Re: Postrel on liberalization

["Henry C.K. Liu" <hliu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Alan:

The abstract states:

"We use aggregate GDP data and within-country income shares for the period
1970-1998 to assign a level of income to each person in the world. We then
estimate the gaussian kernel density function for the worldwide distribution of
income. We compute world poverty rates by integrating the density function below
the poverty lines. The one-dollar-a-day poverty rate has fallen from 20% to 5%
over the last twenty five years. The two-dollar-a-day rate has fallen from 44% to
18%. There are between 300 and 500 million less poor people in
1998 than there were in the 70s."

Obviously, the number of prople living on $1 per day  has dropped from 1970 to
1998.  But that does not show that the number of people living in poverty has
fallen.  $1/day in 1970 would translate into $30 per day in 1998.  The number of
people living on less than  $30 a day in 1998 is definitively larger than the
number at $1 per day in 1970.

We are not all stupid. What is amazing is that with all the benefits of
globalization that Barro celebrates, the world still has people living on less
than $1 per day at all.  You try it for a week and you too would turn radical.

Henry


Alan G Isaac wrote:

> On Thu, 22 Aug 2002 16:09:13 -0700 "Harry L. Cook" <hlc710@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > And next we will find statistical proof that actually there has been no
> > rising inequality in this country in the Reagan and Bush years.
>
> Did you actually understand the argument,
> or is the only important act to reject it?
> The papers are at
>   http://www.columbia.edu/~xs23/home.html
> Reactions to the papers are linked there as well.
> Barro's is to be expected, perhaps,
>   http://www.columbia.edu/~xs23/papers/worldistribution/barrocomment.htm
> Nevertheless, there is a fact of the matter.
>
> Alan Isaac