"...Feldstein never was too good with numbers..."

He doesn't have to be -- he makes up whatever numbers suit him.


On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 11:34 AM, michael yates <[email protected]> wrote:

> In describing the tremendous rise in the share of US income
>
> growth accruing to the richest .1% of income recipients between
>
> 2000 and 2010, Piketty reports that
>
>
> "Recent research , based on matching declared income on tax
>
> returns with corporate compensation records, allows me to
>
> state that the vast majority (60 to 70 percent, depending on
>
> what definitions one chooses) of the top 0.1 percent of the
>
> income hierarchy in 2000– 2010 consists of top managers. By
>
> comparison , athletes, actors, and artists of all kinds make
>
> up less than 5 percent of this group. In this sense, the
>
> new US inequality has much more to do with the advent of
>
> 'supermanagers'” than with that of 'superstars.'”
>
>
> In 2001, that fraudulent hack Martin Feldstein argued in the
>
> New York Times that
>
>
> “Why there has been increasing inequality in this country is one of
>
> the big puzzles in our field and has absorbed a lot of intellectual
>
> effort.” But, this effort has apparently been wasted, since he
>
> goes on to say, “But if you ask me whether we should worry about
>
> the fact that some people on Wall Street and basketball players
>
> are making a lot of money, I say no.”
>
>
> I guess Feldstein never was too good with numbers, given his bullshit
>
> "work" on the harmful impact of social security on capital formation.
>
> No wonder Piketty said that US economists know nothing about anything.
> _______________________________________________
> pen-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
>



-- 
Cheers,

Tom Walker (Sandwichman)
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to