Folks really, really need to be aware of highly intelligent partisan actors wielding data. Case in point is Ben Shapiro, as outlined yesterday – they are very dangerous. Today I want to highlight Martin Wolf of the Financial Times, and his pet hobby: trumpeting the seemingly deleterious effects of income inequality.
The title of his recent editorial is absurd: “Inequality is a threat to our democracies.” Really, Martin? It would be one thing if we lived in a society where the elites truly controlled our everyday lives, such as in a kingdom. Do George Soros and the Koch Brothers have enormous influence over the policy discussion? Yes. But in a highly checked and balanced democracy, do they exert anywhere close to some semblance of control over our day-to-day lives? Absolutely not.
Income inequality is the natural byproduct of the free market economy, which, for some reason, the Obama/Merkel-led global political elites such as Martin Wolf disdain. (The irony is too much, since the political elites get to kick back in their ivory towers and discuss how best to divvy up the economic pie baked by free market capitalism.) Wolf manipulatively employs the following chart to demonstrate how much the economic elites have stepped on the neck of the “little guy” over the last several decades:
This atrocious “analysis” makes no attempt to adjust for the fact that income groups are far from static. Eight years ago I started out my career with a $33,000 salary – well down the income scale. The chart above makes no adjustment for the fact that I have worked my way into the top 10 percent. It is a static chart that assumes income groups remain fixed.
In a free market economy, the upper and lower ends of the income scale are going to perform precisely in line with the chart above, as dictated by the normal forces of supply and demand. The lower end of the income scale is, by mathematical definition, in low demand, and thus unable grow at top-tier rates. This is fact, and if it were otherwise we would be living in Cuba.
Wolf’s insidious conclusion is that he would like to see some form of a large-scale catastrophe in order to reduce income inequality (see following chart). (Since outside of a catastrophe there is only so much Bernie Sanders-style redistribution can do to reduce income inequality.) He and is ilk are really, truly sick. They are elitists who care not one iota about those who pull themselves up by their bootstraps everyday to earn an honest living. Disgusting.