Margaret Thatcher Is Dead ...

[Rich One]

The lower the number, the better is the income distribution (note it is income, not wealth)
The index per se cannot be manipulated as it is a simple, well know formula. Of course, if the income data is wrong, the index would be wrong as well.
I do not think the data/index is wrong for the UK... it reflects quite well the dynamics of inequality in the country in the last 50 or so years.

My implication that the Gini coeficient could have been manipulated, was a irony referring to our INDEC manipulation , Have no basis to sustain wrongdoing in the UK one way or the other...!

Please note that the UK, GINI index disparity was in the mid twenties 26 before HER in 1979 and went to an index value in the mid thirties 36 and is among the pack of other developed nations , and way below the USA...!! not bad in comparison and in view of the world events.

.If the plot would have been logarithmic the look would have been quite different.

 

[expatinowncountry]

If you bury the UK data in a larger data set, and use a larger scale you can mask the spike in inequality that began during Thatcher's time in office. But that would constitute abuse of data, so we wouldn't want to do that...

You would mask it to the eyes because of the scale but still you would have an increase in 9 points in the Gini index.

Now, there are other issues that maybe more relevant:
1) What income data do they use, before or after tax? Which one is relevant?
2) We do not have a counter-factual. Maybe the increase in inequality would have happened (and could have been larger) even without Maggie
3) What value do we give to inequality? Would you be willing to trade some inequality for increased efficiency? Sure almost everyone does... but how much?
4) What concept of inequality matters... it is wealth inequality, income inequality... or inequality of opportunities? Some people argue that some part of the income inequality observed is the result of decisions made by free individuals and our only concern should be if everyone gets a fair chance at birth.

 

[expatinowncountry]

My implication that the Gini coeficient could have been manipulated, was a irony referring to our INDEC manipulation , Have no basis to sustain wrongdoing in the UK one way or the other...!

Please note that the index was in the mid twenties before HER 1979 and went to an index value in the mid thirties and is among the pack of other developed nations , and way below the USA...!! not bad in comparison and in view of the world events.

.If the plot would have been logarithmic the look would have been quite different.

Sorry, I did not understood the irony and I should! The other day an Argentine colleague of mine was showing me his Gini data for Argentina using corrected measures of real income to account for the difference between the INDEC inflation and the actual one and the result was amazing. While inequality has decreased in Argentina in the last ten years, it has done it by far less than the government claims.

 

[rrptownley]

I am trying to understand your argument if you have any. I only posted a chart using data from the IFS, the most reputable authority on Fiscal Issues in the UK. I did not do any claim nor I tried to convince you of anything. Since you seem to be an expert on data, bring yours and we can discuss it. Most Gini calculation using before or after tax income for the UK show an increase in inequality during the 1980s. We can then discuss if this is part of a global phenomenon or attributed to Maggie's policies. And if attributed to Maggie's policies we can discuss on the long term effects (temporary or permanent? more efficient economy?).

As I said, I am happy to debate, but bring something we can debate about.

I worded it a bit too heavily. I was stressed at the time.
The graph you posted shows a raise in the Gini index during the Thatcher years. A google image search shows other graphs drawing the rise as a median from 1940's to current day, in-line with other nations and even one with no rise at all after tax.
It seemed to me that you just chose the graph out of google images that best outlined your point.

*There is nothing wrong with the data in the graph* but if you manipulate the axis to show the data in the light you want to show it, like that French blogger did in your graph, then it can exaggerate and manipulate data when taken at a glance.

 

[Joe]

4) What concept of inequality matters... it is wealth inequality, income inequality... or inequality of opportunities? Some people argue that some part of the income inequality observed is the result of decisions made by free individuals and our only concern should be if everyone gets a fair chance at birth.

Very good point. If the inequality arose because people were kicked off of the dole then that is different from giving tax breaks to cronies. But I'm afraid though that we had a bit of both.

Still anyone that fights against a larger government is OK in my book.

...

If only Europe had listened to Thatcher's Euro warning: http://www.marketwat...dist=lcountdown

...

Many criticize Thatcher's privatizations. They also criticize the privatizations in Argentina and elsewhere, e.g. Russia. Most of these privatizations were disasters - but not because privatizations are bad it's because these privatizations were doled out in backrooms to political party cronies. If the privatizations were done so as to gain the maximum buck and pay down the public debt they would have been a godsend in reducing the stress of all the public debt.

Meanwhile, the cronyism between Menem and privatization's beneficiaries did little to improve the country's institutions and actually provoked opposition to privatization over time.

http://www.foreignaf...-american-style

The failure of privatizations in South America, Russia and elsewhere is a symptom of the maginancy of large government cronyism - not a failure of free markets.

 

[Matiasba]

Sorry, I did not understood the irony and I should! The other day an Argentine colleague of mine was showing me his Gini data for Argentina using corrected measures of real income to account for the difference between the INDEC inflation and the actual one and the result was amazing. While inequality has decreased in Argentina in the last ten years, it has done it by far less than the government claims.

I think the only intervention of the government in indec is in inflation. They do have a lot of other statistics where inflation has nothing to do and they are very reliable. Of course, if you use the inflation variable to calculate something that would not be exact, but I doubt the private consultants have the capacity to measure it precisely either. Plus there are political interests (as they are all from the oposicion). So it clearly isnt what government says, but because of that is very difficult to know exactly.

About inequality, Argentina has always had very good numbers. Latin America is by far the most inequality continent, and countries like Chile, Mexico and Brazil have very bad numbers. Although Argentinas arent that bad, it used to be great, in 1975, before the dictatorship, we had the same Gini than Canada, for example. Then it went up in the dictatorship, as everywhere, and in the 90s with the same socio-economic model of the dictatorship went from .42 to .52

Its clearly a global trend, this is the globalization, among an amazingly increased of poverty, destruction of natural resources, war, financial speculation, etc.

 

[fifs2]

I appreciate the Gini data and personal experiences but what is missing from this thread are the pontifications of a singer, whose songs all sound the same and whose best claim to fame is poncing with flowers..sorry.. courtesy of a FB friend and Daily Mirror reader. Make of this what you will...his absolute inability to see anything of value in what she did (union legislation anyone?) makes me discard his opinions as vitriol, nada mas

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/margaret-thatcher-dead-morrissey-blasts-1818903

 

[Dublin2BuenosAires]

Aul Morrissey wouldn't be shy of a bit of controversy. Since his artistic decline he has to do something to keep in the public eye. Bless him.

 

[scotttswan]

Aul Morrissey wouldn't be shy of a bit of controversy. Since his artistic decline he has to do something to keep in the public eye. Bless him.

He should never have left Johnny Marr

 

[scotttswan]

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-the-thatcher-myths/13236?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

FactCheck: the Thatcher myths