Comments on: Income Inequality http://alamedalearning.com/reality/2010/02/25/income-inequality/ Separating fact from fiction in finance and economics Thu, 28 Apr 2011 10:38:31 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Fatted Calf http://alamedalearning.com/reality/2010/02/25/income-inequality/comment-page-1/#comment-2016 Fatted Calf Sat, 27 Feb 2010 01:47:25 +0000 http://alamedalearning.com/reality/?p=3501#comment-2016 I'd be curious to see what it's like with a different data set to generate the figures. Income inequality is interesting, but as usual with such large differences it's difficult to be honest and not be influenced by what you want to see. Population size, social maturity, sense of entitlement... Not to mention, that income inequality in developing nations is far more damaging. "We included only countries that had income inequality data and were among the richest 50 in the world and excluded those with populations of less than two million to avoid possible tax havens. This meant adding Australia (21 indicators), Japan (19 indicators), Israel (39 indicators), New Zealand (20 indicators), and Slovenia (25 indicators) to the Unicef set, and excluding the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland. The 23 countries included were Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the US." Where is Singapore? I’d be curious to see what it’s like with a different data set to generate the figures. Income inequality is interesting, but as usual with such large differences it’s difficult to be honest and not be influenced by what you want to see. Population size, social maturity, sense of entitlement…

Not to mention, that income inequality in developing nations is far more damaging.

“We included only countries that
had income inequality data and were among the richest
50 in the world and excluded those with populations of
less than two million to avoid possible tax havens.
This meant adding Australia (21 indicators), Japan
(19 indicators), Israel (39 indicators), New Zealand
(20 indicators), and Slovenia (25 indicators) to the
Unicef set, and excluding the Czech Republic,
Hungary, and Poland. The 23 countries included
were Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark,
Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Israel,
Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway,
Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the
United Kingdom, and the US.”

Where is Singapore?

]]>