Valentina Pasquali‘s article tells the difference between income inequality and wealth distribution, where income inequality is primarily the income part, while the wealth distribution looks at the assets of the members within the society. They both help measure out the gap between the country’s or nation‘s richest and poorest people Pasquali also maps out the nations where economic inequality is very severe, or very mild, and elaborates on the economic performances in each country. Economic inequality has intensified, especially in countries like the Central African Republic, Angola, Haiti, Honduras, South Africa, and Nambia. In countries such as Finland, Norway, and Sweden, the economic inequality ranks lowest, Pasquali offers good explanations as to what the most economically unequal countries are, and why they are at that state.
The facts and statistics given in this article support Pasquali’s writing very well, as well as the charts showing the income distribution among all those countries. Rather than a long, boring textbook, this article has facts that grab your attention, then leading you to the easy»to-understand visualst I think that this website could use more information on countries’ interactions with each othert This would show the relationships between countries, where one country is significantly richer than the other, which could also count for economic inequality, Laurent Belsie’s article describes the causes of income inequality throughout the world. Celebrities have market-driven incomes, while people working as CEO’s have fixed incomes that are chosen Celebrities have their pay increased more easily, based on their endorsements, selling recordings, and much more, whereas CEO’s work towards their specificjob only, and their income is fixed. Thus, there is an income inequality between these two fields of employment because the pay of superstars can increase a lot faster than the pay of other jobs where the income is fixed.
Belsie‘s article offers a good insight on why some jobs are ‘worth’ significantly more than another job, It gives us a good, specific example of two jobs: a celebrity, and a CEO, where the jobs have market-driven and fixed incomes, respectively. It informs us that the reason celebrities make more is that their market-driven income can increase more, but also reminds us that with a market—driven income, there is no minimum amount one can make, whereas a CEO has a minimum income. I think this article does a really good job showing two sides of the work field: a fixed income, and a market-driven income. It also does a good job of showing the good and the bad sides of each kind of income, but I think it could use one or two more examples of other sets of market-driven versus fixed-income jobs, just to give us more of an idea about the income inequality.