This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There is a mistake in the entry for Oman. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Briandaflyin ( talk • contribs) 18:21, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
The GINI ratings given in this list are wildly different from the ones given on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality by UN and CIA sources. The list on this page also goes against common sense. China one of the most equal countries, and Sweden one of the most unequal? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.228.133.145 ( talk) 11:30, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
It looks like item #28 on the list is showing up as Switzerland but should be some other country? The Gini number does not look correct for Switzerland. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.210.129.202 ( talk) 03:07, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
Again, strange data: The world's wealth gini is right at the high end (i.e. very unequal) rather than somewhere in the middle as one might expect for an 'average'. Or is it the case that the world's figure incorporates the effects of the small number of individuals who posses vast amounts of wealth in the form of such things as offshore bank accounts, foreign properties etc. i.e. stats that would not appear in an individual country's data? 1812ahill ( talk) 02:54, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
The figures given for the UK do not appear to match those given in the refrenced table 9. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.40.38.10 ( talk) 18:47, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Wealth distribution is *very* different from income distribution. Th figures in this page come from a United Nations University project begun in 2008 and are still the best available. The Nordic countries do score very high, which as you say, looks odd for countries that are the most equal in income distribution. But there are reasons for this. For example when the Nordics report wealth figures they also try to accurately report debt figures, so unlike with many countries the poorest individual have negative net worth (because of debts) emphasising the proportion owned by those at the top without debt. Also since they have very strong social protection, especially pensions, people are less inclined to accumulate wealth to generate an extra income when the state pension is so good. The UNU report linked as a source is very informative. Jockox3 ( talk) 15:46, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
Does anyone really believe that inequality in the Netherlands moved from #64 in the world (GINI of about 0.73) to #1 in the world (GINI of 0.90) in one year? Sure, housing prices went up (8% according to the CS article) but the stock market went down. Not all countries are so volatile but this does call into question the methodology. 85.144.63.10 ( talk) 07:05, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
The data is correct, but I removed the commentary on Scandinavian countries anyway. Its unencyclopedic, the claim of a misconception of low wealth inequality needs citation, and it's deceptive. It's already caused at least one person to believe wealth inequality is not disruptive of human development, even though the Netherlands' human development growth is below-average and wealth inequality and human development growth have a correlation of -.2 (significant at the .2 level). Also, what Jockox3 said.
In the discussion of the (very hard to measure) wealth inequality numbers, somehow no one has mentioned that the GDP numbers are... odd. Some countries seem correct, but some clearly have the wrong units: e.g. China is listed as having a GDP of 18 million, one of the lowest numbers in the world. The table doesn't mention whether the numbers are in dollars or in the country's national currency, but numbers for some countries (e.g. Russia) seem to indicate those are dollars. Besides, there is likely no currency in the world that would put China's GDP at 18 million, unless its measured in tonnes of gold. The same is true for a lot of other countries: Indonesia has a GDP of $3.51 million instead of $1.15 trillion and Dominica has had its GDP reduced to 0 from its true value of $488 million. Having looked at the Credit Suisse 2019 report, the exact number listed for China (18.71) only shows up once and it is the per capita financial wealth of Latvia (in $ thousands). In other words, I have no clue how this number ended up in the table at all. Tsobolev ( talk) 00:06, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Politifact mentions this article in a recent fact check ( http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2011/oct/14/alan-grayson/alan-grayson-says-united-states-has-fifth-most-une/) and gives us kudos for having accurate data. Good work wikipedians. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 01:46, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
That's fine, but now the list is completely confusing. What happened to the Gini coefficients, with each reporting organization (the UN, etc.) as a separate column? Now it's gone. The resulting table is less useful than it was before. It's difficult to understand and not as accurate as it was before. The consolidation of data sources needs to be done more accurately; honestly, the previous version of this page - with its errors - was more useful than this one. 128.12.103.234 ( talk) 05:28, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
Looking for a reliable source of data (to cite in scientific work myself) I inspected the source more closely and was not really convinced: The table containing all the Gini-coefficients only exist in an early version (2008) of the paper, which is accessible (as far as I can see without link on the university's website) here:
http://economics.uwo.ca/faculty/davies/workingpapers/thelevelanddistribution.pdf .
The 'discussion paper' on the
webpage of the United Nations University and the version the first author links to on his university website,
http://economics.uwo.ca/faculty/davies/workingpapers/Level_and_Distn_Global_H_W.pdf , which appeared under the same title and with the same authors in a peer reviewed journal in 2011, both contain much less countries.
Additionally, what the authors write on their sources seems a bit sparse. (But I might have missed something in one of the versions there...) — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
149.148.63.51 (
talk)
18:40, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
This article lists the USA's GINI index as around 80, while the article on the [United States of America] lists it as 45 (as backed up by the CIA factbook--which might not be an unbiased source for info about America). This is not a small disagreement, it's a huge difference. Which is more accurate? Or rather, for the purposes of wikipedia, which is the more reputable source?
Erhm America more equal than Denmark? I dont think so... List is pure shite! Start over..
Citizen Premier ( talk) 03:34, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
One is income (CIA), other (this) wealth. 130.234.245.120 ( talk) 10:45, 1 March 2017 (UTC)anon
The question comes from this article and from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality. Denmark should be as unequal as Zimbabwe and Namibia concerning wealth BUT should be as equal as Sweden, Norway and Japan concerning income?
Income & wealth are two different quantities :-D
In different countries' summary-statistics, they needn't vary in proportion to eachother, or even vary monotonically with eachother.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.82.116.234 ( talk) 22:38, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
The same remark can be done concerning Switzerland and the USA. I join the remarks above, some figures seem to be not reliable here. How can we trust the other figures in this table?-- Joël DESHAIES ( talk) 16:32, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
What fucking retard is running this page? Its all just completely wrong..
I don't understand either. Denmark and Switzerland are some of the most socialist countries, especially Denmark. 2601:640:4000:8CD0:8A63:DFFF:FEA6:9C8D ( talk) 01:30, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
Erm Switzerland is not a socialist country. It has low taxes and low spending on welfare as % of GDP. It is one of the most economically liberal countries in Europe! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.192.113.11 ( talk) 13:56, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
Mongolia does not appear on my screen? Why is it missing? Kdammers ( talk) 06:03, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
The Wealth GINI for Denmark was changed to 0.505 without any references. The number 0.808 can be found in APPENDIX IV of the WIDER Research Paper 2008-77 which was already referred to in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.188.248.168 ( talk) 13:57, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
The survey sources the paper references for Denmark seem a little odd: "Wealth tax records; see Statistics Denmark (1998) and Ohlson et al. (2006). Supplemented with private communication with Statistics Denmark in 2007." As far as I can see Ohlson et al. only published a book in 2006 titled
"Earnings, Earnings Growth and Value", which does not mention Denmark or Scandinavia at all. Regardless, it seems the data used for Denmarks GINI coefficient is almost 20 years old (1996) and the sources table has a mysterious year column with no header?
This number just generally seems very odd to me and looking up the papers sources makes me doubt it even more.
ANDSENS (
talk)
17:32, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
How can the world average be higher than the countries that hold of 99.5% of world GDP? This page does not make any sense at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.218.158.128 ( talk) 22:50, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
A helpful colleague pointed out that the CreditSuisse Global Wealth Databook has compiled median individual wealth statistics by country, on pp. 93-96. Someone was looking for this somewhere on the wiki in the past few months, and it's incredibly hard to find. Given that this information is far more characteristic of a typical person's wealth than the mean values skewed by large outliers everywhere, I think it's very important and I hope we can incorporate it. I suppose I should make some kind of a table or graph based on it. Any ideas? EllenCT ( talk) 20:31, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Copied from article: The latest available known source is October 2013, https://publications.credit-suisse.com/tasks/render/file/?fileID=1949208D-E59A-F2D9-6D0361266E44A2F8, which slightly updates the 2009 https://doi.org/10.3386/w15508 by the same researchers. The following derives instead from a 2006 publication by a different group of researchers, and should be updated. -- SelfishSeahorse ( talk) 19:13, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Does anybody know how to update this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.155.30.232 ( talk) 16:49, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of countries by distribution of wealth. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:54, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
We could use some more eyes on this: Talk:List_of_common_misconceptions#poverty. Also, there is the question of whether the proposed misconception should be added to an article on poverty. -- David Tornheim ( talk) 02:11, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
I've looked through this data--Denmark has as high of wealth inequality (almost) as Zimbabwe? Zero chance. China is second place in wealth equality? Zero chance. Half the citation links don't work. This is one of the WORST articles on wikipedia I have read and should either be deleted or revised. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.218.81.132 ( talk) 18:22, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
This article is pretty accurate. Please use sources rather that just saying "you're wrong". You can always provide another list of wealth gini coefficients. Lucas12233 ( talk) 15:05, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
"Wealth equality"? Gini is a measure of inequality; the higher the Gini, the higher the inequality. The title should be changed to "List of countries by wealth inequality". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pennythugginit ( talk • contribs) 23:01, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
The numbers for GDP in this article are definitely incorrect. I've tried (and failed) to edit the table itself, so I call on moderators who are more experienced with the interface than I am. For confirmation of the data being incorrect, you can sort the table by nominal GDP and find that China has one of the lowest GDP levels in the world, at just $18 million. The same is true for many other countries in the list, e.g. Indonesia (30 million instead of 1.15 trillion). Also, the column doesn't specify which currency the GDP is in (presumably USD), but I doubt there is any currency in which China's GDP is 18 million.
I've written about this in a section above and didn't get a response, so I hope creating a new section will be more effective, because this is quite a significant error.
Tsobolev ( talk) 20:57, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Atheist723 ( talk) 16:17, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
I believe the material I deleted is WP:OR by Jchw1994. If it is mentioned in the WP:RS, then it can be restored. -- David Tornheim ( talk) 21:41, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There is a mistake in the entry for Oman. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Briandaflyin ( talk • contribs) 18:21, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
The GINI ratings given in this list are wildly different from the ones given on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality by UN and CIA sources. The list on this page also goes against common sense. China one of the most equal countries, and Sweden one of the most unequal? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.228.133.145 ( talk) 11:30, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
It looks like item #28 on the list is showing up as Switzerland but should be some other country? The Gini number does not look correct for Switzerland. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.210.129.202 ( talk) 03:07, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
Again, strange data: The world's wealth gini is right at the high end (i.e. very unequal) rather than somewhere in the middle as one might expect for an 'average'. Or is it the case that the world's figure incorporates the effects of the small number of individuals who posses vast amounts of wealth in the form of such things as offshore bank accounts, foreign properties etc. i.e. stats that would not appear in an individual country's data? 1812ahill ( talk) 02:54, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
The figures given for the UK do not appear to match those given in the refrenced table 9. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.40.38.10 ( talk) 18:47, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Wealth distribution is *very* different from income distribution. Th figures in this page come from a United Nations University project begun in 2008 and are still the best available. The Nordic countries do score very high, which as you say, looks odd for countries that are the most equal in income distribution. But there are reasons for this. For example when the Nordics report wealth figures they also try to accurately report debt figures, so unlike with many countries the poorest individual have negative net worth (because of debts) emphasising the proportion owned by those at the top without debt. Also since they have very strong social protection, especially pensions, people are less inclined to accumulate wealth to generate an extra income when the state pension is so good. The UNU report linked as a source is very informative. Jockox3 ( talk) 15:46, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
Does anyone really believe that inequality in the Netherlands moved from #64 in the world (GINI of about 0.73) to #1 in the world (GINI of 0.90) in one year? Sure, housing prices went up (8% according to the CS article) but the stock market went down. Not all countries are so volatile but this does call into question the methodology. 85.144.63.10 ( talk) 07:05, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
The data is correct, but I removed the commentary on Scandinavian countries anyway. Its unencyclopedic, the claim of a misconception of low wealth inequality needs citation, and it's deceptive. It's already caused at least one person to believe wealth inequality is not disruptive of human development, even though the Netherlands' human development growth is below-average and wealth inequality and human development growth have a correlation of -.2 (significant at the .2 level). Also, what Jockox3 said.
In the discussion of the (very hard to measure) wealth inequality numbers, somehow no one has mentioned that the GDP numbers are... odd. Some countries seem correct, but some clearly have the wrong units: e.g. China is listed as having a GDP of 18 million, one of the lowest numbers in the world. The table doesn't mention whether the numbers are in dollars or in the country's national currency, but numbers for some countries (e.g. Russia) seem to indicate those are dollars. Besides, there is likely no currency in the world that would put China's GDP at 18 million, unless its measured in tonnes of gold. The same is true for a lot of other countries: Indonesia has a GDP of $3.51 million instead of $1.15 trillion and Dominica has had its GDP reduced to 0 from its true value of $488 million. Having looked at the Credit Suisse 2019 report, the exact number listed for China (18.71) only shows up once and it is the per capita financial wealth of Latvia (in $ thousands). In other words, I have no clue how this number ended up in the table at all. Tsobolev ( talk) 00:06, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Politifact mentions this article in a recent fact check ( http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2011/oct/14/alan-grayson/alan-grayson-says-united-states-has-fifth-most-une/) and gives us kudos for having accurate data. Good work wikipedians. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 01:46, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
That's fine, but now the list is completely confusing. What happened to the Gini coefficients, with each reporting organization (the UN, etc.) as a separate column? Now it's gone. The resulting table is less useful than it was before. It's difficult to understand and not as accurate as it was before. The consolidation of data sources needs to be done more accurately; honestly, the previous version of this page - with its errors - was more useful than this one. 128.12.103.234 ( talk) 05:28, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
Looking for a reliable source of data (to cite in scientific work myself) I inspected the source more closely and was not really convinced: The table containing all the Gini-coefficients only exist in an early version (2008) of the paper, which is accessible (as far as I can see without link on the university's website) here:
http://economics.uwo.ca/faculty/davies/workingpapers/thelevelanddistribution.pdf .
The 'discussion paper' on the
webpage of the United Nations University and the version the first author links to on his university website,
http://economics.uwo.ca/faculty/davies/workingpapers/Level_and_Distn_Global_H_W.pdf , which appeared under the same title and with the same authors in a peer reviewed journal in 2011, both contain much less countries.
Additionally, what the authors write on their sources seems a bit sparse. (But I might have missed something in one of the versions there...) — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
149.148.63.51 (
talk)
18:40, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
This article lists the USA's GINI index as around 80, while the article on the [United States of America] lists it as 45 (as backed up by the CIA factbook--which might not be an unbiased source for info about America). This is not a small disagreement, it's a huge difference. Which is more accurate? Or rather, for the purposes of wikipedia, which is the more reputable source?
Erhm America more equal than Denmark? I dont think so... List is pure shite! Start over..
Citizen Premier ( talk) 03:34, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
One is income (CIA), other (this) wealth. 130.234.245.120 ( talk) 10:45, 1 March 2017 (UTC)anon
The question comes from this article and from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality. Denmark should be as unequal as Zimbabwe and Namibia concerning wealth BUT should be as equal as Sweden, Norway and Japan concerning income?
Income & wealth are two different quantities :-D
In different countries' summary-statistics, they needn't vary in proportion to eachother, or even vary monotonically with eachother.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.82.116.234 ( talk) 22:38, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
The same remark can be done concerning Switzerland and the USA. I join the remarks above, some figures seem to be not reliable here. How can we trust the other figures in this table?-- Joël DESHAIES ( talk) 16:32, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
What fucking retard is running this page? Its all just completely wrong..
I don't understand either. Denmark and Switzerland are some of the most socialist countries, especially Denmark. 2601:640:4000:8CD0:8A63:DFFF:FEA6:9C8D ( talk) 01:30, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
Erm Switzerland is not a socialist country. It has low taxes and low spending on welfare as % of GDP. It is one of the most economically liberal countries in Europe! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.192.113.11 ( talk) 13:56, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
Mongolia does not appear on my screen? Why is it missing? Kdammers ( talk) 06:03, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
The Wealth GINI for Denmark was changed to 0.505 without any references. The number 0.808 can be found in APPENDIX IV of the WIDER Research Paper 2008-77 which was already referred to in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.188.248.168 ( talk) 13:57, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
The survey sources the paper references for Denmark seem a little odd: "Wealth tax records; see Statistics Denmark (1998) and Ohlson et al. (2006). Supplemented with private communication with Statistics Denmark in 2007." As far as I can see Ohlson et al. only published a book in 2006 titled
"Earnings, Earnings Growth and Value", which does not mention Denmark or Scandinavia at all. Regardless, it seems the data used for Denmarks GINI coefficient is almost 20 years old (1996) and the sources table has a mysterious year column with no header?
This number just generally seems very odd to me and looking up the papers sources makes me doubt it even more.
ANDSENS (
talk)
17:32, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
How can the world average be higher than the countries that hold of 99.5% of world GDP? This page does not make any sense at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.218.158.128 ( talk) 22:50, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
A helpful colleague pointed out that the CreditSuisse Global Wealth Databook has compiled median individual wealth statistics by country, on pp. 93-96. Someone was looking for this somewhere on the wiki in the past few months, and it's incredibly hard to find. Given that this information is far more characteristic of a typical person's wealth than the mean values skewed by large outliers everywhere, I think it's very important and I hope we can incorporate it. I suppose I should make some kind of a table or graph based on it. Any ideas? EllenCT ( talk) 20:31, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Copied from article: The latest available known source is October 2013, https://publications.credit-suisse.com/tasks/render/file/?fileID=1949208D-E59A-F2D9-6D0361266E44A2F8, which slightly updates the 2009 https://doi.org/10.3386/w15508 by the same researchers. The following derives instead from a 2006 publication by a different group of researchers, and should be updated. -- SelfishSeahorse ( talk) 19:13, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Does anybody know how to update this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.155.30.232 ( talk) 16:49, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of countries by distribution of wealth. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:54, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
We could use some more eyes on this: Talk:List_of_common_misconceptions#poverty. Also, there is the question of whether the proposed misconception should be added to an article on poverty. -- David Tornheim ( talk) 02:11, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
I've looked through this data--Denmark has as high of wealth inequality (almost) as Zimbabwe? Zero chance. China is second place in wealth equality? Zero chance. Half the citation links don't work. This is one of the WORST articles on wikipedia I have read and should either be deleted or revised. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.218.81.132 ( talk) 18:22, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
This article is pretty accurate. Please use sources rather that just saying "you're wrong". You can always provide another list of wealth gini coefficients. Lucas12233 ( talk) 15:05, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
"Wealth equality"? Gini is a measure of inequality; the higher the Gini, the higher the inequality. The title should be changed to "List of countries by wealth inequality". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pennythugginit ( talk • contribs) 23:01, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
The numbers for GDP in this article are definitely incorrect. I've tried (and failed) to edit the table itself, so I call on moderators who are more experienced with the interface than I am. For confirmation of the data being incorrect, you can sort the table by nominal GDP and find that China has one of the lowest GDP levels in the world, at just $18 million. The same is true for many other countries in the list, e.g. Indonesia (30 million instead of 1.15 trillion). Also, the column doesn't specify which currency the GDP is in (presumably USD), but I doubt there is any currency in which China's GDP is 18 million.
I've written about this in a section above and didn't get a response, so I hope creating a new section will be more effective, because this is quite a significant error.
Tsobolev ( talk) 20:57, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Atheist723 ( talk) 16:17, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
I believe the material I deleted is WP:OR by Jchw1994. If it is mentioned in the WP:RS, then it can be restored. -- David Tornheim ( talk) 21:41, 13 February 2024 (UTC)