Between 1997 and 2005, equality grew in India, an analysis of the human development reports of the United Nations Development (UNDP) by Manas Chakravarty of Mint has shown.
According to the report for 2007, which draws conclusions from data for 2004-05, the richest 10% of the Indians spent 8.6 times the money spent by the poorest 10%. And in 1996-97, the richest 10% spent 9.5 times the amount spent by the bottom 10%. In other words, India in 2004-05 is more egalitarian than in 1997.
And the Gini coefficient of inequality, which measures inequality on a scale of 0 to 100, where 0 indicates perfect equality and 100, absolute inequality, was 36.8 in 2004-05. The HDR for 2003, which contained data for the Gini index for 1996-97, shows that this measure of inequality was 37.8 in that year.
Read the full story: Between 1997-2005, equality grew
We can’t let facts get in the way of public discourse can we. Of course “the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer” unless I say so otherwise. I’d like to see how these measures look ever since that slogan saw daylight.
I think the rich man has become more miserly by 2005, compared to what he was in 1997. It shows rich man has less time to spend his money in 2005 compared to 1997, when there was no internet. Rich man spends considerable time on the net. Do a survey if you don’t believe me.
Coming to the poor man, the increase is due to less expenditure by rich man.
If at all there is any real increase in expenditure by poor man it is due to the increased cause in pesticides used for self-consumption to attain Nirvana.
I think the conclusions of the survey linked to equality is far fetched. The more money rich spend, it is better for poor people. Elections, marriages and mega events force the moneyed to loosen their purse strings, which will definitely help the poor earn a few rupees more.
Even more odd-sounding is the headline that seeks to say that it would please Kalam.