Nobel Prize in Economics for HIDING CLASS INEQUALITY Under Bogus Words about 'Differences in Income Between Nations.'
Henry Kissinger must be smiling while holding his Nobel Peace prize.
Leave it to the Nobel Committee (you know, the ones who gave the Nobel Peace Prize to Henry Kissinger) to cover up the fact of CLASS inequality by substituting the bogus concept of “differences in income between nations.” Here’s the Boston Globe’s announcement of the prize:
FACT: If all the wealth of the world were somehow magically redistributed among all people on the planet equally, to make the billions of poor people in places like India, Ethiopia, Haiti and Bangladesh equal in wealth to Americans and everybody else, then at least 45% of American households (considered here to be 2.6 people) would be richer, not poorer. And far more households would have qualitatively better lives.
The above fact is shown to be true in my Substack post titled, “What Would GLOBAL Wealth Equality Mean? Almost half of U.S. families would be RICHER, and almost all would be better off.” That article does the arithmetic (that one does not need to be an MIT professor to carry out!) to show that most people of the world—including Americans—suffer from CLASS inequality, not “differences in income between countries.”
Think about what this focus on “differences in income between countries” covers up.
This recent Nobel prize in economics, had it been given during the days of slavery in the United States, would—by its current logic and focus—have been awarded to economists doing top notch research into the “differences in income [a.k.a. profitability] between slave plantations.” This research would have, to use the words in the above-linked article, “demonstrated the importance of societal institutions for a country’s plantation’s prosperity.”
The ruling elite of the world want economists to tell them how to get even richer at the expense of the have-nots of the world whom they treat like dirt.
If all the wealth of the world were shared equally for every man, woman and child then (as my above-linked article shows):
A family of four would thus own a bit more than $227,200 of wealth. The average number of persons per "household" (as opposed to family) is about 2.6, so a household this size would have $147,680 of wealth. This, recall, is if GLOBAL wealth were distributed equally.
To put this in context regarding Americans, consider this. Many American families have zero or less than zero net worth. "A recent Clever Real Estate survey asked Americans the approximate total value of their savings, investments and assets, minus their debt, and about half of Americans (52%) report their net worth is less than $30,000. Even more alarming, 25% of Americans said their net worth is $0 or negative—meaning they owe more in debt than the value of their assets." [source here]
On the high end, of course, some families own billions of dollars of net worth. The Rockefeller family fortune is conservatively estimated to be at least $8.4 billion. The Waltons who own Wal-Mart have a family fortune that is $267 billion.
The ruling class tells Americans that we are the wealthy people of the world and should feel lucky (or guilty) for not being poor like people in Bangladesh. The ruling class absolutely CENSORS the fact that most Americans, along with most people in Bangladesh, etc., live much worse off because of the very rich who live in America AND Bangladesh (and India as I wrote about here) and Russia and China (as I wrote about here) and so on.