Experts say the economic power of the U.S. and the world’s biggest economies will remain stable, and the economies of the world will still be linked by a common currency.

That will not happen if regional variation continues, according to economists at the National Bureau of Economic Research, a nonpartisan think tank.

They said the biggest threat to the global economy from global change is global inequality.

Their paper was published Monday by the Institute of International Finance, a Washington, D.C., think tank and the research arm of the World Bank.

The paper said global inequality could increase as global markets become more competitive, which could reduce demand for the world economy.

It is also possible that global inequality will become worse, the authors said.

Inequality has been on the rise in the developed world since the 1970s, when the share of the top 10 percent of income earners in the U:nst world rose from 12.3 percent in 1970 to 29.7 percent in 2011.

The U.K. and Australia were the first developed countries to have an income share below the U.:nst, with 10.5 percent and 11.4 percent, respectively, according a Pew Research Center study.

“The economic power that the U., the U S., and the U ire in the world today will be the same, but it will be weaker,” said James Berenson, director of the International Center for Policy Analysis at the Brookings Institution.

“That means global inequality is likely to increase, which in turn means global economic growth is likely not to be as strong.”

The researchers used data from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the World Economic Forum, the National Income and Product Accounts, the U :nst Global Competitiveness Report, and other data sources.

They looked at the effects of regional variation in the global economic power, as well as global inequality, for the past 50 years.

The researchers estimated that if regional variations continued, global inequality would grow by 2.5 percentage points per year from 2021 to 2035.

In the short term, regional differences would shrink the global gap by 0.4 percentage points, they found.

But over the long run, regional variation could cause the global average gap to grow by 4.1 percentage points and reduce inequality by 6.3 percentage points over the period, they said.

“Our view is that regional variation is unlikely to have much of an impact on the overall growth of inequality, but this is not to say that regional differences do not have an impact,” the authors wrote.

“If regional variations continue, regional inequality will grow more rapidly than inequality overall, and that means that inequality growth will be more rapid in regions with greater regional variation.”

In addition, they noted that regional variations could have a stronger impact on economic growth than global inequality because it affects global growth and affects how countries respond to globalization.

They added that they found a strong correlation between regional variations and inequality in the past.

“In the U .

S., regional differences have had a strong impact on inequality in terms of increasing inequality relative to global inequality,” the report said.

The authors noted that a large part of inequality in rich countries comes from differences in labor markets.

And they said the effects on inequality were not all negative, with some regions having more inequality than others.

They noted that inequality in countries with high levels of regional inequality has grown in the last 20 years, though they did not say how much.

“Even if regional inequality were to rise more than inequality globally, we would still expect regional inequality to decline in countries that have a higher level of regional variability,” they wrote.

They also noted that some regions had more inequality per person than others and also that inequality varies between countries.

“It is possible that the observed divergence between regions may reflect the extent to which differences between countries are linked to differences in the way people work, or the extent of intergenerational transfers,” they said in the paper.

“However, the observed regional variation between countries in the first half of the 20th century is a result of the high level of inter-generational mobility and of the fact that some countries are more intergenerationally mobile than others.”

The authors added that the current level of inequality is not unusual for countries.

Countries have long had regional variation, they wrote, noting that the economic performance of countries with higher regional inequality are often lower than those with lower regional inequality.