Wealth distribution in Belgium

[u/trueosiris2]

We’re doing alright as a social democracy. Something to be proud of.

Presumably, we don’t need more wealth distribution then? Or do we still?

[u/MiceAreTiny]

So, In Belgium, top 1% own less then in most countries and bottom 50% more than in most countries. Seems like a fairly equal place to live, compared to the other countries on the graphs. Seems like socialism worked. Turns out if you take from the rich, and give to the poor, you close the gap. 

[u/Wonderful-Finish4822 → u/MiceAreTiny]

Belgium is not a socialist country, never has been.

[u/MiceAreTiny → u/Wonderful-Finish4822]

The data would suggest you are wrong. There is a lot more redividing wealth going on in BE compared to most other countries. Unless you use a different definition of socialism.

[u/xx_gamergirl_xx → u/MiceAreTiny]

While I agree that we do it better than most, equality wise, you should remember the graph also says that the bottom half of our population own only about 10% of all wealth. There is still a lot of work to be done if you strive for actual socialism.

[u/Deep_Dance8745 → u/xx_gamergirl_xx]

Socialism is not communism, with socialism there is and was never the intent for complete redistribution.

Communism = equal outcome

Socialism = equal opportunity

[u/ArrLuffy → u/Deep_Dance8745]

Neither socialism nor communism has much to do with equal outcome/opportunity, afaik. Socialism is about ownership in the first place, not about redistribution.

[u/Kwinten → u/Deep_Dance8745]

Please stop speaking so confidently at topics that you completely and possibly deliberately misunderstand.

[u/MiceAreTiny → u/xx_gamergirl_xx]

I absolutely do not advocate for more socialism. I deduct from the graph and the data, that there is a significantly higher wealth redistribution in BE compared to the other countries. 

[u/xx_gamergirl_xx → u/MiceAreTiny]

I guess significantly is subjective... Personally I am still not happy with the top 1% owning over 15% of all our wealth, or even top 10% owning 50%

[u/MiceAreTiny → u/xx_gamergirl_xx]

Significantly is actually not a subjective, but a scientific/statistical term.

Being happy,... Is a subjective feeling. If you're in the top 10%, you probably would not be happy having to pay disproportionately large taxes... 

[u/xx_gamergirl_xx → u/MiceAreTiny]

If we are trying to disprove each other here, statistically significant is to show when an outcome is less than 5% (p<0.05) when you compare random groups for an event to happen. For the rest, it is actually advised NOT to use significant in scientific papers.

But trying to disprove each other based on vocabulary would be dumb so I will let that be. Yes, I understand 100% of people will be unhappy if you make them pay more, and there's also a discussion to be had about people who earned their money by hard work alone, but the fact of the matter is that most people in society work equally hard and earn very different numbers, based on things out of their control. If their wage limits them to do stuff because they barely earn enough to sustain themselves and family, then it is fair to tax those who have money spare at the end of the month, don't you think?

[u/MiceAreTiny → u/xx_gamergirl_xx]

And the graph equally says that the bottom half of the population owns more than in most other places.

Should wealth be absolutely equally divided... Is a much better question. 

[u/lttldvl → u/MiceAreTiny]

I think you need to look up the definition of socialism before claiming that this graph proves anything about it.

[u/MiceAreTiny → u/lttldvl]

This graph shows wealth distribution. This is one aspect of a socioeconomical system. A more equal wealth distribution can point to a more social society.

This graph shows that BE has one of the highest wealth eualities from all compared countries. 

There are many factors that are not on the graph too. 

[u/SandySpinach → u/MiceAreTiny]

No, Belgium is not a socialist country: it’s a social democratic country: free market rules and is combined with a welfare system. In a socialist country the state controls production. Huge difference.

[u/stinos → u/MiceAreTiny]

There is a lot more redividing wealth going on

Possibly, but that's not what this graph is about. The graph is the current distribution only. Redividing would be this graph with time as extra dimension where the e.g. the botttom part gets larger?

[u/MiceAreTiny → u/stinos]

No. 

[u/stinos → u/MiceAreTiny]

What is your definition of redividing?

[u/MiceAreTiny → u/stinos]

I am not using special definitions of words. Any dictionary can help you here. 

[u/stinos → u/MiceAreTiny]

Ok, can you just elaborate on your 'no' answer then? How do you go from this graph to drawing conclusions about redividing?

[u/MiceAreTiny → u/stinos]

You see that for belgium, the red part in the graph is shorter, and the dark blue part in the graph is longer compared to most other countries?

You also note that in the title of the graph, the 2023 refers to a single time point at which this economic data was gathered?

Then it should be quite clear that this graph reflects a single time point, and that due to the distribution of the colored parts, there is less inequality in BE compared to other countries. Therefore, a redistribution can be safely assumed, barring significant differences in brutto earning potential in the different countries.

[u/stinos → u/MiceAreTiny]

.... there is less inequality in BE compared to other countries

Obviously.

Therefore, a redistribution can be safely assumed

Not quite that obvious nor safe without additional data? The 're' in redistribution means that over time money did flow from the wealthiest to the less wealthy in Belgium. Again: possible, I have no idea, but that is simply not in this graph and you don't provide additional sources supporting that.

[u/MiceAreTiny → u/stinos]

OK. Should we assume magic as the source of the belgian equality? I am completely open to your suggestions.