Then I have a few more important graphs to share, Sam.
They are from 2006, and I produced them by myself (a group producing it would have been better), but I used good sources such as nationmaster.com and CIA World Factbook. Today, I would use the World Bank's data.
Here you can see the top ten percent, the financial elite, in all nations and how much they can take home of the national cake.
Column #1 is completely winner-take-all at all levels (such as the USA). Column #3 is proportional but with an empowered president (always a winner-taking-all).
Columns# 4 and 5 do not have a president and are either proportional (#5) or a mixture (such as Germany).
Columns #4 and #5 deliver the best outcomes. The rich are still the rich, but they are not filthy rich.
Columns #1 and #3 show how the winner-take-all element can warp the outcome. Sadly, the mixture of proportional with a president can be the worst there is. Just a top dog (winner-take-all) and then everyone else cats (dividing all seats equally), that means the single dog can get away with a lot more, so to speak.
In the US (column #1), we have dogs at every level, so the top dog has to deal with many other dogs. All are winners-taking-all. The outcomes can still be extreme, but not as extreme as column #3.
Yes, the data is statistically significant, which means that the voting system does indeed influence the outcome of societies.
Here the opposite graph of the bottom ten percent in a society, the financial poor, and how little they can take home from the national cake. No surprise, it shows kind of an inverse of what we saw with the rich.
Enjoy!
