Thread: Wealth gap creating a social time bomb (Good Reading)

Wealth gap creating a social time bomb

• Race behind division in US cities, says UN report
• Beijing is most egalitarian place in the worldJohn Vidal, environment editor The Guardian, Thursday October 23 2008 Article historyGrowing inequality in US cities could lead to widespread social unrest and increased mortality, says a new United Nations report on the urban environment.

In a survey of 120 major cities, New York was found to be the ninth most unequal in the world and Atlanta, New Orleans, Washington, and Miami had similar inequality levels to those of Nairobi, Kenya Abidjan and Ivory Coast. Many were above an internationally recognised acceptable "alert" line used to warn governments.

"High levels of inequality can lead to negative social, economic and political consequences that have a destabilising effect on societies," said the report. "[They] create social and political fractures that can develop into social unrest and insecurity."

According to the annual State of the World's cities report from UN-Habitat, race is one of the most important factors determining levels of inequality in the US and Canada.



"In western New York state nearly 40% of the black, Hispanic and mixed-race households earned less than $15,000 compared with 15% of white households. The life expectancy of African-Americans in the US is about the same as that of people living in China and some states of India, despite the fact that the US is far richer than the other two countries," it said.

Disparities of wealth were measured on the "Gini co-efficient", an internationally recognised measure usually only applied to the wealth of countries. The higher the level, the more wealth is concentrated in the hands of fewer people.

"It is clear that social tension comes from inequality. The trickle down theory [that wealth starts with the rich] has not delivered. Inequality is not good for anybody," said Anna Tibaijuka, head of UN-Habitat, in London yesterday.

The report found that India was becoming more unequal as a direct result of economic liberalisation and globalisation, and that the most unequal cities were in South Africa and Namibia and Latin America. "The cumulative effect of unequal distribution [of wealth] has been a deep and lasting division between rich and poor. Trade liberalisation did not bring about the expected benefits."

The report suggested that Beijing was now the most egalitarian city in the world, just ahead of cities such as Jakarta in Indonesia and Dire Dawa in Ethiopia.

In Europe, which was generally more egalitarian than other continents, Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands and Slovenia were classed as the most equal countries with Greece, the UK and Spain among the least. "Disparities are particularly significant in the cities of eastern Europe, larger Spanish cities and in the north of England," it said.

It documents the seemingly unstoppable move of people away from rural to urban areas. This year it is believed that the number of people living in urban areas exceeded those in the countryside for the first time ever, but the report says there is no sign of the trend slowing.

"The dramatic transition between rural and urban communities is not over. Urbanisation levels will rise dramatically in the next 40 years to reach 70% by 2050," it predicts.

The most dramatic urbanisation has been taking place in China, with many millions of people moving from the countryside to cities. The report says 49 new cities have been built in the past 18 years. The rapid transition to an urban society has brought great wealth but also many negative results.

"China has attained some of the deepest disparities in the world with urban incomes three times those in rural areas. Inequalities are growing, with disproportionate rewards for the most skilled workers ... and serious problems for the unemployed and informal workers."

Urban growth rates are highest in the developing world, which absorbs an average 5 million new urban residents a month and is responsible for 95% of world urban growth. The report predicts that Asian cities will grow the most in the next 40 years and could have 63% of the world urban population by 2050.

Tokyo is expected to remain the world's largest mega city, with 36.4m people by 2025. But Mexico City, New York, and Sao Paulo could give way in the league table to Mumbai, Delhi and Dhaka. Kinshasa and Lagos are the two African cities expected to grow the most, with each adding more than 6 million people by 2025.

Rather than countryside to city movement, which has marked rapid population growth in the last 40 years, the UN expects more people to move from city to city.

Capital cities in particular are attracting much more of countries' investments and are growing fast. Some are becoming home to nearly half a country's population.

But the report also identified what it believes is the emergence of a new urban trend, with many cities now shrinking in size. The populations of 46 countries, including Germany, Italy, Japan and most former soviet states, are expected to be smaller in 2050 than they are now, and in the past 30 years, says the report, more cities in the developed world have shrunk than grown.

It found that 49 cities in the UK, including Liverpool and other old industrial centres in the north of England, and 100 in Russia reduced in size between 1990 and 2000, mainly because of unemployment. In the US 39 cities are smaller now than they were 10 years ago.

The reasons for the decline of cities was mostly economic, but the report says that the environment is now an important factor.

Air quality and pollution from mines, power plants and oil exploration have been responsible for population losses in India, Mexico and Africa, it says. "Cities tend to struggle most with health-threatening environmental issues, such as the lack of safe water, sanitation and waste."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/oc ... ban-growth

Oh ya right I want the UN to tell me anything. Good grief.

Originally Posted by Gogo

Oh ya right I want the UN to tell me anything. Good grief.

Yeah, that was my first reaction as well. Thanks for the post but I'm always suspicious when the UN comes out with reports such as this. What's their real agenda?

I agree... just making everyone aware of how the UN works it's way in

One does not need UN studies to see what is happening. Just visit cities like Los Angeles and Miami to get an idea.....Where I disagree is that this is a racial plot. Far from it. The racial factor only comes into place when you consider the exodus of white middle-class people out of these regions the last 50 years. The only whites left are the super-elite, while the middle-class was replaced by Third World immigrants. The destruction of these cities, and their decay into mini-Third World's has to do with unfettered globalism, free trade, and illegal immigration.

But the fact is clear: Big cities are certainly mirroring Third World nations in wealth disparity. Tancredo publicly said as much about Miami.

Originally Posted by BearFlagRepublic

One does not need UN studies to see what is happening. Just visit cities like Los Angeles and Miami to get an idea.....Where I disagree is that this is a racial plot. Far from it. The racial factor only comes into place when you consider the exodus of white middle-class people out of these regions the last 50 years. The only whites left are the super-elite, while the middle-class was replaced by Third World immigrants. The destruction of these cities, and their decay into mini-Third World's has to do with unfettered globalism, free trade, and illegal immigration.

But the fact is clear: Big cities are certainly mirroring Third World nations in wealth disparity. Tancredo publicly said as much about Miami.

Not only does this smack of using wealth redistribution it doesn't even attempt to approach those who chose to live on welfare and have for generations. They have chosen NOT to finish school but drop out. Many other aspects to a story like this. This is just totally imbalanced.

Originally Posted by Gogo

Not only does this smack of using wealth redistribution it doesn't even attempt to approach those who chose to live on welfare and have for generations. They have chosen NOT to finish school but drop out. Many other aspects to a story like this. This is just totally imbalanced.

I'm not sure I understand. Are you arguing that large American cities have not seen a destruction of their middle classes and First World status? Because that is what I was arguing, largely because of globalism.

Originally Posted by BearFlagRepublic

Originally Posted by Gogo

Not only does this smack of using wealth redistribution it doesn't even attempt to approach those who chose to live on welfare and have for generations. They have chosen NOT to finish school but drop out. Many other aspects to a story like this. This is just totally imbalanced.

I'm not sure I understand. Are you arguing that middle classes in large American cities have not seen a destruction of their middle classes and First World status? Because that is what I was arguing, largely because of globalism.

Adding to your comment but not all issues are addressed in this article and the article in imbalanced.

Ok I see Gogo. Plus I agee, and stated that the article was trying to blame some type of racial factor for the problem. The fact is that the whites in these communities are the ones that embraced open borders and free trade. They embraced the policies that drove whites and middle-class people out of their community. Not to mention many other things that middle America has opposed for generations.

Originally Posted by AirborneSapper7

I agree... just making everyone aware of how the UN works it's way in

Ok, that explains it. I think I'm becoming more familiar with your positions on issues due to your numerous posts Airborne and it didn't make sense to me that you would be supporting the UN! Thanks for the clarification and for keeping us "in the know!"