this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2025
586 points (92.8% liked)

News

33272 readers
2427 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Despite the US’s economic success, income inequality remains breathtaking. But this is no glitch – it’s the system

The Chinese did rather well in the age of globalization. In 1990, 943 million people there lived on less than $3 a day measured in 2021 dollars – 83% of the population, according to the World Bank. By 2019, the number was brought down to zero. Unfortunately, the United States was not as successful. More than 4 million Americans – 1.25% of the population – must make ends meet with less than $3 a day, more than three times as many as 35 years ago.

The data is not super consistent with the narrative of the US’s inexorable success. Sure, American productivity has zoomed ahead of that of its European peers. Only a handful of countries manage to produce more stuff per hour of work. And artificial intelligence now promises to put the United States that much further ahead.

This is not to congratulate China for its authoritarian government, for its repression of minorities or for the iron fist it deploys against any form of dissent. But it merits pondering how this undemocratic government could successfully slash its poverty rate when the richest and oldest democracy in the world wouldn’t.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca 5 points 15 hours ago

The answer is socialist policies, or social democrat policies, or whatever-the-fuck-you-want-to-name-it-to-come-to-terms-with-it policies. China hasn't even been particularly good with them, they've just managed to have them. That's all you need, to accept them as good instead of demonizing them. Which makes some trends in the countries that do have them sad.

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 3 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (1 children)

So did Taiwan, Eastern Europe and dozens of other countries without sacrificing human rights as much as China. So tired of "they're evil but hey that's the only way to not be poor!" bullshit that validates dictators.

Expected better from The Guardian than to use this bait to illustrate US' shortcomings. The world does not revolve around US and to poke america you don't need to validate dictators.

[–] Jumbie@lemmy.zip 1 points 13 hours ago

Sadly, the world does revolve around the US. It seems to be changing with The Stupids in charge, though.

[–] ISuperabound@lemmy.world 5 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

China, in large part, raised people out of poverty at the expense of the so-called “west”…so it’s no mystery that the US was unable to do the same. The wests’ corporations needed cheap labour, and China was happy to accept the jobs. We all know this. Trump got elected because he was the first to overtly acknowledge that reality and propose a solution. Now, his “solution” will only exasperate the problem because he’s ultimately a corrupt fascist…but there’s a lesson there that hasn’t been learned yet.

[–] NeilBru@lemmy.world 4 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (1 children)

his “solution” will only ~~exasperate~~ exacerbate the problem

[–] ISuperabound@lemmy.world 2 points 10 hours ago

My eyes are so bad I can’t tell which way either of those words is spelled.

[–] lolola@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

all i can do is lol and roll my eyes

i don't believe a word about china on lemmy

[–] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 3 points 23 hours ago

On one hand, it looks so great.

On the other hand, you got a bunch of people lined up at foreign embassies/consulates, waiting for their interview and hoping for immigration visas.

[–] clot27@lemmy.zip 11 points 1 day ago

Not by choice but by design. America is capitalist hell hole and it will get worse day by day

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 27 points 1 day ago

when the richest and oldest democracy in the world wouldn’t.

I like that it uses “wouldn’t” rather than”couldn’t”. So relevant to today’s politics

[–] DarkAri@lemmy.blahaj.zone 18 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The idea that they have zero poverty is just absurd.

[–] FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 20 points 1 day ago (3 children)

The source is the World Bank. They are extremely unlikely to lie about this as their ideology is diametrically opposed to communism.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 1 points 16 hours ago

China dumped communism a generation ago, in all but the ruling party's name. Now it's totalitarian state capitalism. I suspect that the World Bank is just fine with that.

[–] DarkAri@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 13 hours ago

They might be opposed to communism but probably not authoritarianism. I'm sure China is well past its communist days and far into its world bank days.

[–] AmericanEconomicThinkTank@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I appreciate your fine estimation of TWB, but a study is only as good as it's data.

Data from the government, by the government. Have conditions and quality of life improved? Yes. But it was only a few years ago the people were buying gross tonnage of cheap fashion clothes during a rather harsh winter so people could survive the cold by burning it instead of coal to heat their homes.

That's not even counting the hundreds of millions that live life like it's the great depression, and the conditions in which they work.

[–] ISuperabound@lemmy.world 2 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Right…but you can’t swing from one extreme (zero poverty) to the other (hundreds of millions living like it’s the Great Depression). Neither are true.

It should be noted that poverty in China isn’t the same as poverty in the USA, ie when you adjust for wages v cost of living it doesn’t tell us much, because the systems are incompatible. All those people in China making below $1.90 US a day (or whatever your metric is) aren’t in the same boat they’d be in in the US, and vice versa.

But all of this ignores the topic of the post: China did indeed raise virtually all of its citizens out of poverty, and the US didn’t. But it’s really weird to just throw that factoid out there without acknowledging that China did it at the expense of the US.

True, I do have a habit of getting overly enthusiastic in my use a metaphor, lmao and humor as I see.

Compared to what life was like pre-80's? Yes absolutely things have improved, but even if improvement of conditions exist for those into the billion, that doesn't exclude the relative conditions on the ground.

Unemployment is growing in younger demographics at rates near the peak of what the US experienced in 33. If you compare overall, sustain unemployment year to year is worse. Continuing lack in stability in land value has changed what was a bedrock backing for generational social mobility into a risky hedge for many.

As you well know, and have said, just going off of say strength of the ren for pure purchasing power or daily wages is misleading. Compare the shifts in collegiate achievements, the chosen international schools that the middle class are sending their kids to get their degrees. Look towards the shifts in lower class, especially in the cities, towards day labor over even extended work contracts or proper salary. Look towards the accessibility of central heating, plumbing, electricity. See the treatment of the lower half a billion of Chinese society when they need to access healthcare, when they need the law. What is their commute like?

[–] FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Source? Seriously, if you’re going to dispute sources you have to provide a better one.

[–] Fleur_@aussie.zone 3 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

You're arguing with a guy called American economic think tank.

[–] AmericanEconomicThinkTank@lemmy.world 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

You say that like it's a bad thing ♡

[–] Fleur_@aussie.zone 1 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

Well, biased and stalwart in opinion might be more accurate descriptions.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 15 points 1 day ago

Only a handful of countries manage to produce more stuff per hour of work.

Only a handful of countries manage to produce more money per hour of work.

That's an important distinction IMO.

load more comments
view more: next ›