Tonight Michael Moore was on Jay Leno's program and stated that the top one per-cent had more wealth than the bottom 95 per-cent combined. [Or was it income? Doesn't matter.] My reaction is "So what?" A better measure is the distribution of consumption. I'm sure they don't eat as much, drive as many cars, live in as many houses, wear as many clothes, or use as much medical care. My concern is how I live, not how the top one per-cent live. I'm sure that I am in the 95 per-cent but I live very well.
If the top one per-cent gave their wealth to the 95 per-cent, the latter couldn't consume twice as much goods and services because there wouldn't be enough to go around. Instead, prices would go up.
Am I missing something?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment