I shared this deep in a dunk thread earlier and figured there's probably many comrades who haven't seen this data. I think it's very good rhetorically because a lot of libs have an incredibly vibes-based impression that the Soviet Union was just an Animal Farm old-boss-same-as-the-new-boss situation.

Instead, this demonstrates that Russia underwent one of the most dramatic inversions of income inequality of any country in recorded history.

For comparison here is the US over the same time period:

China:

And the UK:

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] cynesthesia@hexbear.net 78 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (6 children)

the positive correlation between the prominence of the USSR and income inequality in other countries is notable - even if you are in the imperial core, you benefit from actually existing socialism

and the corollary to that helps explain why the imperium steps on AES as much as possible - even if you are the imperium, you make less money if actually existing socialism exists

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 60 points 2 years ago (3 children)

The USSR in its prime was able to challenge the USA on a lot of moral issues that would have never been brought up by other powers. For instance, I'm pretty sure that civil rights was not able to progress as it did without the ability for the USA to be shamed into action.

That said, both China and Russia seem like they are near pre-revolution levels of income disparity right now. So, I don't know who would be the standard bearer pushing for economic equality now.

[–] cynesthesia@hexbear.net 42 points 2 years ago (2 children)

russia is no shock, but the chinese stats are disappointing. bottom 50%'s percent of income is lower than it was pre-revolution. I wonder how this squares with the milestone of eradicating extreme poverty

[–] Saizaku@lemmy.dbzer0.com 34 points 2 years ago (9 children)

It's disappointing but necessarily surprising tbh. China has been doing state capitalism for a while now.

As for your question these statistics aren't necessarily contradictory to the idea of extreme poverty being reduced/eradicated. As this is basically a measure of wealth inequality, and while it might be worse than pre revolution, the standard of life is undoubtedly much higher. This is a result of China's explosive economic growth, there is simply way more wealth in China than ever before. So a higher wealth inequality isn't necessarily a good indicator of poverty. It is however an apt representation of the CCP's economic policies over the past two decades and is a good indicator that poverty will rise once China's growth slows down if wealth inequality isn't addresed.

load more comments (9 replies)

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] Awoo@hexbear.net 23 points 2 years ago

both China and Russia seem like they are near pre-revolution levels of income disparity right now.

Uhhhh China's life expectancy pre revolution was 33 years old. There is absolutely zero comparison between China of today and the humiliation years of hyper exploitation by the British, Americans, Japanese and so on.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] MF_COOM@hexbear.net 36 points 2 years ago

you make less money if actually existing socialism exists

Not least because it means you're not allowed to own and exploit the resources of that country any more

[–] culpritus@hexbear.net 20 points 2 years ago

I've seen this analysis presented before. I think there was a study published about it, or maybe I'm misremembering where I saw it.

It's a great point to make.

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] Bruja@hexbear.net 71 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Wow, looks like something bad happened in 1991 that caused inequality to get even worse than under Tsarist Russia.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] HornyOnMain@hexbear.net 52 points 2 years ago (5 children)

It's disappointing but not that surprising to see the level of disparity between the wealthy and the poor in modern day china, what is surprising is to see that the fucking UK is more "equal" than china

[–] SimulatedLiberalism@hexbear.net 32 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

It is true that renting is still more affordable than in the US, but property prices in Shanghai, Shenzhen and Hong Kong are already higher than LA and NYC, with Beijing just below them (all priced in USD, so take the income disparity into account as well). It is nearly impossible for young people to become a homeowner in Tier 1 cities these days.

[–] Omegamint@hexbear.net 30 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I guess the only silver lining is that china puts in a lot of state effort to develop new cities that may exist as alternative options. The fact that massive inequality has gotten worse in china should come as no surprise though. The current success of china is still reliant on allowing their working class to be heavily exploited.

[–] SimulatedLiberalism@hexbear.net 19 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Yes, unfortunately they let the property market run wild (which didn’t exist before the 2009 GFC btw), and only in the last few years did they start to take it seriously. So they are at least doing something, but the results have been mixed so far.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] JoeByeThen@hexbear.net 19 points 2 years ago

so-far

[–] RuthlessCriticism@hexbear.net 19 points 2 years ago

This is income inequality, wealth inequality in the UK is of course magnitudes worse.

[–] geikei@hexbear.net 19 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Like i comment elsewhere a very large part of Chinese income inequality is the huge rural-urban divide. All countries have it but its an order of magnitude worse in China so there are basicaly 2 different countries within China . Having 300 million people in the biggest cities earning western levels of income and 300 million people in rural small towns and villages earning a fraction of that skews the metric a lot EVEN tho life in rural ereas is also much cheaper and without taking into account that this is a symptom of the rapid urbanization and mpsernization that will probably uplift the latter group like it did the former

[–] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 47 points 2 years ago

Comparing China negatively to the USSR makes sense, but comparing it negatively to the UK shows how people on this board are still very capable of being birdbrained and taken by a single, specific data set without considering the broader context. While the UK is making strides in austerity, China is continuously building [back] up from the gutting by Deng and making advancements in socialization. Show me where in the UK they build entire modern apartment complexes for dirt-poor villages living in rustic conditions and turn them over for free. How many hospitals do they erect, how many miles of new rail do they lay to provide infrastructural support?

Of course the UK, being so small and having spent so long as the industrial center of the planet (though those days are long past) already has some of this infrastructure rather than needing to build it . . .

[–] DoghouseCharlie@hexbear.net 46 points 2 years ago (3 children)

China was cool for a second there but it looks like they're going cringe. We need another purge, Xi.

[–] EmmaGoldman@hexbear.net 38 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Deng stans on life support after this comment

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] Alaskaball@hexbear.net 42 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Long live the Soviet Union

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] AOCapitulator@hexbear.net 37 points 2 years ago (1 children)

fuckin margret thatcher

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] Chapo_is_Red@hexbear.net 35 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Be interesting to see this for wealth in addition to income

[–] MF_COOM@hexbear.net 24 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Yeah it definitely would be. If you follow the link for the source you'll find some data but it's not as exhaustive. One of the refrains in Capital in the 21st Century is that wealth inequality is always more dramatic and extreme, and another is that it's incredibly irresponsible for states to not be recording and publishing data about wealth so citizens can make informed decisions. (You can already hear the libness coming out - it's a good book if you can get past that)

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] stigsbandit34z@hexbear.net 35 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Ahh so the US has always been shit and continues to get worse

amerikkka-clap

[–] Awoo@hexbear.net 49 points 2 years ago (5 children)

The US getting worse correlates with the destruction of the USSR. The ruling class saw the exact moment in time they had won and began to exploit harder knowing they no longer had to put up anymore pretence to compete with the socialist threat.

[–] stigsbandit34z@hexbear.net 22 points 2 years ago

deeper-sadness

load more comments (4 replies)

[–] geikei@hexbear.net 33 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (4 children)

People here miss the main reason for the Chinese graph. Due to rapid modernaziation and urbanization China is at a point where it has two countries with different levels of income within itself. One with some 200-300 million people in the big cities earning basicaly European level salaries and incomes and one of some 200-300 million rural residents that make 2-3 times less at least (and then various stages in between).So in the process of massive urbanization in a very short period of time a shitton of people have been uplifted to high income status while a shitton are in the way and a shitton are still not uplifted but most likely will. That creates a very unique impact in inequality metrics without context

Also that doesnt translate to equaly huge disparty in quality of life or purchasing power since in rural or small town China life ,even beyond rent, is indeed much cheaper compared to urban ereas in a degree not seen in the vast majority of countries . That particular configuration is very specific to China. For example the median US "rural" income is just 20% lower than the median urban one and despite that income inequality is so immense nationwide

And all that ignoring the particularities that arise if you try to make a wealth graph for China instead of income. With 90% home ownership rate, very large savings compared to other countries, an ever present in kind welfare state and a "at least on paper" people's state that can be argued to actively control most of the wealth in various ways . Even for a "de formed" workers state how can you really make a wealth graph that accounts for the non capitalist particularities of ownership and control

Also how can you even compare stats like that between different modes of production. The bottom 50% in 1930s China were landless peasant serfs slaving on feudal warlords and living till 33 years old. What does them having 25% of Chinas income share even mean or even matter? How can you compare it to the situation I described above. How is it even calculated in such a context ?

It's nothing like comparing and calculating the stats in Western capitalist countries now vs in the 30s or 40s

[–] Assian_Candor@hexbear.net 26 points 2 years ago

Good points, but rich mfers in China are still really rich. There’s a big delta between tech bros and Foxconn workers living in Shenzhen or whatever. Still, even the folks on the bottom of the ladder are afforded life’s necessities, you won’t see tent cities for example

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] RonJonGuaido@hexbear.net 32 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Massive income inequality w Chinese characteristics.

[–] RonJonGuaido@hexbear.net 19 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Actually existing socialism is when you have worse inequality than post brexit Britain.

[–] RedDawn@hexbear.net 42 points 2 years ago

It’s worth noting that in China the poorest have seen incredible increases in their standard of living and extreme poverty has been essentially eliminated during the same time period. So its entirely incomparable to say, the United Kingdom or United States where life is getting worse for poor people while the rich get richer.

That said, yeah, income inequality is a contradiction that comes with using capitalism, even a controlled form of it, to develop the means of production. It’s a contradiction that the Communists running China are aware needs to be managed as evidence by plans to address it in upcoming 5 years plans, whereas the focus of previous 5-year plans has been about growing the means of production and eliminating the worst poverty and food insecurity, goals which were met or exceeded.

[–] SeventyTwoTrillion@hexbear.net 39 points 2 years ago (11 children)

actually existing socialism is when you manage to achieve what China has achieved from the absolutely destitute conditions that the communists started with, and didn't have the advantage of having the largest empire in human history up to that point feeding material surplus into the core

load more comments (11 replies)

[–] GaveUp@hexbear.net 26 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

Actually existing socialism is when everybody has the same income

[–] MF_COOM@hexbear.net 19 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I don't think that's a very charitable characterization of their perspective comrade. It's not unreasonable to be concerned about those levels of inequality.

[–] GaveUp@hexbear.net 21 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Ik, I'm not really trying to start a conflict or debate

Just playfully responding to one casual quip with another

If they put a more serious critique or question I would've ignored it or replied with an equally respectful response

[–] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 19 points 2 years ago

I don't think the other one was being very charitable either shrug-outta-hecks

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] wombat@hexbear.net 31 points 2 years ago (1 children)

stalin shouldn't have stopped at berlin

[–] flan@hexbear.net 25 points 2 years ago

stalin shouldn't have stopped

[–] Othello@hexbear.net 28 points 2 years ago (2 children)

can a smart person tell me what cool thing happened in the 60s in the soviet union?

[–] MF_COOM@hexbear.net 39 points 2 years ago

I think it has something to do with some really powerful eyebrows but I'm no expert

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] Mindfury@hexbear.net 20 points 2 years ago

tfw Deng pushed the wrong button

load more comments