Five days ago, I wrote about a big increase in U.S. millionaires.

That column was the economic version of a Rorschach test. But instead of reacting to an inkblot, the goal was to elicit instinctive responses to a chart showing many more rich people in the United States. Should we be happy or sad?

Today’s column will focus on the opposite outcome.

Here’s a visual from a story in the U.K.-based Telegraph. As you can see, there’s been a huge drop in the number of British millionaires over the past few years.

So which country has a better trend? Is it better to be the U.S., where the number of millionaires is expanding, or the U.K., where the number is shrinking?

There are two reasons why left-leaning readers might instinctively prefer the outcome we see in the United Kingdom.

• If you think the economy is a fixed pie, you prefer the U.K. After all, fewer millionaires means everyone else will have more money.
• If you fixate on inequality, you also prefer the U.K. because almost certainly there is now a lower Gini Coefficient, which means more equality.

I suspect right-leaning readers will have a different perspective.

They’ll presumably agree with some of the analysis from the accompanying article. Here are some excerpts.

The Adam Smith Institute (ASI), a think tank, estimated there were now 442,000 people in Britain with wealth of more than £1m, down 7pc from last year and the lowest level since the 2008 financial crash. It blamed the decline on falling property prices and an exodus of wealthy individuals following Labour’s changes to the non-dom regime. Mitchell Palmer, from the think tank, said the shrinking millionaire population should be viewed as “a warning signal”. He said: “Every millionaire that leaves means less capital for British businesses, fewer international connections and weaker entrepreneurial spirit in the economy.” …Andrew Griffith, the shadow business secretary, said: “Whatever their personal finances, everyone should care about Britain having fewer millionaires…creating jobs and businesses here. It’s a competitive world, and when young and ambitious people are voting with their feet and leaving your country, that’s a shameful sign.”

What’s my two cents?

I obviously think it’s good to have more (of the right kind of) rich people. That’s a recipe for improving my life.

But I always like to quantify things, so I went to the IMF’s big database to compare recent U.S. and U.K. data on per-capita economic output.

Lo and behold, the United States is richer.

And, contrary to what convergence theory would suggest, the United States is also getting richer at a faster rate.

So maybe, just maybe, it is good for all of us when there are more rich people.

Practically speaking, the big takeaway is that bad policy choices by recent U.K. governments (both Labour and Conservative) are having bad consequences.

And since the overall level of economic liberty in the U.S. hasn’t changed much (some good policies offset by some bad policies), it’s no surprise that there’s a growing lead over the U.K.

P.S. It’s almost as if British politicians read David Azerrad’s article and thought it was serious advice rather than satire.