In the outskirts of Lagos, Nigeria, Amina is trying to meet her ends, waking up before dawn to sell bread at a bustling market—much like James across the Atlantic in Detroit, US. The former lives on almost $2,670 a year—with her family of five surviving on less than $2 a day in purchasing power terms—while James, a single father, earns $27,112 annually, placing him among America’s poorest 20%.
On an individual level, James’s income is 13 times that of Amina’s, but on a broader scale, it reveals a gulf wider than an ocean—a tale of two planets: the Global North, represented here by G7 countries including the United States, Germany, France, and the United Kingdom, and the Global South, encompassing (but not limited to) India, China, Brazil, and South Africa and other countries that are part of BRICS.
In what is defined as the North here, the poor are not a monolith; rather, their incomes are clustered within ranges that might seem luxurious compared to those in the South. For instance, in the US, what is categorized as poor earns $27,112 per household annually in purchasing power parity (PPP) terms—enough for food, rent, and perhaps a used small car. In contrast, in welfare-supported states like Germany, France, and the United Kingdom, the annual income for the poor stands at $16,500, $14,500, and $16,500 respectively, for those teetering at the edge of poverty.
On the other side of the spectrum, the poorest in South Africa survive on $2,670 a year—a figure that defies comprehension in a world of skyscrapers and smartphones. The poorest in Brazil earn $3,662, which, though slightly better, still leaves them far behind. Emerging giants of the Global South, such as India and China, show figures of $4,085 and $9,007 respectively, hinting at progress through urbanization and industrial booms, yet their depths of poverty remain stark.
This comparison is a litmus test: the poor at both ends of the world are not poor in isolation, but when compared to each other. The gap isn’t just about monetary differences—it reflects disparities in safety nets, infrastructure, opportunities, living standards, and overall quality of life.
Riches of rich:
Yet, the story does not end here. In South Africa, for example, while extreme poverty persists, there is also a glaring concentration of wealth—evidenced by the elite in Sandton, Johannesburg who fly in private jets. The familiar cliché of the top 1% is reflected in stories where disparities reach the stratosphere both between the Global North and South and within them.
In America, to be among the top 1%, an estimated annual wealth of $5,800,000 is required—a figure supported by the Credit Suisse Global Wealth Report. In comparison, in the North, thresholds for the top 1% in Germany, France, and the United Kingdom are $3,500,000, $3,200,000, and $3,400,000 respectively.
In the Global South, the picture changes further. In China, the threshold is $1,300,000; in Brazil, it is $700,000; in South Africa, $500,000; in India, $175,000; and in Nigeria, the corrected estimate is $2,000,000. These elites seems rich locally but are almost paupers in front of western tycoons, for the gap is not just wide but a chasm.
What hides behind numbers?
What these numbers do not immediately reveal is the “why.” A common thread running through these disparities is the legacy of colonialism—where many Global South countries were exploited, drained of resources, and left with fragmented institutions. Even after gaining independence, these nations have grappled with international policies, trade barriers, tax havens, and challenges such as a lack of indigenous industries and underdeveloped human capital. Internal issues like corruption, mismanagement, and political instability have further skewed development, allowing a select few to flourish at the expense of the many.
While Amina may never see these numbers and charts, she lives every day with their consequences. The data not only reflects a stark divide but also calls for urgent discussions on rethinking trade, taxation, reparations, and political dialogue—ultimately, a commitment to addressing the deep-rooted causes of inequality.
Dear reader,
Opinions expressed in the op-ed section are solely those of the individual author and do not represent the official stance of our newspaper. We believe in providing a platform for a wide range of voices and perspectives, even those that may challenge or differ from our own. We remain committed to providing our readers with high-quality, fair, and balanced journalism. Thank you for your continued support.
