What I don't get about progressives is their apparent birth right to mind everyone else's business. If one group is more industrious and has a different outcome, there must be something wrong with that. My world is just fine. I don't understand what gives them the right to regulate and tax my world out of existence because they feel it should be a different way than I worked to make it. How is it more their right to regulate me than it is my right to live freely? I didn't give them permission, who did?

Couple that propensity with a win at any cost approach and we wind up with fudged numbers, bad science, and a room full of one Worlders demanding we do this or that. Who gave the one Worlders the right to demand anything. I think thet did. I think they held a meeting, started making plans, did it again, created some publicity. I think they decided they were above us, and we let them!

The ultimate backup for all governments is the use of force, which is the primary reason to keep the government small with a minimum of laws. We have fallen so far away from that goal that we are becoming, or perhaps have become an oligarchy.

just one more know it all looking for his 15 minutes of fame. a waste of time demonstrating his in adequate knowledge of the subject. he has obviously never read another French economist by the name of Claude Frederic Bastiat. If I were to speak to this fellow who in my opinion is a clown I would recommend "The Bastiat Collection second edition".

He said he had to adjust some of the raw data. How and why? It's shameful top economic people meet and praise him without any scrutiny.

First of all, any wealth created at the end of the sword of crony capitalism is skewing any data that exists. How could one write an analysis of capital and capitalism without accounting for such.
When your premise is redistribution through government intervention, while in fact the governments of the world have been a large catalyst of wealth concentration through crony capitalism, is just irony at its pinnacle.

I was reading the books review at democracy journal after seeing it recommended by Greg Makiws blog. For the book to get so much attention is interesting because of its agenda and in the review the author states that (paraphrase and accurate) even if piky's numbers are off this book is still important because it has people taking about it...in other words, so what if he lied, the purpose was to make income equality and worldwide tax a topic.

What a croque of...

But hey it's wonderful life!

These types of analyses have no control set, and are little more than well-formulated opinions.
He should look at the income disparity in communist countries since their individual revolutions. Perhaps the conclusion is all government is inherently evil and must be limited or occasionally reset.
Friedman looked at almost the same data and came to the conclusion that although income disparity exists, there is overwhelming evidence that the poor get more well off ONLY when the rich get richer, consequent with the overall GDP moving up!
Popular economics in this world of "It's not my fault. I'm really talented. He is so lucky..." is going to ruin this country.
I wonder if the French Prof. was funded by the French Government to write this...redundant right?

When confirmation bias just isn't enough?

Well said.