Prosperity Without Wealth

"Once again I am caught in the glare of ageism and misogyny that permeates the world we live in."--Madonna, responding to criticism of her appearance at the Grammys

***

The top 10 percent of households in the United States earn about 33.5 percent of all income, but they pay 45.1 percent of income-related taxes, including Social Security and Medicare taxes. In other words, their share of all income-related taxes is 1.35 times larger than their share of income. That is the most progressive income tax share of any OECD nation. In Germany, the top 10 percent earn 29.2 percent of the income and pay 31.2 percent of income-related taxes, 1.07 times their share of income. The French top 10 percent earn 25.5 percent of the income and pay 28.0 percent of the income taxes, 1.10 times their share of income.--Gramm et al

***

Tracking Of An Eagle Over A 20 Year Period  

***

Prosperity Without Wealth

Stuppa writing on the strange paper in Nature on 'degrowth,' subtitled “Wealthy countries can create prosperity while using less materials and energy if they abandon economic growth as an objective:”

'To begin with, it is sad to see one of the most prestigious journals (the same journal that published the Watson and Crick paper on DNA…) is publishing this kind of rubbish. The article does not have a single piece of data. It is just a manifesto for a deindustrialization of the west, filled with naïve and simplistic comments. For example “it is necessary to ensure universal access to high-quality health care”. Nobody disagrees, but do they realize that such health care requires expensive doctors, expensive medications, expensive machinery (MRI, CAT, etc.)? And why would big pharma invest in discovery if their board of directors are more interested in the environment than they are in dividends and returns? And why would a kid invest 10+ years in becoming a doctor, with gruesome hours, if he cannot make a bunch of money at the end? Sure…love for humanity, etc etc, but at the end if you leave it to passion we simply won’t have enough people to go around.

But what is even more sad is to see that most of the authors are very successful and highly published and highly cited academics. This tells us that this is not a fringe movement. It is a movement that, in Gramsci’s words, has accomplished the long march in the institutions, and now controls funding, publications, etc.'

Just an estimate of costs of this brave new world. The ten-year assumption of the cost of universal healthcare would be an additional $30 to $40 trillion dollars. Trillion. Additional.

And Freeman in the WSJ on the same article:

'Prosperity without profits? The piece goes on to suggest plans for universal income and canceling international debts and by now readers may be getting the feeling that this is not so much about saving the environment as it is about tearing out the institutions of capitalism root and branch.'