wealth

Business week has a chart of the US "Houshold" wealth:

• Real Net Household Wealth Hits a New High

• Distribution of Wealth (Page 7/8 of pdf)
• Top % 1 5 10 20
  Total net worth held 30 54 67 81
  

Since I was suggesting we consider taxing Wealth, rather than, or partially in replacement for, income, as more accuratly reflecting the social benefit that people get from the country, I am linking to this article.

Note: I will add other links as appropriate and any comments that people want to add to point to more information on the US Wealth, its distribution, or other related material is welcome.

Other related Blogs...

• Liberal vs Progressive

• "Liberals" in our current parlance are those who focus on using taxpayer money to help better society.
• "Progressive" are those who focus on using government power to make large institutions play by a set of rules.

Economics -- Online Economics Textbooks

• Household Wealth [graphs] Wealth and Savings: Mandel Gets It Half Right @AngryBear
• Housing Bubble -- From 1890 till 2003 the Housing Index has beeen stable and only after 2003 has it doubled.
  
• Prices and Currency: [graphs] The two Bens @FinancialSense
  
• National Debt (percent of GDP) @BlogCritics is relatively stable: [graphs]The Debt is only increasing as an absolute number

• The Straight Truth About the Bush Economy by Gene Sperling (Think Progress)
  
• Why This Economy Stinks Dec 7, 2005 (Blogging of the President)
  
• The Budgetary Effects of the Bush Tax Cuts: Dec 7, 2005 (Angry bear)
  
• Job growth following the 2003 Bush tax cuts: Dec 6, 2005 -- the rest of the story, (Angry bear)
  

Un-Related 100 most often misspelled words

headstart

Asymmetrical Information, in "Does IQ Matter", feels that Head Start programs are not very useful and points to the study of the more "effective" program, " is useless, and even expensive interventions like the Perry pre-school project produced results that are distinctly disappointing from a cognitive perspective.

Of course the conclusions are debatable, the conclusion of the Perry project was:

• A benefit-cost analysis was conducted by estimating the monetary value of the program and its effects in constant 2001 dollars discounted annually at 3%. Dividing the $105,324 in benefits per participant by the $14,716 in cost per participant results in a benefit-cost ratio of 716% of the program investment returned to the public.