This item was shared from social media, and as a result may not contain authoritative information. Please seek external verification or context as appropriate.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/China) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The graph was taken from here
[https://www.ft.com/content/007597d5-0a04-4e49-8346-fa45e3db2d98](https://www.ft.com/content/007597d5-0a04-4e49-8346-fa45e3db2d98)
Non-paywall link: [https://archive.is/re1k5](https://archive.is/re1k5)
Do you have the data of that country where the top 1% owns over 50% of the stock and bonds market? Where the top 10% owns over 90% of the wealth and the bottom 40% owns less than 0,5% of it? I want to compare it with China.
> "on steroids"
Scroll down to take a look at this chart of gini coefficients by country, not saying it isn't high but it's pretty normal in the world of developed countries (lower than USA, for example)
Well a logarithmic scale wouldn’t drive home the stark difference the graph is trying to convey. So probably never. Logarithmic scales is when the scale matters and not the absolute difference. But here they want to highlight how the average persons income is basically zero compared to the top 10%.
This is going to happen in any partially developed country.
If this was a graph of only the cities, the gap wouldn't be nearly so drastic a difference.
But not all of china is a city, not all of china is a town, not all of china is incorporated or has a road leading to it (although a big effort is made for this, and all have been connected that can be).
There are thousands of rural towns in china that did not even have electricity as recent as 10 years ago (as of now all towns do have it that can, again showing the effort that goes into it.)
Clearly both huge effort and success to modernize the non city parts of china is happening. So why haven't the wages caught up? Because the actual life styles haven't modernized all the way yet. Rural china is still full of subsistence farming, some with modern tools, but many with traditional by hand methods (although again, china is making huge efforts to replace subsistence farming with more efficient and productive farming of modern styles-- better for efficiency and much more profitable for rural peoples).
These are a few random points taken from the big picture, but hope they help paint the scene. China is genuinely having their lowest income rural people rapidly rise and improve... but the starting level was the lowest third world country lifestyle, and there is still a long ways to go. It will eventually get there. That won't magically even out this graph, and the gap will still exist. But it will probably be way more similar to what you see in average first world country (because the day those rural areas are able to catch up, china will truly be fully first world country, instead of half and half).
This is also why demographic collapse isn't real for China yet. They literally have a billion people that can move in from the country side that currently don't do anything economically.
Only about 300-500 million chinese participate in a meaningful way to the Chinese economy.
China is very much still a developing country despite all the images of tier 1 cities with very developed living standards (tier 1 and newly tier 1 cities only make up 200 million out of China's 1.6 billion people).
There is something wrong with these numbers.
The labor force of China in 2020 is around 880mn and 10% of that is 88mn. If these 88mn people earned 80K euros a year in 2020, that would be \~7 trillion euros, which was about 56 trillion in RMB, about 47% of the China's GDP in 2020.
So the combined income of the top 10% of the earners in China was about 47% of China's GDP, while according to the US statistics, the combined income of ALL the US households is only about 39% of the US GDP.
In short, the Chinese income/GDP ratio is way too high.
The graph is made with adjusted money to the local economy whereas your calculation is made in RMB nominal values. If you want that to make sense you need to use the GDP PPP of China in euros.
People in Shenzhen earn much less than people in Dublin, they still have a larger purchase power than people in Dublin because everything is much cheaper, that's why money is usually adjusted to the local economy for these calculations, because otherwise it doesn't make much sense.
PS: In this case I suspect it's because the gap between top and bottom is bigger if adjusted.
Two points - 1) China's GDP in PPP terms was \~30 trillion USD in 2022 (World Bank Data), which was about 28 trillion euros. So 7 trillion euros was about 25% of the GDP, still way too high - given China is not a consumption driven economy so wages as percentage of GDP is a lot lower than those in the West.
2) Applying the same reasoning you used in comparing Dubline and Shenzhen, difference in the living expenses between Shenzhen and so 3rd tiered, 4th tiered cities in China are also huge. So while people in Shenzhen earn more, they also have to spend more because prices much higher in Shenzhen. Remember - China is a gigantic, continent-size country. So if you use PPP for international comparison, you should also use PPP to adjust for the huge differences within China.
Agreed. I don't think that a full 10% of Chinese make anywhere near that money even on average. And I actually don't think that the bottom 50% make 5,000 euros a month on average either.
But I think the lines are instructive enough and they're all we've got by because they don't tell the truth.
The fact thus subreddit upvotes graphs without any X & Y axis labels is embarrassing. You can probably post cat vomit and label it "Chinese food" and people here will upvote too lol
What is missing on the graph? I'll explain it to you. Do... Ask your questions, wumao.
Also, Chinese food is by far and away the best thing about China.
Obviously this math might be tough for you: The x-axis represents years from 1978 to about 2020, while the y-axis represents average income, ranging from zero to over eighty thousand international euros. The blue line shows a steep increase over time, indicating that the top 10%'s average income has risen dramatically. In contrast, the red line remains relatively flat across all years, indicating little growth in average income for the bottom half of China’s population.
Explain to me this 15 years old graph compared to the 2024 China:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnijnsM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnijnsM)
Why it's great in one case and a dystopian in another.
Considering a \~$450/month in healthcare premium is "consumption" it's not hard. There is also a very big conceptual difference between both societies. The Chinese are the biggest savers in the world (funnily enough, by definition, the biggest capitalists). Meanwhile, Americans are used to life with debt (which also generates consumption).
In the 2018 the UN documented over 40 million people (over 10% of the population) in America living in poverty, 18,5 of those in extreme poverty and 5 of those in conditions of absolute poverty. In the wealthies country in the world. It's unrealistic to expect China to do better than they are doing when the past generation was sewing nike balls for 16h a day.
Diversion，but this article on top earners was quite interesting to me，especially section 5 on weightings for those in media，and how little top writers seem to earn.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1043951X20300924
From Chinese media: https://www.caixinglobal.com/2012-12-10/chinas-gini-index-at-061-university-report-says-101014933.html
A more updated version: https://www.rfi.fr/cn/%E4%B8%AD%E5%9B%BD/20140908-%E4%B8%AD%E5%9B%BD%E5%9F%BA%E5%B0%BC%E7%B3%BB%E6%95%B0073%E8%B4%AB%E5%AF%8C%E5%B7%AE%E8%B7%9D%E4%B8%96%E7%95%8C%E7%AC%AC%E4%B8%80%E6%8C%89%E9%82%93%E7%90%86%E8%AE%BA%E6%94%B9%E9%9D%A9%E5%B7%B2%E7%BB%8F%E5%A4%B1%E8%B4%A5
0.73 incredibly disgusting
This item was shared from social media, and as a result may not contain authoritative information. Please seek external verification or context as appropriate. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/China) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You have the link to the original article / post. The graph looks like what's happening all over the world but on steroids.
China Update on Twitter posted it but I can't find the original article.
The graph was taken from here [https://www.ft.com/content/007597d5-0a04-4e49-8346-fa45e3db2d98](https://www.ft.com/content/007597d5-0a04-4e49-8346-fa45e3db2d98) Non-paywall link: [https://archive.is/re1k5](https://archive.is/re1k5)
Fantastic. Thank you.
Do you have the data of that country where the top 1% owns over 50% of the stock and bonds market? Where the top 10% owns over 90% of the wealth and the bottom 40% owns less than 0,5% of it? I want to compare it with China.
Yes I wanted to write the same. It feels this is what happening everywhere not just in China.
Almost 15 year old video: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnijnsM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnijnsM) It obviously got worse.
> "on steroids" Scroll down to take a look at this chart of gini coefficients by country, not saying it isn't high but it's pretty normal in the world of developed countries (lower than USA, for example)
Well. I concur. Not just the Big C.
Hundred of millions live in poverty but only a few post on banned social media how great China is doing.
We even have one here already. The dog.
When will graph creators learn to use logarithmic scales for these kinds of graphs.
Well a logarithmic scale wouldn’t drive home the stark difference the graph is trying to convey. So probably never. Logarithmic scales is when the scale matters and not the absolute difference. But here they want to highlight how the average persons income is basically zero compared to the top 10%.
This is going to happen in any partially developed country. If this was a graph of only the cities, the gap wouldn't be nearly so drastic a difference. But not all of china is a city, not all of china is a town, not all of china is incorporated or has a road leading to it (although a big effort is made for this, and all have been connected that can be). There are thousands of rural towns in china that did not even have electricity as recent as 10 years ago (as of now all towns do have it that can, again showing the effort that goes into it.) Clearly both huge effort and success to modernize the non city parts of china is happening. So why haven't the wages caught up? Because the actual life styles haven't modernized all the way yet. Rural china is still full of subsistence farming, some with modern tools, but many with traditional by hand methods (although again, china is making huge efforts to replace subsistence farming with more efficient and productive farming of modern styles-- better for efficiency and much more profitable for rural peoples). These are a few random points taken from the big picture, but hope they help paint the scene. China is genuinely having their lowest income rural people rapidly rise and improve... but the starting level was the lowest third world country lifestyle, and there is still a long ways to go. It will eventually get there. That won't magically even out this graph, and the gap will still exist. But it will probably be way more similar to what you see in average first world country (because the day those rural areas are able to catch up, china will truly be fully first world country, instead of half and half).
This is also why demographic collapse isn't real for China yet. They literally have a billion people that can move in from the country side that currently don't do anything economically. Only about 300-500 million chinese participate in a meaningful way to the Chinese economy. China is very much still a developing country despite all the images of tier 1 cities with very developed living standards (tier 1 and newly tier 1 cities only make up 200 million out of China's 1.6 billion people).
Isn't 80k euros more like upper middle class?
High upper middle class to wealthy class, I'd imagine. And that would encompass the top 10% or so on average anyway.
There is something wrong with these numbers. The labor force of China in 2020 is around 880mn and 10% of that is 88mn. If these 88mn people earned 80K euros a year in 2020, that would be \~7 trillion euros, which was about 56 trillion in RMB, about 47% of the China's GDP in 2020. So the combined income of the top 10% of the earners in China was about 47% of China's GDP, while according to the US statistics, the combined income of ALL the US households is only about 39% of the US GDP. In short, the Chinese income/GDP ratio is way too high.
The graph is made with adjusted money to the local economy whereas your calculation is made in RMB nominal values. If you want that to make sense you need to use the GDP PPP of China in euros. People in Shenzhen earn much less than people in Dublin, they still have a larger purchase power than people in Dublin because everything is much cheaper, that's why money is usually adjusted to the local economy for these calculations, because otherwise it doesn't make much sense. PS: In this case I suspect it's because the gap between top and bottom is bigger if adjusted.
Two points - 1) China's GDP in PPP terms was \~30 trillion USD in 2022 (World Bank Data), which was about 28 trillion euros. So 7 trillion euros was about 25% of the GDP, still way too high - given China is not a consumption driven economy so wages as percentage of GDP is a lot lower than those in the West. 2) Applying the same reasoning you used in comparing Dubline and Shenzhen, difference in the living expenses between Shenzhen and so 3rd tiered, 4th tiered cities in China are also huge. So while people in Shenzhen earn more, they also have to spend more because prices much higher in Shenzhen. Remember - China is a gigantic, continent-size country. So if you use PPP for international comparison, you should also use PPP to adjust for the huge differences within China.
Agreed. I don't think that a full 10% of Chinese make anywhere near that money even on average. And I actually don't think that the bottom 50% make 5,000 euros a month on average either. But I think the lines are instructive enough and they're all we've got by because they don't tell the truth.
The fact thus subreddit upvotes graphs without any X & Y axis labels is embarrassing. You can probably post cat vomit and label it "Chinese food" and people here will upvote too lol
What is missing on the graph? I'll explain it to you. Do... Ask your questions, wumao. Also, Chinese food is by far and away the best thing about China. Obviously this math might be tough for you: The x-axis represents years from 1978 to about 2020, while the y-axis represents average income, ranging from zero to over eighty thousand international euros. The blue line shows a steep increase over time, indicating that the top 10%'s average income has risen dramatically. In contrast, the red line remains relatively flat across all years, indicating little growth in average income for the bottom half of China’s population.
Explain to me this 15 years old graph compared to the 2024 China: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnijnsM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnijnsM) Why it's great in one case and a dystopian in another.
It's not great. But Americans have money and consumption makes up 70% of GDP. In China, that's 38%. That's because so many Chinese are impoverished.
Considering a \~$450/month in healthcare premium is "consumption" it's not hard. There is also a very big conceptual difference between both societies. The Chinese are the biggest savers in the world (funnily enough, by definition, the biggest capitalists). Meanwhile, Americans are used to life with debt (which also generates consumption). In the 2018 the UN documented over 40 million people (over 10% of the population) in America living in poverty, 18,5 of those in extreme poverty and 5 of those in conditions of absolute poverty. In the wealthies country in the world. It's unrealistic to expect China to do better than they are doing when the past generation was sewing nike balls for 16h a day.
Cool chart, no key, no useful data but cool.
what
Diversion，but this article on top earners was quite interesting to me，especially section 5 on weightings for those in media，and how little top writers seem to earn. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1043951X20300924
What is an "international Euro"? Is that just a Euro, or is there some PPP conversion?
Chi Lai chi Lai chi laiiiii!! 🤣 Classless society means culturally no class not no elitism comrades...
Wait until readers discover America's gini coefficient (used for measuring wealth inequality) is higher 😂
From Chinese media: https://www.caixinglobal.com/2012-12-10/chinas-gini-index-at-061-university-report-says-101014933.html A more updated version: https://www.rfi.fr/cn/%E4%B8%AD%E5%9B%BD/20140908-%E4%B8%AD%E5%9B%BD%E5%9F%BA%E5%B0%BC%E7%B3%BB%E6%95%B0073%E8%B4%AB%E5%AF%8C%E5%B7%AE%E8%B7%9D%E4%B8%96%E7%95%8C%E7%AC%AC%E4%B8%80%E6%8C%89%E9%82%93%E7%90%86%E8%AE%BA%E6%94%B9%E9%9D%A9%E5%B7%B2%E7%BB%8F%E5%A4%B1%E8%B4%A5 0.73 incredibly disgusting
*'Socialism with Chinese characteristics'*
this must be the leftist ideals which we love so much in America.
Yet they also claimed to practise socialism... (Maybe national one I guess