369
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2023
369 points (95.8% liked)
Asklemmy
44149 readers
1420 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
That global poverty has declined because of the spread of liberal economies
I'll bite. Why has global poverty declined?
For the most part it hasn't actually declined, but where it has can't be fairly ascribed to that.
I'm mostly going off the argument made here which seemed pretty convincing to me. The gist of it is that the statistics used to push the narrative of neoliberal effectiveness on poverty are presented in very misleading ways.