The Haves and the Have-Nots by Branko Milanovic Summary

The Haves and the Have-Nots by Branko Milanovic examines global income inequality through historical, literary, and modern lenses. It compares wealth distribution across societies like ancient Rome, 19th-century Europe, and contemporary nations, using examples such as Jane Austen’s Mr. Darcy and Barack Obama’s family. The book introduces tools like the Gini coefficient to measure inequality and explores how birthplace impacts economic opportunity.

This book suits readers interested in economic history, social justice, or global wealth disparities. Economists, students, and policymakers will appreciate its data-driven analysis, while general audiences enjoy its narrative style blending literature (e.g., Anna Karenina) with real-world examples like China’s economic rise.

Yes, Milanovic’s concise yet comprehensive approach makes complex economic concepts accessible. The book’s mix of statistical analysis, historical parallels, and engaging vignettes—like comparing 18th-century French inequality to modern Brazil—offers a unique perspective on how inequality shapes societies.

Key ideas include:

• Inequality is measured by location (country), class, and historical era.
• Birthplace vastly impacts lifetime earnings (e.g., Obama’s Kenyan grandfather vs. U.S. opportunities).
• Kuznets waves—cyclical rises and falls in inequality—are driven by technology and globalization.

Milanovic argues that global inequality stems from between-country differences (e.g., GDP gaps) and within-country class divides. For example, the richest 1.75% of people earn as much as the poorest 77%, a disparity rooted in colonial legacies and uneven globalization.

The book analyzes fictional characters to illustrate wealth gaps:

• Mr. Darcy (Pride and Prejudice): His £10,000 annual income equates to modern billionaire status.
• Anna Karenina: Her financial independence highlights 19th-century Russian aristocracy’s economic power.

Milanovic argues Marx underestimated national identity’s role in class struggles. While Marx predicted worker solidarity across borders, modern inequality is increasingly tied to citizenship, as seen in immigration debates.

The Gini coefficient measures income distribution (0 = perfect equality; 1 = maximum inequality). Milanovic uses it to compare nations: Brazil’s 0.63 Gini reflects high inequality, while Denmark’s 0.25 shows relative equality. Globally, the coefficient is 0.70—higher than any single country.

The book links globalization to diverging fortunes: wealthy nations and their elites gain, while poor countries and unskilled workers stagnate. For example, China’s economic boom lifted millions but widened internal inequality.

Critics note the book focuses more on describing inequality than solving it. Some argue Milanovic overlooks intersectional factors like gender and race, focusing primarily on class and geography.

While Global Inequality analyzes post-1989 trends (e.g., Asian middle-class growth), The Haves and the Have-Nots offers a broader historical scope, using literature and vignettes to make technical concepts relatable.

With rising populism and climate migration, the book’s insights into how inequality fuels social instability remain pertinent. Its analysis of pandemic-era wealth gaps and AI-driven job displacement offers a framework for current policy debates.