12 votes

All the world’s wealth in one visual

8 comments

  1. patience_limited
    Link
    This is a handy visualization, though I've got some questions about its premises: Just how much is the wealth of African and South American nations reduced by indebtedness? On what basis did...

    This is a handy visualization, though I've got some questions about its premises:

    1. Just how much is the wealth of African and South American nations reduced by indebtedness?
    2. On what basis did Credit Suisse value real estate with untapped resources, as opposed to buildings?
    3. What is the wealth value of undeveloped, biodiverse environmental preserves?
    4. If this analysis' "wealth" is measured mainly in terms of currency value, perhaps U.S. comparative wealth is actually just notional dollar strength - could every dollar-dependent nation become drastically poorer or richer overnight with a change in that value?
    5. Wealth, in this analysis, is heavily dependent on industrial development, and Asia has become the dominant global source of industrial production. Will re-unionisation and redistribution in Western nations have any net positive effect on national prosperity, or do polluting industries have to be rebuilt under protectionist conditions first? (That implies zero-sum assumptions.)

    Feel free to pitch in below if you've got better ideas or comments.

    7 votes
  2. [3]
    nacho
    Link
    I don't know how they're getting their data or calculating this, but the methodology is obviously junk. Sure there's a comparison of something between different countries, but it can't be anything...

    I don't know how they're getting their data or calculating this, but the methodology is obviously junk. Sure there's a comparison of something between different countries, but it can't be anything meaningful:

    Norway's sovereign wealth fund is currently valued at 10 370 894 934 412 NOK, which according to google is 1.163 trillion USD. It owns about 1,4% of all global stocks and shares among other things.

    This chart values the entirety of all wealth in Norway at 1,1 trillion, less than this one wealth fund alone.

    In other words, everything else in Norway has a net negative value. Norwegian companies are worth nothing, Norwegian-owned properties and shares are worth nothing, Norwegian natural resources (oil, gas etc.) is worth nothing, Norwegian-owned cars, goods worth nothing, other large pension and stock funds privately owned, IP worth nothing, infrastructure worth nothing and so on.

    6 votes
    1. cfabbro
      (edited )
      Link Parent
      Clicking on the Data & Sources link: https://howmuch.net/sources/distribution-worlds-wealth-2019 The original source of the chart's data is:...

      Clicking on the Data & Sources link:
      https://howmuch.net/sources/distribution-worlds-wealth-2019

      The original source of the chart's data is:
      https://www.credit-suisse.com/about-us/en/reports-research/global-wealth-report.html
      https://www.credit-suisse.com/media/assets/corporate/docs/about-us/research/publications/global-wealth-databook-2019.pdf

      And reading through it, the issue seems to be not that "the methodology is junk" but merely that the data doesn't reflect what howmuch.net is trying to suggest it does, nor did it intend to. The Credit Suisse report is basically only trying to compare "global household wealth" (i.e. total household assets - liabilities), not the total wealth of entire Nations. And that data mostly comes from various governmental statistical agencies the world over, and from the OECD org.

      E.g. Since you mentioned Norway, these are the sources of the Norwegian data:
      https://www.ssb.no/en/finsek and https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=QASA_7HH (select Norway on the country dropdown)

      4 votes
    2. HoolaBoola
      Link Parent
      Duh, socialism automatically turns your companies to antimatter

      Duh, socialism automatically turns your companies to antimatter

      2 votes
  3. Algernon_Asimov
    Link
    According to their data, Australia is the 12th wealthiest country in the world. I'm honestly surprised by this. But, I suppose I shouldn't be: we must be fairly high up the rankings, or we...

    According to their data, Australia is the 12th wealthiest country in the world. I'm honestly surprised by this. But, I suppose I shouldn't be: we must be fairly high up the rankings, or we wouldn't keep getting invited to attend the G20 meetings.

    And we have only 25 million people. Our per capita household wealth is therefore about $288,080. This compares favourably to the USA's per capita household wealth of about $325,122, is higher than the United Kingdom's per capita value of $211,251 and Canada's per capita value of $227,146, and far outstrips China's per capita value of about $44,355. (Population data.)

    Poor New Zealand! They get included in the region called "Australia". We usually use "Australasia" when we're including New Zealand, so they don't feel ignored. But at least they're included in this map, which is a nice change!

    4 votes
  4. [3]
    NoblePath
    Link
    Man, there’s some clever people here on tildes. Data source and calculation errors aside, i wonder how this visualization changes on a per capita basis?

    Man, there’s some clever people here on tildes. Data source and calculation errors aside, i wonder how this visualization changes on a per capita basis?

    2 votes
    1. [2]
      cfabbro
      Link Parent
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_wealth_per_adult And appropriately enough, the source of that data (Credit Suisse's Global Wealth Databook) is the same as the howmuch.net chart. :)

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_wealth_per_adult

      And appropriately enough, the source of that data (Credit Suisse's Global Wealth Databook) is the same as the howmuch.net chart. :)

      4 votes
      1. NoblePath
        Link Parent
        Thanks for finding that. Some surprising numbers there.

        Thanks for finding that. Some surprising numbers there.

        1 vote