The differences in living standards

The differences in living standards around the world are staggering. In 1997 the average American had an income of about $29,000. In the same year, the average Mexican earned $8,000, and the average Nigerian earned $900. Not surprisingly, this large variation in average income is reflected in various measures of the qual- ity of life. Citizens of high-income countries have more TV sets, more cars, better nutrition, better health care, and longer life expectancy than citizens of low-income countries.
Changes in living standards over time are also large. In the United States, incomes have historically grown about 2 percent per year (after adjusting for changes in the cost of living). At this rate, average income doubles every 35 years. Over the past century, average income has risen about eightfold.
What explains these large differences in living standards among countries and over time? The answer is surprisingly simple. Almost all variation in living stan- dards is attributable to differences in countries’ productivity—that is, the amount of goods and services produced from each hour of a worker ’s time. In nations where workers can produce a large quantity of goods and services per unit of time, most people enjoy a high standard of living; in nations where workers are less productive, most people must endure a more meager existence. Similarly, the growth rate of a nation’s productivity determines the growth rate of its average income.
The fundamental relationship between productivity and living standards is simple, but its implications are far-reaching. If productivity is the primary deter- minant of living standards, other explanations must be of secondary importance. For example, it might be tempting to credit labor unions or minimum-wage laws for the rise in living standards of American workers over the past century. Yet the real hero of American workers is their rising productivity. As another example, some commentators have claimed that increased competition from Japan and other countries explains the slow growth in U.S. incomes over the past 30 years. Yet the real villain is not competition from abroad but flagging productivity growth in the United States.
The relationship between productivity and living standards also has profound implications for public policy. When thinking about how any policy will affect liv- ing standards, the key question is how it will affect our ability to produce goods and services. To boost living standards, policymakers need to raise productivity by ensuring that workers are well educated, have the tools needed to produce goods and services, and have access to the best available technology.



In the 1980s and 1990s, for example, much debate in the United States centered on the government’s budget deficit—the excess of government spending over gov- ernment revenue. As we will see, concern over the budget deficit was based largely on its adverse impact on productivity. When the government needs to finance a budget deficit, it does so by borrowing in financial markets, much as a student might borrow to finance a college education or a firm might borrow to finance a new factory. As the government borrows to finance its deficit, therefore, it reduces the quantity of funds available for other borrowers. The budget deficit thereby reduces investment both in human capital (the student’s education) and physical capital (the firm’s factory). Because lower investment today means lower productivity in the future, government budget deficits are generally thought to de- press growth in living standards.