The above graph is lifted from a forthcoming book by Surjit S. Bhalla, called Second Among Equals: The Middle Class Kingdoms of India and China. It shows the share of the middle class in world population rising from 2 percent in 1820 to 23 percent in 1950 to 54 percent in 2005 to a projected 79 percent in 2025. [typos corrected]
In another chart, looking at India alone, the middle class population is 2 percent in 1960 and 34 percent in 2005. China went from essentially 0 percent in 1980 to 67 percent in 2005.
Thanks to reader Prashant Kothari for forwarding the charts.
READER COMMENTS
Buzzcut
Dec 4 2006 at 10:17am
I thought that the chart looked strangely linear, so I entered the numbers in Excel and plotted an XY chart rather than a bar chart.
It is highly non-linear. A power regression fits the data the best. (y=1E-108*x^32.57, R^2=.9809)
Interestingly enough, you can get an almost perfect fit if you only plot the years 1820, 1913, 1950, and 2005. (R^2=.9985, y=5E-114*x^34.25)
1980 is a huge outlier. That’s the damage socialism caused, especially Maoism and Indian style socialism.
Vincent Clement
Dec 4 2006 at 10:23am
I thought the middle class was shrinking 😉
Bruce G Charlton
Dec 4 2006 at 11:53am
MISPRINT
“…54 percent in 2005 to a projected 79 percent in 2005.”
But a fascinating snippet – thanks.
Dear AK, please could you give some indication of the oprational definition of Middle Class used in this book?
Buzzcut
Dec 4 2006 at 12:16pm
Do a exponential regression on the data for 1820, 1913, and 1950. Extrapolate to 2025.
Had socialism never occured, 96.7% of the world’s population would be middle class in 2025 vs. the 79% now projected (I get 76.5%).
66% of the pop would be middle class in 2005, instead of the 54% we now have.
Socialism/ Maoism did that much damage. And it isn’t like 1950 was a good year or anything. It was only 5 years after WWII, after all. Imagine where the world would be if, say, WWI had never happened and the positive trends of the 19th century had continued.
George
Dec 4 2006 at 3:16pm
A couple of typos: “23 percent in 1850” should be changed to the much-less-shocking “1950”; and as pointed out above, “79 percent in 2005” should be “2025”.
Comments are closed.