No. The first point is closer than the second.Social security or work-related regulations (compensation etc)?
No. It really is a big number, it defines a country governance priorities.Pregnancy leave-related?
No, not really like that.Women's pay relative to Men's pay?
Sorry, I tried to make it clear, but obviously did not. The numbers are rank, so I only have values for 76 countries, Denmark has the highest value, Democratic Republic of Congo the lowest and the UK the 52nd highest. Here are the numbers normalised, and the map again:Are the numbers you posted on the last page absolute or relative numbers?
world_stats$normalised_value <- (world_stats$value - min(world_stats$value)) / (max(world_stats$value) - min(world_stats$value))
> head(world_stats[,c("name","rank","normalised_value")], n = 10)
name rank normalised_value
60 Denmark 76 1.0000000
205 Sweden 75 0.9811848
72 France 74 0.9548927
19 Belgium 73 0.9407347
69 Finland 72 0.9314571
16 Austria 71 0.9152279
106 Italy 70 0.8607821
162 Norway 69 0.8519707
39 Switzerland 68 0.8350484
161 Netherlands 67 0.8160142
> tail(world_stats[,c("name","rank","normalised_value")], n = 10)
name rank normalised_value
87 Guatemala 10 0.13729999
156 Niger 9 0.13680703
61 Dominican Rep. 8 0.13679927
139 Mexico 7 0.11291793
184 Rwanda 6 0.11075694
43 Cameroon 5 0.10216092
206 Swaziland 4 0.09324428
96 Indonesia 3 0.07058298
223 Uganda 2 0.06516544
44 Dem. Rep. Congo 1 0.00000000
> world_stats[grepl("Unit", world_stats$name),c("name","rank","normalised_value")]
name rank normalised_value
226 United States 57 0.6888439
76 United Kingdom 52 0.6349033
Not in the way you mean it, but a slightly odd interpretation of the words would be very close, or even exact.Distribution of earnings?
No, a very different interpretation of "Distribution of earnings".Income by some quantile, like median income or income of 25% quantile.
This is getting closer to the interpretation, but not there.Redistribution of earnings by taxation and benefit payments.
No, but similarly close. A much bigger / significant measure of the national priorities than this.Average payout (benefits, employee wages, etc.) per person by the government?
No, but you are thinking on the right lines. Think bigger.Benefits + Education
No, but much closer.Investment (public and private).