so now you are richest man in the world
-
I guess even high Gini coefficient may not even be a problem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient
I quote from the article which cite credible academics
==
Another limitation of Gini coefficient is that it is not a proper measure of egalitarianism, as it is only measures income dispersion. For example, if two equally egalitarian countries pursue different immigration policies, the country accepting a higher proportion of low-income or impoverished migrants will report a higher Gini coefficient and therefore may appear to exhibit more income inequality.
Gini coefficient falls yet the poor gets poorer, Gini coefficient rises yet everyone getting richer.
== -
Since I'm rather free this afternoon, I would like to add 2 more cts on this silly report by Citibank and Knight Frank.
GDP is a measure of the value of goods and services produced in the country. Therefore, a high per capita GDP merely illustrates that the people in a country is rather productive, nothing more. It is NOT an indication of wealth, only of POTENTIAL income.
What about wages then? Surely with a high per capita GDP, we should be paying higher wages?
http://business.asiaone.com/Business/News/Office/Story/A1Story20100517-216611.html
Based on this report, the wage share of GDP in Singapore has been bouncing around 40% plus or so whereas in the USA, it is closer to 60%. If these percentages did not change recently, it would mean that to achieve similar level of wages as in the USA, our per capita GDP must by 40-50% higher!
And then, of course, there is the Gini coefficient.... -
Irrelevant:
Since I'm rather free this afternoon, I would like to add 2 more cts on this silly report by Citibank and Knight Frank.
GDP is a measure of the value of goods and services produced in the country. Therefore, a high per capita GDP merely illustrates that the people in a country is rather productive, nothing more. It is NOT an indication of wealth, only of POTENTIAL income.
What about wages then? Surely with a high per capita GDP, we should be paying higher wages?
http://business.asiaone.com/Business/News/Office/Story/A1Story20100517-216611.html
Based on this report, the wage share of GDP in Singapore has been bouncing around 40% plus or so whereas in the USA, it is closer to 60%. If these percentages did not change recently, it would mean that to achieve similar level of wages as in the USA, our per capita GDP must by 40-50% higher!
And then, of course, there is the Gini coefficient....
:goodpost:
Where have you been hiding all this while Mr Irrelevant?
I completely agree income distribution is a problem in Singapore. -
WeiHan:
No, I have said before that income distribution IS A problem in Singapore. The lower paid workers need a leg up, be it via taxes and grants, I don't know, but something needs to be done.I guess even high Gini coefficient may not even be a problem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient
I quote from the article which cite credible academics
==
Another limitation of Gini coefficient is that it is not a proper measure of egalitarianism, as it is only measures income dispersion. For example, if two equally egalitarian countries pursue different immigration policies, the country accepting a higher proportion of low-income or impoverished migrants will report a higher Gini coefficient and therefore may appear to exhibit more income inequality.
Gini coefficient falls yet the poor gets poorer, Gini coefficient rises yet everyone getting richer.
== -
3Boys:
How do you account for the fact that income for average singaporeans have been stagnant but yet GDP/capita has increased?
No, I have said before that income distribution IS A problem in Singapore. The lower paid workers need a leg up, be it via taxes and grants, I don't know, but something needs to be done.WeiHan:
I guess even high Gini coefficient may not even be a problem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient
I quote from the article which cite credible academics
==
Another limitation of Gini coefficient is that it is not a proper measure of egalitarianism, as it is only measures income dispersion. For example, if two equally egalitarian countries pursue different immigration policies, the country accepting a higher proportion of low-income or impoverished migrants will report a higher Gini coefficient and therefore may appear to exhibit more income inequality.
Gini coefficient falls yet the poor gets poorer, Gini coefficient rises yet everyone getting richer.
==
Is either
1. The non-residential workers have been taken out of the denominator when calculating GDP/capita. ( I still don't see why this argument is ridiculous)
2. The richest 10% really account for all the GDP increases
3. Others? -
WeiHan:
How do you account for the fact that income for average singaporeans have been stagnant but yet GDP/capita has increased?
No, I have said before that income distribution IS A problem in Singapore. The lower paid workers need a leg up, be it via taxes and grants, I don't know, but something needs to be done.3Boys:
[quote=\"WeiHan\"]I guess even high Gini coefficient may not even be a problem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient
I quote from the article which cite credible academics
==
Another limitation of Gini coefficient is that it is not a proper measure of egalitarianism, as it is only measures income dispersion. For example, if two equally egalitarian countries pursue different immigration policies, the country accepting a higher proportion of low-income or impoverished migrants will report a higher Gini coefficient and therefore may appear to exhibit more income inequality.
Gini coefficient falls yet the poor gets poorer, Gini coefficient rises yet everyone getting richer.
==
Is either
1. The non-residential workers have been taken out of the denominator when calculating GDP/capita. ( I still don't see why this argument is ridiculous)
2. The richest 10% really account for all the GDP increases
3. Others?[/quote]We have a very high concentration of wealthy, and a small number of the extremely wealthy. It is a 2-track economy right now, which partly accounts for the high GINI.
Although it is hard to independently verify the data, yb's approach has got no more merit than the one he is trying to debunk. And it's not as if it comes to a wholly different conclusion either (that Singapore is one of the top ranked countries by GDP). He started with a conclusion that KF was wrong, that ST was 'gloating', then tried to morph the data by taking 2 extremes, and voila, we are ahead of Australia, but not Norway. Really making a mountain out of a molehill, just to take a shot at ST.
If he want to argue GINI, then argue GINI lah, bao jiak there, even g'ment say so. -
The stagnation of median income isn't an uniquely-Singapore issue.
America's middle class is shrinking in size too
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/2012-08-22/middle-class-share-of-americas-income-shrinking
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better š
Register Login