism (Chosenism).
Crapitalism.
Coined by Gene Epstein of Barons Weekly to describe Crony Capitalism.
As for the article, I’m never sure what to make of those types of stats and claims. I can’t get sympathetic for the poor in this country. Even alleged migrant “slave labor” or alleged ghetto poverty when compared to places in Asia and Africa.
A lot of Americans choose to save no money and to spend 110% of what they earn. They switch houses every few years, incurring big transaction costs and every few years they spend an entire year’s salary on a new vehicle. There are people with plenty of income, but who choose to spend so freely that their net worth is zero or negative. Their self-induced plight doesn’t bother me. My guess is that fewer Japanese are so profligate, thus the smaller share of wealth owned by the top 10%.
Exactly right, Iska Waran, thank you for making the point so well. In discussions of this nature I always point to POW camps in the last war, or any war, for that matter.
The fact is that each new member of the camp starts of at zero and then, as time passes, each POW exploits his own proclivities and either stays where he is, at the bottom of the pile, or rises through the ranks as his skills, knowledge and industry dictate.
The poor will always be with you – it’s standard statistical distribution theory – the 80/20 rule by Pareto: it’s the law of the vital few, or the principle of factor sparsity, which states that, for many events, roughly 80% of the effects come from 20% of the causes.
Also: if you are a beliver in the bible: Deuteronomy 15:11: “Poor persons will never disappear from the earth. That’s why I’m giving you this command: you must open your hand generously to your neighbours, to the needy among you, and to the poor who live with you in your land.”
That sounds like socialism.
In my world it sounds like a POW free market capitalist situation.
Apparently, more socialism = less financial inequality.
Which is what you would expect when you take away both the people’s incentive and ability to achieve success by punishing it through taxation or or outright prohibition.
This is no surprise. After all, who wants to admit their personal failures are their own fault and not someone else’s?
Much easier to blame it on someone than accept it as the result of your own actions or lack of effort.
“…they have liabilities exceeding the value of their assets.”
Debt slaves.
An inability or unwillingness to live within their means.
Can’t exercise the discipline to restrict unnecessary purchases with discretionary funds.
Needs vs. wants.
The 80% in Pareto’s theory don’t lack for income.
They just aren’t smart in handling or managing it.
Then, when broke, they demand or expect help from the ones who have sacrificed or limited their wants thru past, intelligent choices.
And the debtors blame capitalism or corporate greed.
And want then, to eat the rich, in ‘fairness’ claims…Socialism.
You have it! There is a bit more however. Keep and eye on what is presented as a premise. Statistics is the grease on the skids of liars. Charts and numbers are the splaterings from the manure spreader. Remember the accountant interview.
Interviewer – what is two and two?
Candidate – what do you want it to be.