Oh yeah, it definitely makes sense that the average person in the US would still be better off, but I would think countries like Sweden and Norway would have a net decrease with global wealth being spread evenly. Then again, I just looked up inequality stats and Sweden has higher inequality than the US, so maybe that explains it.
I also just meant like 40 or 50% of all global wealth ends up in America or with American nationals so even relatively well off nations would be doing better under global re-distribution.
But yeah, all capitalist nations are gonna have insane wealth gaps.
Why the fuck did they leave out Australia and Canada ?
They didn't, basically every western country but America would have net decrease in income per Capita with global equal redistribution.
The Nordic countries would also have a net increase according to this, which seems a little odd to me.
There's a fuckton of money in America
Oh yeah, it definitely makes sense that the average person in the US would still be better off, but I would think countries like Sweden and Norway would have a net decrease with global wealth being spread evenly. Then again, I just looked up inequality stats and Sweden has higher inequality than the US, so maybe that explains it.
I also just meant like 40 or 50% of all global wealth ends up in America or with American nationals so even relatively well off nations would be doing better under global re-distribution.
But yeah, all capitalist nations are gonna have insane wealth gaps.
Ah, I understand now, and that makes perfect sense. Thanks for the clarification.
Almost everyone except for the wealthy are in debt in Sweden at least. Manageable debt, but it is still negative wealth.
Most of Australia's wealth is in the housing market anyway