Gross Domestic "Win Shares" And Productivity Losses
Squeezing the super-rich is not a panacea. Although the inequity in the income distribution is pretty stark in America today, there just aren't that many people earning over $1 million, or over $5 million, and you probably can't squeeze them that much further before you start to run into some serious issues with productivity losses [. . .]
(Emphasis supplied.) For those of you who do not know, Silver is a wizard sabremetrician, who made his name as statistical analyst regarding baseball. The Godfather of sabremetricians was Bill James, who developed a concept called win shares - which attempts to describe each players contributions to the total wins of the team.
I was thinking about this when Silver expressed his view of expected productivity losses due to higher tax rates for millionaires. As a general proposition, it is unremarkable to say that higher taxes lead to lower productivity on an individualized basis (how the tax revenues are spent could of course offset that individualized loss - i..e - education, infrastructure, research etc.) But is it specifically true in an meaningful way with regard to increasing the marginal tax rate paid by millionaires? To wit, what is the "win share" produced by millionaires to the gross domestic product and how would that be reduced if their tax rates went up? Let's consider on the flip.
|< Taliban Flogs and Executes Pregnant Woman for Adultery | Judicial Activism For Me, But Not For Thee >|