This only covers the period to 2010, - since then inequality has
increased sharply: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/01/05/how-inequality-made-these-western-countries-poorer/?postshare=3451455311226652&tid=ss_fb
This only covers the period to 2010, - since then inequality has
increased sharply: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/01/05/how-inequality-made-these-western-countries-poorer/?postshare=3451455311226652&tid=ss_fb
This only covers the period to 2010, - since then inequality has
increased sharply: >https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/01/05/how-inequality-made-these-western-countries-poorer/?postshare=3451455311226652&tid=ss_fb
On Sun, 14 Feb 2016 22:31:42 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
This only covers the period to 2010, - since then inequality has
increased sharply: >>https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/01/05/how-inequality-made-these-western-countries-poorer/?postshare=3451455311226652&tid=ss_fb
Why post this in nz.general with no linkage to NZ?
On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 10:11:53 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
On Sun, 14 Feb 2016 22:31:42 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
This only covers the period to 2010, - since then inequality has >>>increased sharply: >>>https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/01/05/how-inequality-made-these-western-countries-poorer/?postshare=3451455311226652&tid=ss_fb
Why post this in nz.general with no linkage to NZ?
Read the article - New Zealand features prominently - for example:
""Here are the countries that missed out on most growth, according to
the OECD:
1. New Zealand: New Zealand's economy could have grown by 44 percent
between 1990 and 2010, but the country did only achieve 28 percent
growth due to inequality. Hence, it lost 15.5 percentage points --
more than any other country. "
On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 10:11:53 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>[snip]
wrote:
On Sun, 14 Feb 2016 22:31:42 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
This only covers the period to 2010, - since then inequality has >>>increased sharply: >>>https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/01/05/how-inequality-made-these-western-countries-poorer/?postshare=3451455311226652&tid=ss_fb
Why post this in nz.general with no linkage to NZ?
Read the article - New Zealand features prominently - for example:
On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 21:49:29 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 10:11:53 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>wrote:[snip]
On Sun, 14 Feb 2016 22:31:42 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:
This only covers the period to 2010, - since then inequality has >>>>increased sharply: >>>>https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/01/05/how-inequality-made-these-western-countries-poorer/?postshare=3451455311226652&tid=ss_fb
Why post this in nz.general with no linkage to NZ?
Read the article - New Zealand features prominently - for example:
I have limited time Rich. If you cite a Washington Post article
without specifically mentioning any NZ connection I (and probably
others) wont waste time reading it.
On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 10:56:05 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 21:49:29 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 10:11:53 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>wrote:[snip]
On Sun, 14 Feb 2016 22:31:42 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>wrote:
This only covers the period to 2010, - since then inequality has >>>>>increased sharply: >>>>>https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/01/05/how-inequality-made-these-western-countries-poorer/?postshare=3451455311226652&tid=ss_fb
Why post this in nz.general with no linkage to NZ?
Read the article - New Zealand features prominently - for example:
I have limited time Rich. If you cite a Washington Post article
without specifically mentioning any NZ connection I (and probably
others) wont waste time reading it.
Fair point Crash - here is a bit more:
Rising inequality holds back economic growth -- according to a recent
report by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
(OECD).
The organization, which is primarily composed of high-income
countries, analyzed economic growth from 1990 to 2010 and found that
almost all 21 examined countries missed out on economic growth due to
rising inequalities. (We take a closer look at the countries that were >hardest hit in the second half of this post.)
"When income inequality rises, economic growth falls," the authors of
the report concluded.
They explained their findings by pointing out that wealth gaps hold
back the skills development of children -- particularly those with
parents who have a poorer education background. In other words: A lack
of access to high-quality and long-term education among poorer
citizens in many OECD countries hurts the economy.
The authors did not examine the impact of a country achieving zero
inequality (something that would come close to idealized communism),
but used inequality levels and economic growth in 1990 as their
reference, which they compared to data from 2010.
The wealth gap in OECD countries is now at its highest level since 30
years, as this chart below shows.
<see link for chart>
Economically, the authors are particularly worried about the gap
between low-income households and the rest of the population. "In
contrast, no evidence is found that those with high incomes pulling
away from the rest of the population harms growth," the authors wrote.
"Since 2008, the argument that inequality is causing economic losses
has gained steam. But the fact that this study was released by the
OECD has surprised me," Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for
Economic and Policy Research, told The Washington Post. Particularly
before the financial crisis, many economists considered inequality as
a useful corollary to economic growth -- an assumption the recent OECD
study tries to rebuke.
Here are the countries that missed out on most growth, according to
the OECD:
1. New Zealand: New Zealand's economy could have grown by 44 percent
between 1990 and 2010, but the country did only achieve 28 percent
growth due to inequality. Hence, it lost 15.5 percentage points --
more than any other country. This is particularly surprising, given
that New Zealand was once considered a paradise of equality, as Max >Rashbrooke, the author of a book called Inequality: A New Zealand
Crisis, pointed out in the Guardian newspaper.
"New Zealand halved its top tax rate, cut benefits by up to a quarter
of their value, and dramatically reduced the bargaining power – and
therefore the share of national income – of ordinary workers.
Thousands of people lost their jobs as manufacturing work went
overseas, and there was no significant response with increased trade
training or skills programs, a policy failure that is ongoing,"
Rashbrooke writes in the op-ed. He also blames New Zealand for a lack
of affordable homes which led to higher rents and unpaid mortgages. "
___________________
Such is the legacy of Roger Douglas and Ruth Richardson . . . .
On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 10:56:05 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 21:49:29 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 10:11:53 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>wrote:[snip]
On Sun, 14 Feb 2016 22:31:42 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>wrote:
This only covers the period to 2010, - since then inequality has >>>>>increased sharply: >>>>>https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/01/05/how-inequality-made-these-western-countries-poorer/?postshare=3451455311226652&tid=ss_fb
Why post this in nz.general with no linkage to NZ?
Read the article - New Zealand features prominently - for example:
I have limited time Rich. If you cite a Washington Post article
without specifically mentioning any NZ connection I (and probably
others) wont waste time reading it.
Fair point Crash - here is a bit more:
Rising inequality holds back economic growth -- according to a recent
report by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
(OECD).
The organization, which is primarily composed of high-income
countries, analyzed economic growth from 1990 to 2010 and found that
almost all 21 examined countries missed out on economic growth due to
rising inequalities. (We take a closer look at the countries that were hardest hit in the second half of this post.)
"When income inequality rises, economic growth falls," the authors of
the report concluded.
They explained their findings by pointing out that wealth gaps hold
back the skills development of children -- particularly those with
parents who have a poorer education background. In other words: A lack
of access to high-quality and long-term education among poorer
citizens in many OECD countries hurts the economy.
The authors did not examine the impact of a country achieving zero
inequality (something that would come close to idealized communism),
but used inequality levels and economic growth in 1990 as their
reference, which they compared to data from 2010.
The wealth gap in OECD countries is now at its highest level since 30
years, as this chart below shows.
<see link for chart>
Economically, the authors are particularly worried about the gap
between low-income households and the rest of the population. "In
contrast, no evidence is found that those with high incomes pulling
away from the rest of the population harms growth," the authors wrote.
"Since 2008, the argument that inequality is causing economic losses
has gained steam. But the fact that this study was released by the
OECD has surprised me," Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for
Economic and Policy Research, told The Washington Post. Particularly
before the financial crisis, many economists considered inequality as
a useful corollary to economic growth -- an assumption the recent OECD
study tries to rebuke.
Here are the countries that missed out on most growth, according to
the OECD:
1. New Zealand: New Zealand's economy could have grown by 44 percent
between 1990 and 2010, but the country did only achieve 28 percent
growth due to inequality. Hence, it lost 15.5 percentage points --
more than any other country. This is particularly surprising, given
that New Zealand was once considered a paradise of equality, as Max Rashbrooke, the author of a book called Inequality: A New Zealand
Crisis, pointed out in the Guardian newspaper.
"New Zealand halved its top tax rate, cut benefits by up to a quarter
of their value, and dramatically reduced the bargaining power - and
therefore the share of national income - of ordinary workers.
Thousands of people lost their jobs as manufacturing work went
overseas, and there was no significant response with increased trade
training or skills programs, a policy failure that is ongoing,"
Rashbrooke writes in the op-ed. He also blames New Zealand for a lack
of affordable homes which led to higher rents and unpaid mortgages. "
___________________
Such is the legacy of Roger Douglas and Ruth Richardson . . . .
| Sysop: | sneaky |
|---|---|
| Location: | Ashburton,NZ |
| Users: | 31 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 188:38:41 |
| Calls: | 2,082 |
| Calls today: | 5 |
| Files: | 11,137 |
| Messages: | 947,673 |