The political knifes are drawn

[skysidhe]

great! but that PDF was dated 2002.

According to the link I posted, as well as the link that merc posted, the work to redistribute wealth happened after 2002. There is new data from 2003 to 2009.
True, you can call the weekly standard a blog, but the information's source was from the World Bank statistical study. It gives a percentage's as to the growth.

http://go.worldbank.org/OSLA6RP0G0

Notes a decline of the proportion of Brazilians living in extreme poverty – less than US $1.25 a day – from 17 percent to 8 percent during the period 1981-2005.

Here is a 2009 PDF from the World Bank statistical study site. Source sited by the blog merc posted.

http://www-wds.worldbank.org/externa...DF/WPS5080.pdf


Summary

Summary: Brazil, China and India have seen falling poverty in their reform periods, but to varying degrees and for different reasons. History left China with favorable initial conditions for rapid poverty reduction through market-led economic growth; at the outset of the reform process there were ample distortions to remove and relatively low inequality in access to the opportunities so created, though inequality has risen markedly since. By concentrating such opportunities in the hands of the better off, prior inequalities in various dimensions handicapped poverty reduction in both Brazil and India. Brazil's recent success in complementing market-oriented reforms with progressive social policies has helped it achieve more rapid poverty reduction than India, although Brazil has been less successful in terms of economic growth. In the wake of its steep rise in inequality, China might learn from Brazil's success with such policies. India needs to do more to assure that poor people are able to participate in both the country's growth process and its social policies; here there are lessons from both China and Brazil. All three countries have learned how important macroeconomic stability is to poverty reduction.

Originally Posted by DanaC

Worth also considering that tax rates set and tax collected dont always match up. There are quite a few countries out there which appear to tax heavily in that they set tax rates at a high level; but if the ability of the state to enforce and collect is significantly less than in another country where tax is apparently lower, but more likely to be paid, the actual tax burden is very small in real terms.

That makes sense.

[DanaC]

That's a fascinating looking article Sam: that said, if it isn't from a public domain/ commons site then it's possibly a tad risky posting the entire document.

[skysidhe]

Originally Posted by DanaC

That's a fascinating looking article Sam: that said, if it isn't from a public domain/ commons site then it's possibly a tad risky posting the entire document.

And that is my whole premise. Most information is in the public domain and a lot of it is credible. Like the IRS, the WORLD BANK.

Yes, thank you for posting that sam. I was wondering if you had inside information.

[SamIam]

Originally Posted by skysidhe

great! but that PDF was dated 2002.

Yeah, I'll admit that a more recent analysis would be helpful. Things have improved since then, but the problems outlined by Ferreira still persist.

True, you can call the weekly standard a blog, but the information's source was from the World Bank statistical study.

The Weekly Standard itself appears to be some sort of newspaper/magazine. Like most other newspapers, its stories will be influenced by its editorial slant. Regardless, the site identifies itself as a Blog of The Weekly Standard and Merc himself called it a "biased source."

I have some issues with the World Bank, but my argument was not so much against its statistics as it was the erroneous comments made by the blog writer.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Notes a decline of the proportion of Brazilians living in extreme poverty – less than US $1.25 a day – from 17 percent to 8 percent during the period 1981-2005.

But what would $1.25, or $2, or $5, buy in 1981 compared to 2005? People who appear to be gaining may actually be backsliding.

[DanaC]

Isn't the $1.25 dollar a day the benchmark figure? I mean, when it defines those living in extreme poverty as 'less than US 1.25 a day' isn't it just giving the current definition? With the people in 1981 living at an equivalent level?

[xoxoxoBruce]

That's what I was wondering. The $1.25 is a benchmark, but I'm wondering if they adjust for inflation before a boasting a change in the % living in poverty?

[DanaC]

It would certainly make all the difference to the results lol

[skysidhe]

I would at first glance say yes the cost of inflation overcame any gains in purchasing power. I tried to search for that Brazil's purchasing power parity, but I am not a number cruncher. I did find the 2009 GNP rank for countries and Brazil is ranked at 9 by the International Monetary fund and ranked 8 by World Bank and CIA Factbook. The US is number 1, The UK is ranked 6 and Mexico by comparison is 14.

The fact that Brazil is ranked nine in GDP would suggest their purchasing power is strengthening? This quote is from wikipedia. I know people do not like that source but it is all I could come up with this morning.

Its real per capita GDP has surpassed US$ 10,500 in 2008, due to the strong and continued appreciation of the real for the first time this decade. Its industrial sector accounts for three fifths of the Latin American economy's industrial production.[17] The country’s scientific and technological development is argued to be attractive to foreign direct investment, which has averaged US$ 30 billion per year the last years, compared to only US$ 2 billion per year last decade,[17] thus showing a remarkable growth. The agricultural sector, locally called the agronegócio (agrobusiness), has also been remarkably dynamic: for two decades this sector has kept Brazil amongst the most highly productive countries in areas related to the rural sector.[17] The agricultural sector and the mining sector also supported trade surpluses which allowed for massive currency gains (rebound) and external debt paydown. Due to downturn in Western economies Brazil found itself in 2010 trying to halt the appreciation of the real.[22]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Brazil

Originally Posted by DanaC

Isn't the $1.25 dollar a day the benchmark figure? I mean, when it defines those living in extreme poverty as 'less than US 1.25 a day' isn't it just giving the current definition? With the people in 1981 living at an equivalent level?

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

That's what I was wondering. The $1.25 is a benchmark, but I'm wondering if they adjust for inflation before a boasting a change in the % living in poverty?

I am sure the answer to those questions could be found on a statistical data site like the World Factbook.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat...k/geos/br.html



I don't know if that helps.

[SamIam]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

But what would $1.25, or $2, or $5, buy in 1981 compared to 2005? People who appear to be gaining may actually be backsliding.

When I lived in Brazil in '79, $1.25 US would barely buy a small bag of beans. I couldn't imagine poor Brazilians getting by on that amount, and they didn't, really. Brazil had been plagued by hyper-inflation, although that problem seems to be resolved.

One criticism economists make of Brazilian numbers is that the dollar amount which defines those living in extreme poverty has been set artificially low.

According to the International Cost of Living Index, in 2010 the cost of living in Brasilia was higher than that of Zurich! http://www.articlesbase.com/internat...0-1722667.html

[xoxoxoBruce]

The problem with, "real per capita GDP" is it measures to money but not where it goes. If the king takes 99%, the serfs are still screwed no matter how much there is.

[DanaC]

And as Sam pointed out: it doesn't take into account what that money buys either. Pre-war Germans with their wheelbarrows full of money would look rich if they walked down my street, but that barrow load of cash would have barely fed their family for the week.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by DanaC

Isn't the $1.25 dollar a day the benchmark figure? I mean, when it defines those living in extreme poverty as 'less than US 1.25 a day' isn't it just giving the current definition? With the people in 1981 living at an equivalent level?

Statistics lies and statistics. The use of $1.25 a day is a meaningless benchmark.

[skysidhe]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

The problem with, "real per capita GDP" is it measures to money but not where it goes. If the king takes 99%, the serfs are still screwed no matter how much there is.

On face value one would have to agree, but I was attempting to answer this question

But what would $1.25, or $2, or $5, buy in 1981 compared to 2005? People who appear to be gaining may actually be backsliding.

I was overreaching in post #129. I posted the link to the pdf but didn't explain why it answered that question. Because, it is a comparative report, I would need to cherry pick information. If I did that I am afraid I would somehow skew the information, so I didn't.

It is a report that spans a several years. The publishing date is October 2009. The authors are listed as well as some disclaimers and as the report goes along it is careful to mention any survey problems.

It outlines distributional change and answers your question as to whether or not there are any real gains.

It is a complicated report. I had to read it several times and I still can't get my head around the variables.

Has Brazil made gains in equality? Yes, I think the report says so. Is it harder for people who make less than $2 dollars a day. Yes, it says that too.


I am not pretending to know anything. I don't, but the opportunity to research and learn something is fascinating. I have a greater understanding of the situation. I am glad I read it. I am glad that Sam brought it up. I learned something today.

Maybe someone else can extract the relevant information from it.

Brazil, China, India reform period, comparative report.

http://www-wds.worldbank.org/externa...DF/WPS5080.pdf

[xoxoxoBruce]

You said when you posted it, the data was sketchy and difficult. I at least, am not holding you responsible to clear up the questions, as it sounds like it would be thesis worthy research to do that.