Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: dvdw© who wrote (107661)	9/20/2014 12:05:22 PM
From: elmatador	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217516

The idea was that inequalities increase in the early phases of industrialization because only a minority is prepared to benefit from the new wealth that industralization brings. Later in more advanced phases of development inequality automatically decreases as a large and larger fraction of the population partakes of the fruits of economic growth Kuznetz -below- might not have been totally right. But we can infer from his statement that the same can apply to countries (Kuznets was writing about individuals' inequality. We can say that a few countries ripped the benefits of industrialization. Other countries that were still largely rural did not. They have to wait to the last 2 decades of the 20th Century to benefit.. The early beneficiaries of industrialization, Europeans Japanese and North Americans, could lower inequality because their countries were concentrating all the benefits of early industrialization. As we moved into the 21st century, the late comers to industrialization are now taking a large and larger share of the world's wealth. Thus the egalitarian economic policies of Japan Europe and North America can no longer be sustainable.