645
submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

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
[-] drmoose@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 days 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.

[-] DarkAri 31 points 2 days ago

The idea that they have zero poverty is just absurd.

[-] FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 27 points 2 days ago

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

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.

[-] FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago

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

[-] Fleur_@aussie.zone 3 points 2 days ago

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

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ISuperabound@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

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?

[-] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 days 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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] lolola 14 points 2 days ago

all i can do is lol and roll my eyes

i don't believe a word about china on lemmy

[-] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Don't, but it's worth considering the source. The Guardian while it does lean a little to the left, it is a mainstream news-source with a huge audience, and it has broken some major international news stories in the past.

[-] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 days ago

The Guardian's writers are a mixed bag, and some of them can be quite credulous. And the Guardian's political posture is most closely aligned with the Lib Dems and to some extent with the Labour centrists, though Starmer has exercised such appalling judgement and has demonstrated such moral bankruptcy that they've published some criticism of his policies.

[-] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 days 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.

[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 27 points 3 days 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

[-] ISuperabound@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

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 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

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

[-] ISuperabound@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

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

[-] huppakee@piefed.social 100 points 3 days ago

Last paragraph basically says it all:

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.

[-] evenglow@lemmy.world 59 points 3 days ago

China's new 5 year plan says it all too. So does all their previous 5 year plans too. Publicly available too.

In USA affordable EVs from China are illegal. Other affordable green tech from China is made unaffordable.

Maybe it's not the government that is the problem. Maybe the problem is the people in charge of running the government. And those people's plan.

Project 2025 is public too. That's USA's plan or at least the Republicans plan.

load more comments (19 replies)
[-] MangioneDontMiss@feddit.nl 13 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

At this point, Chinas goverment may be no more authoritarian than the US government. And China has a lot more social welfare programs than the US. Honestly, when I was in China i felt substantially more free than I did in the US. Far less policed. Far less restricted. Maybe that jsut my experience, but the feeling was real.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (24 replies)
[-] clot27@lemmy.zip 11 points 2 days ago

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

[-] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 57 points 3 days ago

Eh...

I'm glad my homeland is doing a lot better these days, but still, for my family, we end up doing better in the US (we moved around 2010 for context, way before this admin), the first few years in the US was a struggle, the similar stuggle as before in Guangzhou, but eventually we have a house and then we started saving up and we have a small bussiness and some investments here in the US. So it really depends on personal circumstances...

In China, everyone has an ancestral house, but that is in your village; in the city, unless you are from the city, you probably won't have housing. Jobs were in cities, so people migrate there, migrant workers... most of them have to rent a small apartment unit, probably in some slum. There are handweitten "for rent" posters everywhere. My family didn't have to rent, they "bought" an apartment in Guangzhou (bought in quotes because the 70 year lease thing... which we still don't know how it works... 70 years have not passed), its a very shitty one, in a slum neighborhood, but that was all they could afford. Most had to rent.

Prior to the Opening Up and Reforms, people weren't allowed to move around, so you'd just get stuck on your farm... and farming manually... which really sucks.

After the Opening Up and Reforms, the relaxed the restriction on movements. But the Hukou still had restrictions.

I was born in Guangzhou, but wasn't allowed into their public schools, no Guangzhou Hukou, my hukou was Taishan, my mom had to pay for a privately-run one that she said was inferior to the public school. Some migrant workers just left their kids beind in their village to attend school there. So those kids rarely get to see their parents. I did see them because I was going to school in Guangzhou so we didn't really get separated like those kids did, but usually we didn't get to see out parents for most of the day, so either grandmother was home to watch me and my brother, or sometimes we just get left at home alone.

I think most of the kids in that school I went to were all kida of migrant parents... because a Guangzhou kids would just go to public school.

Someone with Taishan Hukou also can't like get any healthcare benefits of Guangzhou.

It's like a internal passport system. Countries withing countries...

Then there was another issue with me essentially being an "illegal child" since my mother violated the 1 child policy, as I was the 2nd to be born, so my parents had to pay a huge fine before I can even get registered in Hukou and legally exist and have identity documents.

Converting to Guangzhou Hukou was practically impossible. Somehow, getting US citizenship was easier... 🤷‍♂️

Maybe one day this stupid Hukou thing goes away, because it is stupid af.

load more comments (12 replies)
[-] HK65@sopuli.xyz 16 points 2 days 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.

[-] BurnedDonutHole@ani.social 14 points 2 days ago

It seems someone is not watching YouTube documentaries where people visit country side to see people are living worse than poverty conditions and eating rats, bugs and whatever they can find, they literally live without any infrastructure or modern amenities, healthcare etc... While Chinese government is actively censoring such videos, news any and all information about it, so much so that they went and arrested poor villagers sharing videos of their villages.

I'm all for helping people and development, but you're literally spewing bullshit about things you don't know. Especially when the Chinese government is infamous when it's come to faking their data and information.

I'd like to hear your views about how much they helped the Uighurs as well.

[-] ISuperabound@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

It’s dangerous to censor, certainly…but it’s also dangerous to base your opinion on YouTube videos that surely have their own agenda and lack of breadth.

China is neither the poverty void this article presents, nor is it the hellhole you’re suggesting it is. It’s also a fact that China raised the vast majority out of its citizens out of poverty…and used that boom to make it sustainable.

[-] BurnedDonutHole@ani.social 1 points 1 day ago

It seems you're putting words in my mouth that I didn't say. I didn't say it's a hellhole nor it's a bad place to live. I merely pointed out the BS in this article and what else is going on. I don't see it as a objective and homogenously spread thing and I definitely don't share your optimistic approach about the sustainability where the government basically choosing who has the right to be elevated with its so social credit system. When people from said poor countryside and so called outcasts like Uighurs are not allowed to freely move to the cities and aren't allowed to have the other basic opportunities like education, healthcare etc... This so called miracle elevation from the poor status loose it's allure in my eyes. If you would like to believe it's a good thing then you're cherry picking and can't even see it.

[-] ISuperabound@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Your last comment was talking about people eating rats and bug and living without healthcare…if that doesn’t describe a hellhole, I don’t know what does.

But in this comment you’ve changed gears and everything seems reasonable…and I’m on board.

[-] BurnedDonutHole@ani.social 2 points 1 day ago

Pointing out the realities doesn't mean I see China as hellhole. If you see it as such it's your own view. So, don't reflect it on me.

I'm pointing out the fact that government doesn't provide equal opportunities and they use heavy censorship on such realities.

When you chose who gets to have the opportunities and who doesn't, it's not a miracle! Any authoritarian government can do that and they do it to an extent.

This is article is just a puff piece without real information in my eyes and I stated that. Rest is up to you.

[-] ISuperabound@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Non thing to disagree with here….reasonable and I agree.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] tornavish@lemmy.cafe 67 points 3 days ago

They have also put millions into poverty.

load more comments (40 replies)
[-] lechekaflan@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

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.

My favorite idea is that the Mainland regime -- then under Deng -- took their economic development ideas and business customs from Japan -- including industrial espionage -- and basically modified those for Chinese needs while addressing the problems which led to Japan's later bubble burst by the late 80s. That local corporations were given first priority, with a lot of incentives, tax breaks, programs to increase productivity and cut away inhibitions, hire young people from the far provinces who are willing to work for less, anything to have the world buy cheap from China. So they treated business like warfare, as essential for national survival and prestige where by 2049 the world must look up to Mainland China, never to be humiliated again.

However, China in its current state has its younger generations in urban areas having to deal with overwork burnout (996工作制 or 996 working hour system for example) and so creating basically its own anti-work culture. That there are godawful displays of wealth by tuhao almost everyday, while most others complain how it's so expensive to live in, say, Shanghai. I could try to go on, but I put it that it's still not a happy place as long as there is class conflict.

[-] ruekk@lemmy.world 47 points 3 days ago

Not surprised at all. American has done a fantastic job at propagandizing the populace against China.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2025
645 points (100.0% liked)

News

33282 readers
1632 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