In the first quarter of 2024, almost two-thirds percent of the total wealth in the United States was owned by the top 10 percent of earners. In comparison, the lowest 50 percent of earners only owned 2.5 percent of the total wealth. Income inequality in the U.S. Despite the idea that the United States is a country where hard work and pulling yourself up by your bootstraps will inevitably lead to success, this is often not the case. In 2023, 7.4 percent of U.S. households had an annual income under 15,000 U.S. dollars. With such a small percentage of people in the United States owning such a vast majority of the country’s wealth, the gap between the rich and poor in America remains stark. The top one percent The United States follows closely behind China as the country with the most billionaires in the world. Elon Musk alone held around 219 billion U.S. dollars in 2022. Over the past 50 years, the CEO-to-worker compensation ratio has exploded, causing the gap between rich and poor to grow, with some economists theorizing that this gap is the largest it has been since right before the Great Depression.

The 'financialisation' of Chinese housing, land and infrastructure - the use of financial instruments to convert the built environment into investment opportunities - generates momentum and vitality in the Chinese economy and has led to wealth accumulation. This study explores how the Chinese housing boom has been financed in the absence of a more developed financial system, and to what extent the financial sector has contributed to the overall appreciation of housing and land assets. A large questionnaire survey was conducted in six case cities including Shanghai, Shenzhen, Chengdu, Xi'an, Nanjing and Tianjin.The Chinese financial system has fostered rapid economic growth in recent decades through so-called 'land-based financing' (tudi chaizhen) in housing, land and infrastructure development. The 'financialisation' of Chinese housing, land and infrastructure - the use of financial instruments to convert the built environment into investment opportunities - generates momentum and vitality in the Chinese economy and has led to wealth accumulation. Real estate financing instruments such as the real estate investment trust (REITS), mortgage securitisation, reverse mortgages and public-private partnerships (PPP) in infrastructure have been recently invented. On the other hand, traditional real estate financial products such as household mortgages and real estate loans benefit from new internet-based finance. Chinese real estate finance has now entered a phase of 'financial explosion'. However, the concrete channels, complex arrangements and new instruments are not entirely known. This research project aims to investigate how housing, land and infrastructure are actually financed, what are the new financial instruments, to what extent there is a trend of 'financialisation', and what are the risks associated with this transformation. We examine the recent trend of financialisation in terms of the forms and extent of the involvement of both the formal and the unofficial ('shadow banking') sectors in real estate development. Recent developments in REITS and PPP will be examined to show the inflow of financial capital in housing, land, and infrastructure projects. We explore how the Chinese housing boom has been financed in the absence of a more developed financial system, and to what extent the financial sector has contributed to the overall appreciation of housing and land assets. We will also try to understand the potential impacts of financialisation on households, enterprises and local government finances (i.e. the issue of 'local debt') and what are the main factors affecting financial stability. The project investigates three levels of financing mechanisms: projects and enterprises, local governments, and individual households. We choose six case cities: in the coastal region, Shanghai and Shenzhen; the central region: Zhengzhou and Changsha; the western region: Chongqing and Chengdu. At the local government (city) level, we will examine the institutional environment and policies regarding built environment finance, including the involvement of housing provident funds. This research project will assess the recent trend of financialisation in Chinese housing, land and infrastructure sectors and provide a nuanced understanding of the changing financial mode, its dynamics and the new institutional environment. The project will examine emerging financial products and new channels in these sectors and their operational mechanisms. The project will focus on household financial behaviour to understand the new trend of financialisation of real estate and its impact on housing consumption, investment behaviour, and job preference. The project will further assess macroeconomic implications such as the impact on the Chinese financial system, financial product innovation, fiscal policies and company investment. Finally, these findings will lead to an assessment of the potential risks associated with financialisation and recommendations for risk management. The sample was collected through random face to face interview at the site of China Housing Provident Fund Centres in six cities (Shanghai, Shenzhen, Tianjin, Nanjing, Chengdu, Xi’an). Verbal consent was made before interview by the Centre in the same way as other NSFC projects. The rejection rate was 9.6%. The sample reflects the population of housing provident fund applicants rather than the total urban resident population. But because housing provident fund is a mainstream compulsory scheme, the sample reflects the population who qualifies housing provident funds and has the intention to apply for the mortgage.

In 2023, the average price of real estate in China was approximately ****** yuan per square meter, representing a decrease from the previous year. Rising prices in the real estate market Since the 1998 housing reform, property prices in China have been rising continuously. Housing in the country is now often unaffordable, especially considering the modest per capita income of Chinese households. Shanghai and Beijing even have some of the most competitive real estate markets in the world. The rapid growth in housing prices has increased wealth among homeowners, while it also led to a culture of speculation among buyers and real estate developers. Housing was treated as investments, with owners expecting the prices to grow further every year. Risk factors The expectation of a steadily growing real estate market has created a property bubble and a potential debt crisis. As Chinese real estate giants, such as China Evergrande and Country Garden, operate by continuously acquiring land plots and initiating new projects, which often require substantial loans and investments, a slowdown in property demands or a decline in home prices can significantly affect the financial situation of these companies, putting China’s banks in a vulnerable position. In addition, due to a lack of regulations and monetary constraints, the long-term maintenance issues of high-rise apartments are also a concern to the sustainable development of China’s cities.

Among OECD member countries, the United States had the highest percentage of gross domestic product spent on health care as of 2023. The U.S. spent nearly ** percent of its GDP on health care services. Germany, France and Japan followed the U.S. with distinctly smaller percentages. The United States had both significantly higher private and public spending on health compared with other developed countries. Why compare OECD countries?OECD stands for Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. It is an economic organization consisting of ** members, mostly high-income countries and committed to democratic principles and market economy. This makes OECD statistics more comparable than statistics of developed and undeveloped countries. Health economics is an important matter for the OECD, even more since increasing health costs and an aging population have become an issue for many developed countries. Health costs in the U.S.  A higher GDP share spent on health care does not automatically lead to a better functioning health system. In the case of the U.S., high spending is mainly because of higher costs and prices, not due to higher utilization. For example, physicians’ salaries are much higher in the U.S. than in other comparable countries. A doctor in the U.S. earns almost twice as much as the average physician in Germany. Pharmaceutical spending per capita is also distinctly higher in the United States. Furthermore, the U.S. also spends more on health administrative costs compare to other wealthy countries.