- 7 Levels Of Wealth Manifestation Pdf Example
- 7 Levels Of Wealth Manifestation Pdf File
- 7 Levels Of Wealth Manifestation Pdf Free
- Different Levels Of Wealth
The 7 Levels of Wealth Manifestation by Margaret Lynch is one of the better courses I have gone through. I have actually completed this course multiple times, in different forms, with positive results both in terms of what I have felt and solid, money-in-hand improvements.
7 Levels Of Miracles; 7 Levels Of Wealth Manifestation; Powerful, Passionate and Fabulous; Stand Out Like A Rock Star; Transcribed Tapping Rounds from 2013; Other Bonuses; Energy Healing; Retreats; Support. IMPORTANT NOTE: This app is a companion to Margaret M. Lynch's 7 Levels of Wealth Manifestation program for existing users. You MUST be an existing member of the program to use the app.Liberate. Secret 7 Remaining Active In Manifestation As Opposed To Reactive Will Guarantee Manifestation Success. Staying active towards manifestation means you are taking control of the basis of manifestation in the mind and body. If you remain passive and reactive, you are not in control, and this guarantees negative manifestation. Click the following link to learn: 11 forgotten laws for wealth creation. Manifesting Abundance with Dr. Joe Vitale of the Secret fame, show you exactly how he went from ungrounded and homeless to spiritually and physically wealthy! The seven types of wealth, including but not limited to financial wealth, that truly makes life feel rich, abundant, and joyful: 1. Physical Wealth—Having the optimal health and energy in your body that makes everything you do possible. Emotional Wealth—Where you live emotionally is the quality of your life.
It was re-recorded and released a few years ago, and is currently having even more video components added to what was previously an audio-only program.
You can watch the video recording for free for a limited time here.
It is designed to uproot and resolve conflicts and blocks around money in a manner, as well as a level of depth, you may not have experienced with other teachers focused on this topic.
The primary modality used in the course is EFT tapping, used in a very structured and comprehensive way with an overall broader and deeper model than simply “tapping on money issues.”
In fact, the title can be almost misleading. This is one of the more insightful courses I’ve encountered in terms of learning about myself, far beyond simply wealth and money.
I say that this is likely to cover new ground even if you are pretty familiar with this type of work. There are a lot of programs out there that talk about money. They may try to work on your mindset or your beliefs, tell you to visualize, let go and lots of other things you have probably heard many times. This course goes far beyond that.
A major component of this course that makes it so powerful is the way it works through these 7 levels, which we will look at now.
What are These “7 Levels”?
This is not seven aspects of money, they are seven aspects of yourself.
I’m sure you have heard of the 7 Chakras before. They are indeed the seven levels, or perhaps more accurately, the seven viewpoints through which our relationship to money will be exposed and worked with.
You might be reacting as I once did to anything that talked about Chakras- basically, a big red flag for new age cheesiness that does not really belong in a money discussion. However, once I saw the way they are used as a model of teaching and examining different qualities of our personality, I was impressed by their effectiveness.
The Chakras serve as an excellent map for uncovering and working with parts of yourself that are in conflict around any topic. Learning to recognize what is actually going on, and how to reach resolution is extremely powerful. This is a very effective course in doing so.
Margaret used to work with Rhys Thomas who primarily teaches about the Chakras and has a high level of insight. Her current version of the course uses Eastern Body, Western Mind by Anodea Judith as a reference text to deep dive into each Chakra, using that as a springboard for her own EFT
The amount of aha moments and self-understanding that emerged from the teachings on each level was somewhat staggering. Common personality traits, patterns of thinking, ways of interacting with the world and more that are representative of different chakras, the various wounds and vows that occur there — things started making a LOT of sense using this model.
Most importantly, the processing that goes on works to actually dig in and heal/grow.
You’re Already Familiar With This
Everyone has felt competing agendas inside of themselves. Perhaps you really want to pursue some skill or career, but are deeply concerned about how others might perceive you. Maybe it’s your parents or your cultures expectations of you specifically that cause the charge. The financial risk (or reward) element of it could be the biggest block.
You could fall on the other side of the spectrum, where you are pursuing a desire so fervently that you often do not recognize the destructive qualities on other areas of your life until it is too late. Achievement could be natural, but relationships suffer. Part of you wants to slow down but another part does not want to sacrifice a moment of work.
Maybe you so naturally take care of others that you neglect to take proper care of yourself.
All of these are attributes of ourselves that can out of balance, or blocked in certain areas. This will very directly relate to how we manage, receive and deal with money.
What’s Included in The 7 Levels of Wealth Manifestation Program
There is a lot of material in this course, and I personally don’t find any of it to be filler or unnecessary. It’s actually quite to the point, with a lot of tapping and processing, and just enough teaching to give a useful context.
- 10 Modules – with audio and sometimes video, going through teaching and lots of EFT / processing around each level or Chakra.
- Q&A call recordings – There are at least 5 rather in depth Q&A recordings from previous live calls through the history of this program. I’ve gone through 2 so far and find them to be very good supplements. The students are on point with good questions and Margaret shows she really knows her stuff, with good suggestions or tapping rounds.
- 7 sides of the Second Chakra – This is a nice newly added bonus. If you explore this material, you’ll find out how much is wrapped up in the second Chakra. I am looking forward to going through this and will update more when I do.
- Chakra Masterclass 2019 – These are newer video teachings Margaret has added.
A Look At The Levels
Let’s take a brief look at some of these levels or perspectives, and how money might be seen through them. I believe you will immediately recognize them within yourself and see the logic behind it. It is far more important to see this as a model for getting in touch with these qualities, than it is to take everything literally.
The First Level or Chakra – This is the physical world itself, and where we feel the natural drive of the body for safety and security. Money from this perspective will be seen in terms of how it can keep you safe, it is not going to be interested in “fun” and certainly not anything risky.
It also contains the programming you get from your family, culture and so on. If there were certain viewpoints about wealthy people, poverty, money being the root of all evil, something to be held on to tightly, something that comes naturally and easily and so on. This energy will be imprinted on you to some degree, regardless of whether not it was explicitly stated.
As you might imagine, there is an enormous amount of material here. If this area dominates or is out of balance, has wounds or traumas in it (which any level can have, something this program works with rather deeply) they are going to solidly impact your relationship to money.
The 2nd – This is the realm of pure desire. It wants what it wants, and does not care about consequences or safety. Everyone has felt the desire to have money for purely the sake of expression, buying cool things, doing whatever you want to do without having to worry about your budget. Obviously, this is fiercely different than the first level, and the two need to be able to balance in order to function properly.
This energy can be heavily judged or disowned, especially if you are dominated by safety, making it very difficult to ever claim what you want or enjoy it. You may look condescendingly on others who spend money what you might call frivolously, and put moral condemnation around it. This actually blocks the ability to receive, step up to situations that could result in big gains, perhaps constantly saving money and denying yourself even there is plenty there to enjoy.
On the other side, this could dominate and run the show in a way where you are constantly spending on whatever the desire-of-the-moment might be. You may charge after things without considering long term effects or consequences, for yourself or others.
Let’s look at just one more, the 4th – Located in the heart, this is the energy of acceptance, love and compassion. The emphathetic and nurturing aspect of all people, that genuinely wants to give in service or see another succeed. Perhaps most importantly, it also where you love and accept yourself.
Wounds and vows here can be created around things like perfectionism — deciding you are not good enough now, and always striving to be “perfect” so that you can be worthy of receiving. The class on this energy center is very powerful and strikes many deep cords with the callers (as well as myself when working with it).
Money through this lens can also be about using it towards relationships, community and so on. If this is totally shut down it can be a very cold way to live, while at the other end you can become so concerned with others that you do not properly take care of yourself.
As you can see from just these three, there is going to be a very dynamic relationship going on between these 7 levels. In order to have a fully integrated and functional life around money that is able to receive, enjoy, save, create and much more in a wise way, you will want to work with each of these levels.
The Course Content
The 7 levels of wealth manifestation includes teaching around each level that creates a very comprehensive but logical, relatable model. This will give you a lot of clarity and insight into the big picture, and a lot of aha moments about how this all connects to money in a practical way.
More importantly, you do deep and intensive processing for each of the 7 levels. First there is often an exploration of the common wounds, vows and conflicts that reside in each one. You then process using EFT, which Margaret Lynch guides you through based on the core content of each level plus the responses and reactions from live callers.
If you are not familiar with EFT, it is a simple but highly effective process that is explained in the course. You simply tap on different points of your body to stimulate the energy system, while voicing whatever issues, beliefs, conflicts and so on are taking place. You will be good to go in moments, and will likely be surprised at the effectiveness especially if you are new to it (there are plenty of free introductions to EFT as well, including on this website.)
Margaret is very good at leading the tapping rounds, an obviously experienced facilitator. She also really, really knows her stuff regarding the 7 levels/chakras, apparent from interactions with the live callers and how quickly she is able to relate their issue and put it in context.
Final Thoughts
This is a highly recommended course if you are interested in an in-depth exploration of yourself and how you relate to money in different ways, particularly if you enjoy or are interested in EFT. As said earlier, it is quite thorough and goes into far more depth than the usual “money mindset” material. I found the experience both very educational and effective at uncovering and processing a lot of blocks and viewpoints I did not know were there.
7 Levels Of Wealth Manifestation Pdf Example
Click Here for the “Telesummit Special” Price on the Full 7 Levels of Wealth Manifestation Course
1. Trends in income and wealth inequality
By , and
Barely 10 years past the end of the Great Recession in 2009, the U.S. economy is doing well on several fronts. The labor market is on a job-creating streak that has rung up more than 110 months straight of employment growth, a record for the post-World War II era. The unemployment rate in November 2019 was 3.5%, a level not seen since the 1960s. Gains on the jobs front are also reflected in household incomes, which have rebounded in recent years.
But not all economic indicators appear promising. Household incomes have grown only modestly in this century, and household wealth has not returned to its pre-recession level. Economic inequality, whether measured through the gaps in income or wealth between richer and poorer households, continues to widen.
Household incomes are growing again after a lengthy period of stagnation
With periodic interruptions due to business cycle peaks and troughs, the incomes of American households overall have trended up since 1970. In 2018, the median income of U.S. households stood at $74,600.5 This was 49% higher than its level in 1970, when the median income was $50,200.6 (Incomes are expressed in 2018 dollars.)
But the overall trend masks two distinct episodes in the evolution of household incomes (the first lasting from 1970 to 2000 and the second from 2000 to 2018) and in how the gains were distributed.
Most of the increase in household income was achieved in the period from 1970 to 2000. In these three decades, the median income increased by 41%, to $70,800, at an annual average rate of 1.2%. From 2000 to 2018, the growth in household income slowed to an annual average rate of only 0.3%. If there had been no such slowdown and incomes had continued to increase in this century at the same rate as from 1970 to 2000, the current median U.S. household income would be about $87,000, considerably higher than its actual level of $74,600.
The shortfall in household income is attributable in part to two recessions since 2000. The first recession, lasting from March 2001 to November 2001, was relatively short-lived.7 Yet household incomes were slow to recover from the 2001 recession and it was not until 2007 that the median income was restored to about its level in 2000.
But 2007 also marked the onset of the Great Recession, and that delivered another blow to household incomes. This time it took until 2015 for incomes to approach their pre-recession level. Indeed, the median household income in 2015 – $70,200 – was no higher than its level in 2000, marking a 15-year period of stagnation, an episode of unprecedented duration in the past five decades.8
More recent trends in household income suggest that the effects of the Great Recession may finally be in the past. From 2015 to 2018, the median U.S. household income increased from $70,200 to $74,600, at an annual average rate of 2.1%. This is substantially greater than the average rate of growth from 1970 to 2000 and more in line with the economic expansion in the 1980s and the dot-com bubble era of the late 1990s.
Why economic inequality matters
The rise in economic inequality in the U.S. is tied to several factors. These include, in no particular order, technological change, globalization, the decline of unions and the eroding value of the minimum wage. Whatever the causes, the uninterrupted increase in inequality since 1980 has caused concern among members of the public, researchers, policymakers and politicians.
One reason for the concern is that people in the lower rungs of the economic ladder may experience diminished economic opportunity and mobility in the face of rising inequality, a phenomenon referred to as The Great Gatsby Curve. Others have highlighted inequality’s negative impact on the political influence of the disadvantaged, on geographic segregation by income, and on economic growth itself. The matter may not be entirely settled, however, as an opposing viewpoint suggests that income inequality does not harm economic opportunity.
Alternative estimates of economic inequality
This report presents estimates of income inequality based on household income as estimated in the Current Population Survey (CPS), a survey of households conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau in partnership with the Bureau of Labor Statistics. These estimates refer to gross (pretax) income and encompass most sources of income. A key omission is the value of in-kind services received from government sources. Because income taxes are progressive and in-kind services also serve to boost the economic wellbeing of (poorer) recipients, not accounting for these two factors could overstate the true gap in the financial resources of poorer and richer households.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) offers an alternative estimate of income inequality that accounts for federal taxes and a more comprehensive array of cash transfers and in-kind services than is possible with Current Population Survey data. The CBO finds that the Gini coefficient in the U.S. in 2016 ranged from 0.595, before accounting for any forms of taxes and transfers, to 0.423, after a full accounting of taxes and transfers. These estimates bracket the Census Bureau’s estimate of 0.481 for the Gini coefficient in 2016. By either estimate, income inequality in the U.S. is found to have increased by about 20% from 1980 to 2016 (The Gini coefficient ranges from 0 to 1, or from perfect equality to complete inequality). Findings from other researchers show the same general rise in inequality over this period regardless of accounting for in-kind transfers.
Yet another alternative is to focus on inequality in consumption, which implicitly accounts for all forms and sources of incomes, taxes and transfers. Some estimates based on consumption show that inequality in the U.S. increased by less than implied by estimates based on income, but other estimates suggest the trends based on consumption and income are similar. Empirically, consumption can be harder to measure than income.
Upper-income households have seen more rapid growth in income in recent decades
The growth in income in recent decades has tilted to upper-income households. At the same time, the U.S. middle class, which once comprised the clear majority of Americans, is shrinking. Thus, a greater share of the nation’s aggregate income is now going to upper-income households and the share going to middle- and lower-income households is falling.9
The share of American adults who live in middle-income households has decreased from 61% in 1971 to 51% in 2019. This downsizing has proceeded slowly but surely since 1971, with each decade thereafter typically ending with a smaller share of adults living in middle-income households than at the beginning of the decade.
The decline in the middle-class share is not a total sign of regression. From 1971 to 2019, the share of adults in the upper-income tier increased from 14% to 20%. Meanwhile, the share in the lower-income tier increased from 25% to 29%. On balance, there was more movement up the income ladder than down the income ladder.
But middle-class incomes have not grown at the rate of upper-tier incomes. From 1970 to 2018, the median middle-class income increased from $58,100 to $86,600, a gain of 49%.10 This was considerably less than the 64% increase for upper-income households, whose median income increased from $126,100 in 1970 to $207,400 in 2018. Households in the lower-income tier experienced a gain of 43%, from $20,000 in 1970 to $28,700 in 2018. (Incomes are expressed in 2018 dollars.)
More tepid growth in the income of middle-class households and the reduction in the share of households in the middle-income tier led to a steep fall in the share of U.S. aggregate income held by the middle class. From 1970 to 2018, the share of aggregate income going to middle-class households fell from 62% to 43%. Over the same period, the share held by upper-income households increased from 29% to 48%. The share flowing to lower-income households inched down from 10% in 1970 to 9% in 2018.
These trends in income reflect the growth in economic inequality overall in the U.S. in the decades since 1980.
Income growth has been most rapid for the top 5% of families
Even among higher-income families, the growth in income has favored those at the top. Since 1980, incomes have increased faster for the most affluent families – those in the top 5% – than for families in the income strata below them. This disparity in outcomes is less pronounced in the wake of the Great Recession but shows no signs of reversing.
From 1981 to 1990, the change in mean family income ranged from a loss of 0.1% annually for families in the lowest quintile (the bottom 20% of earners) to a gain of 2.1% annually for families in the highest quintile (the top 20%). The top 5% of families, who are part of the highest quintile, fared even better – their income increased at the rate of 3.2% annually from 1981 to 1990. Thus, the 1980s marked the beginning of a long and steady rise in income inequality.
A similar pattern prevailed in the 1990s, with even sharper growth in income at the top. From 1991 to 2000, the mean income of the top 5% of families grew at an annual average rate of 4.1%, compared with 2.7% for families in the highest quintile overall, and about 1% or barely more for other families.
The period from 2001 to 2010 is unique in the post-WWII era. Families in all strata experienced a loss in income in this decade, with those in the poorer strata experiencing more pronounced losses. The pattern in income growth from 2011 to 2018 is more balanced than the previous three decades, with gains more broadly shared across poorer and better-off families. Nonetheless, income growth remains tilted to the top, with families in the top 5% experiencing greater gains than other families since 2011.
The wealth of American families is currently no higher than its level two decades ago
Other than income, the wealth of a family is a key indicator of its financial security. Wealth, or net worth, is the value of assets owned by a family, such as a home or a savings account, minus outstanding debt, such as a mortgage or student loan. Accumulated over time, wealth is a source of retirement income, protects against short-term economic shocks, and provides security and social status for future generations.
The period from the mid-1990s to the mid-2000s was beneficial for the wealth portfolios of American families overall. Housing prices more than doubled in this period, and stock values tripled.11 As a result, the median net worth of American families climbed from $94,700 in 1995 to $146,600 in 2007, a gain of 55%.12 (Figures are expressed in 2018 dollars.)
But the run up in housing prices proved to be a bubble that burst in 2006. Home prices plunged starting in 2006, triggering the Great Recession in 2007 and dragging stock prices into a steep fall as well. Consequently, the median net worth of families fell to $87,800 by 2013, a loss of 40% from the peak in 2007. As of 2016, the latest year for which data are available, the typical American family had a net worth of $101,800, still less than what it held in 1998.
The wealth divide among upper-income families and middle- and lower-income families is sharp and rising
The wealth gap among upper-income families and middle- and lower-income families is sharper than the income gap and is growing more rapidly.
The period from 1983 to 2001 was relatively prosperous for families in all income tiers, but one of rising inequality. The median wealth of middle-income families increased from $102,000 in 1983 to $144,600 in 2001, a gain of 42%. The net worth of lower-income families increased from $12,3oo in 1983 to $20,600 in 2001, up 67%. Even so, the gains for both lower- and middle-income families were outdistanced by upper-income families, whose median wealth increased by 85% over the same period, from $344,100 in 1983 to $636,000 in 2001. (Figures are expressed in 2018 dollars.)
The wealth gap between upper-income and lower- and middle-income families has grown wider this century. Upper-income families were the only income tier able to build on their wealth from 2001 to 2016, adding 33% at the median. On the other hand, middle-income families saw their median net worth shrink by 20% and lower-income families experienced a loss of 45%. As of 2016, upper-income families had 7.4 times as much wealth as middle-income families and 75 times as much wealth as lower-income families. These ratios are up from 3.4 and 28 in 1983, respectively.
The reason for this is that middle-income families are more dependent on home equity as a source of wealth than upper-income families, and the bursting of the housing bubble in 2006 had more of an impact on their net worth. Upper-income families, who derive a larger share of their wealth from financial market assets and business equity, were in a better position to benefit from a relatively quick recovery in the stock market once the recession ended.
As with the distribution of aggregate income, the share of U.S. aggregate wealth held by upper-income families is on the rise. From 1983 to 2016, the share of aggregate wealth going to upper-income families increased from 60% to 79%. Meanwhile, the share held by middle-income families has been cut nearly in half, falling from 32% to 17%. Lower-income families had only 4% of aggregate wealth in 2016, down from 7% in 1983.
The richest are getting richer faster
The richest families in the U.S. have experienced greater gains in wealth than other families in recent decades, a trend that reinforces the growing concentration of financial resources at the top.
The tilt to the top was most acute in the period from 1998 to 2007. In that period, the median net worth of the richest 5% of U.S. families increased from $2.5 million to $4.6 million, a gain of 88%.
This was nearly double the 45% increase in the wealth of the top 20% of families overall, a group that includes the richest 5%. Meanwhile, the net worth of families in the second quintile, one tier above the poorest 20%, increased by only 16%, from $27,700 in 1998 to $32,100 in 2007. (Figures are expressed in 2018 dollars.)
The wealthiest families are also the only ones to have experienced gains in wealth in the years after the start of the Great Recession in 2007. From 2007 to 2016, the median net worth of the richest 20% increased 13%, to $1.2 million. For the top 5%, it increased by 4%, to $4.8 million. In contrast, the net worth of families in lower tiers of wealth decreased by at least 20% from 2007 to 2016. The greatest loss – 39% – was experienced by the families in the second quintile of wealth, whose wealth fell from $32,100 in 2007 to $19,500 in 2016.
As a result, the wealth gap between America’s richest and poorer families more than doubled from 1989 to 2016. In 1989, the richest 5% of families had 114 times as much wealth as families in the second quintile, $2.3 million compared with $20,300. By 2016, this ratio had increased to 248, a much sharper rise than the widening gap in income.13
Income inequality in the U.S has increased since 1980 and is greater than in peer countries
Income inequality may be measured in a number of ways, but no matter the measure, economic inequality in the U.S. is seen to be on the rise.
One widely used measure – the 90/10 ratio – takes the ratio of the income needed to rank among the top 10% of earners in the U.S. (the 90th percentile) to the income at the threshold of the bottom 10% of earners (the 10th percentile). In 1980, the 90/10 ratio in the U.S. stood at 9.1, meaning that households at the top had incomes about nine times the incomes of households at the bottom. The ratio increased in every decade since 1980, reaching 12.6 in 2018, an increase of 39%.14
Not only is income inequality rising in the U.S., it is higher than in other advanced economies. Comparisons of income inequality across countries are often based on the Gini coefficient, another commonly used measure of inequality.15 Ranging from 0 to 1, or from perfect equality to complete inequality, the Gini coefficient in the U.S. stood at 0.434 in 2017, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).16 This was higher than in any other of the G-7 countries, in which the Gini ranged from 0.326 in France to 0.392 in the UK, and inching closer to the level of inequality observed in India (0.495). More globally, the Gini coefficient of inequality ranges from lows of about 0.25 in Eastern European countries to highs in the range of 0.5 to 0.6 in countries in southern Africa, according to World Bank estimates.
- The median income splits the income distribution into two halves – half the households earn less than the median and half the households earn more. Incomes are adjusted for household size and scaled to represent a household size of three. See methodology for details. ↩
- Percentage changes are estimated, and other calculations are made, before numbers are rounded. ↩
- The recession dates are as designated by the National Bureau of Economic Research. ↩
- It is likely that household incomes did not return to their 2000 level till 2016 or later. A redesign of income questionsby the Census Bureau in 2014 is estimated to have given a boost of about 3% to median household income in the U.S. at the time of the redesign. ↩
- Middle-income” Americans are adults whose annual household income is two-thirds to double the national median, after incomes have been adjusted for household size. Lower-income households have incomes less than 67% of the median and upper-income households have incomes that are more than double the median. See methodology for details. Previous Pew Research Center reports have examined the state of the American middle class in greater detail, including trends within U.S. metropolitan areas. ↩
- The data source for these estimates is the Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplement for 1971 to 2019. In the survey, respondents provide household income data for the previous calendar year. Thus, income data in this section refer to the 1970-2018 period and the counts of people from the same survey refer to the 1971-2019 period. ↩
- The S&P/Case-Shiller U.S. National Home Price Index increased from 80 in January 1995 to 185 in June 2006 (January 2000=100). It fell to 134 in February 2012 and climbed thereafter, reaching 212 in August 2019. At the start of the Great Recession in December 2007, the S&P 500 index stood at about 1,500, three times its level of about 500 in 1995. After the peak in 2007, the S&P 500 fell below 1,000 in 2009. As of November 2019, the index had reached a level of about 3,000. (S&P 500 historical values downloaded from Yahoo! on Nov. 21, 2019.) ↩
- Estimates of wealth are from the Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF). The SCF is conducted triennially by the Federal Reserve Board of Governors. It was first fielded in 1983 and the latest survey for which data are available was in 2016. ↩
- It is not possible to compute the ratio of the wealth of the top 5% of families to the wealth of the poorest 20% because the median wealth of the poorest families is either zero or negative in most years examined. ↩
- Per the U.S. Census Bureau, the source of these estimates, the 90th percentile household income in 2018 was $184,292 and the 10th percentile household income was $14,629 (incomes not adjusted for household size). ↩
- The Gini coefficient encapsulates the share of aggregate income held by each person or household. If everyone has the same income, or the same share of aggregate income, the Gini coefficient equals zero. If the income distribution is perfectly unequal, a single person or household holds all aggregate income, the Gini coefficient is equal to one. ↩
- The OECD is a group of 36 countries, including many of the world’s advanced economies. The OECD’s estimates of the Gini coefficient are for the following years: U.S. – 2017, UK – 2017, Italy – 2016, Japan – 2015, Canada – 2017, Germany – 2016, France – 2016, and India – 2011. ↩