Is the world getting better, getting worse, staying the same, or indeterminate?

[Aeson]

World and local are both improving, but in a way that likely will lead to a very tough spot at some point.
US has plateaued. Improving in some ways, getting worse in others. In regards to momentum that's very bad. Looks like it likely will tip the wrong way, but it isn't sure yet.

[SlowwHand]

Better or worse, compared to when?

[N35t0r]

Instantaneously.

[Bereta_Eder]

high tech products got a lot cheaper.
Agricultural products got a lot more expensive.
That's it.

(actually a lot better in some ways, still)

I remember 20 years ago, there was imminent war every 5 years with turkey.
the balkans were flared up and fighting
now that has gone

i also remember the economy running with 100 miles per hour and people simply squabling money right and left
that's gone too

and that nearly every one had a job

that we were not sure if we belonged to the west or not
now that's gone too (we do)

[N35t0r]

With all the advances in communications, the world is becoming increasingly more interconnected. While this has some drawbacks, I think it's a net positive.

[kentonio]

I was pondering on this today. Although we move ever more towards humanism, and that is obviously a good thing for us individually and in social groups, we're moving further and further away from our evolutionary roots. We tend to assume developing away from animal instincts and behaviour is a good thing, but I can't help but wonder if its going to bite us in the ass in future from an evolutionary standpoint.

[ricketyclik]

While many are rising out of poverty and general standards of living as a human average are rising, so are disparities of wealth, which is worrying from a social stability point of view.

The population continues to grow exponentially, and while we're improving overall standards of living I worry about the consequences for the rest of the ecosphere, and in return consequently our own species, for if the biosphere (including us) loses diversity it will be more vulnerable to perturbations.

Growing humanism and interconnectedness are good things, and hopefully will provide the solutions to our problems, including those raised by Plato.

I share Ken's observation about our ever climbing further and further out on an evolutionary limb, but I don't think there's any stopping that - it's who we are, sink or swim.

[N35t0r]

The difference in wealth between medieval peasants and kings; or between roman emperors and slaves was pretty marked as well. We're just more aware now, and we also (generally) consider such large inequalities as something that needs fixing (even if we can't agree on the correct method to adress them), while at that time they were generally accepted.

[giblets]

Globally, inequality is decreasing because developing countries are growing faster than developed countries.

[Kidlicious]

Globally, inequality is decreasing because developing countries are growing faster than developed countries.

No. It's because of people having different savings rates.

[giblets]

Could you please elaborate on that because I can never guess what you're talking about when you just write a one liner.

[Kidlicious]

Could you please elaborate on that because I can never guess what you're talking about when you just write a one liner.

People who have many children don't save a lot of money. In a way I agree with you but I didn't read the whole thread.

[N35t0r]

[ricketyclik]

The difference in wealth between medieval peasants and kings; or between roman emperors and slaves was pretty marked as well. We're just more aware now, and we also (generally) consider such large inequalities as something that needs fixing (even if we can't agree on the correct method to adress them), while at that time they were generally accepted.

True, but with the industrial revolution we were told that if we all worked we could all live like kings. While that turned out to be true, during the course of the latter half of the 20th century and beyond there has been a definite trickling up.

Even the relatively right wing group the IMF has noted it.

Growth and inequality are mutually incompatible, participants agreed at a high level seminar held during the IMF-World Bank meetings, but they differed sharply about the priorities to address the rise in inequality over recent decades.
Income inequality has risen throughout the world. According to Oxfam, the top 85 richest people now own half the world’s wealth, the audience at the IMF seminar on “The Macroeconomics of Income Inequality,” was told.
Guy Ryder, Director General of the International Labor Organization, said a growing consensus about its damaging effects was creating an unprecedented opportunity to act on reducing inequality.
Previously, inequality was thought to be the price for a functioning global economy, “but now the IMF and other organizations say there is an alignment of getting the global economy working better, creating jobs that we need, and dealing with inequality,” said Ryder.
“If this is a problem, if we all agree this is a problem, what are we going to do about it?” he said.
Inequality “morally wrong”
Inequality is not only bad for growth, and a threat to democracy, but it is also “morally wrong” suggested Winnie Byanyima, Executive Director of the charity, Oxfam.
“It just cannot be right that millions are living in abject poverty while others—these 85 we’ve heard about—if they had one thousand life times, could not spend it [their wealth] all,” she said.
Jeffrey Sachs, head of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, identified many different types of inequality including inequality of income, wealth, power, and well being. He was scathing about the significant growth in inequality in the United States which, he said, had allowed the richest to hijack the political process for their own gain.
IMF publishes on inequality
Over the last year, the IMF has published two major papers on inequality which explain its effect on growth, and how tax and spending policies can be designed to help achieve redistribution at a minimal cost to economic efficiency.
A number of participants welcomed the publication of the IMF research which have contributed to the growing consensus on the need to address inequality.
The Deputy Managing Director of the IMF, Min Zhu, said inequality could be addressed through government policies. “Macroeconomic policies matter,” he said. It was a recognition which was now routinely integrated into the Fund’s work.
“When we advise authorities in our country work, we always put jobs, and growth, and employment into policy formation,” he told the audience.
He said it was critical that the Fund understand the impact of macroeconomics and to devise policy accordingly. “Think about it, if income is concentrated in a small group of people it will change consumption because the capacity for consumption is different at different income levels,” he said.
Proposals to address inequality
Tyler Cowen, a professor at George Mason University, suggested some additional measures which could help reduce global inequality, including encouraging immigration, conditional cash transfers, and investing in public health and agriculture.
“I think inequality is a symptom of an underlying problem which is not enough opportunities,” Cowen said, adding that his proposals would create openings for poor people.
“If we are concerned with inequality, I would say let’s focus on it with a problem-solving mentality,” he said.
A number of the participants attacked tax evasion and illicit financial flows by corporations, which Byanyima said was money that could be spent on public services “a real income for the poor”.
Inequality’s impact on “the guy on the street”
Ryder said there was no need to look at the “extreme” examples of tax avoidance and aggressive evasion. “Let’s look at the middle,” he said. “How are we going to put money back in people’s pockets?...Let’s look at what’s happening right here, right now, at the guy on the street,” he said.
Sachs said that inequality was often passed on and exacerbated through generations; that the rich could make higher “investments in human capital” such as education and health, than the poor.
“Taxing the rich to enable everyone to have an opportunity is one piece of this puzzle. It’s not a conflict between fairness and growth, but puts the two together,” said Sachs.

[ricketyclik]

To expound a little, I recently friended an old acquaintance on Facebook. Many of her posts are of the anti-vax nature, and she has a lot of friends echoing her. I probed a bit, you know, tried some evidence and reason, but was met with utter dismissal. It seemed to me that their attitude was driven by a breakdown in trust in society's systems - health, education, law. I reckon the disparity in wealth and accompanying corruption drives a lot of that way of thinking, as Plato was describing.