Obviously it depends on how wealth is figured. This makes a difference in comparisons. Good read insight of recent comparisons and the debate over them.
So, would then those who argue that US wealth data should include capitalized value of not-marketable, but guaranteed, future incomes streams agree that everybody in socialism was a dollar (half-a-)millionaire and that perhaps two-thirds of the population in Yugoslavia, Hungary or Poland had greater private net assets than the corresponding people in the United States? Does this make sense? If it does not, then you are back to the “usual” calculations where only marketable wealth counts and where 30% of US population have zero wealth. So, you can choose:Global Inequality
a. Either everybody in socialism was a quasi-millionaire, or
b. 30% of Americans have zero net wealth today.
Your call.
Was everybody under socialism a millionaire?Branko Milanovic | Visiting Presidential Professor at City University of New York Graduate Center and senior scholar at the Luxembourg Income Study (LIS), and formerly lead economist in the World Bank's research department and senior associate at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
If you dont have toilet paper you are not a "millionaire"....
ReplyDeleteMatt,
ReplyDeleteAn article just for you!
Wipe or Wash?