Supporters of individual liberty and national sovereignty have been skeptical of the United Nations, and with good reason. With the support of statists such as George Soros, the U.N. pushes for crazy ideas such as global taxation and global currency.
But there’s another international bureaucracy, also funded by American tax dollars, that is even more pernicious. The Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has the same leftist ideology as the U.N., but it actually has some ability to change policy.
As you can imagine, this always means bigger government and more statism. Here are some examples.
- The OECD has an anti-tax competition project designed to prop up Europe’s bankrupt welfare states.
- The OECD is pushing a “Multilateral Convention” that is designed to become something akin to a World Tax Organization, with the power to persecute nations with free-market tax policy.
- The OECD has endorsed Obama’s class-warfare agenda, publishing documents endorsing “higher marginal tax rates” so that the so-called rich “contribute their fair share.”
- The OECD pulled off a hat trick of bad policy in a 2010 document, promoting a value-added tax, Obama’s global warming agenda, and failed Keynesian stimulus.
- The OECD endorsed Obamacare policies, as I explain in this video.
- The OECD even advocates higher taxes when nations are in the middle of economic crisis.
- The OECD also is pushing for higher taxes in Latin America, based on the odd notion that those nations should copy Europe’s failed welfare states.
With this dismal track record, you probably won’t be surprised to learn that the Paris-based bureaucracy has a new propaganda initiative that seeks to bolster a left-wing redistribution agenda. And as part of this new scheme, it has put together numbers that supposedly show that there is more poverty is the United States than there is in bankrupt and backwards nations such as Greece, Hungary, Portugal, and Turkey.
This isn’t April 1, and I’m not joking. Here’s a chart, produced from the data at this OECD website, which you get to by clicking the “Poverty: Country comparisons” link on this OECD webpage.
You may be wondering whether the bureaucrats at the OECD who put together these numbers are smoking crack or high on crystal meth. Well, they certainly can afford lots of drugs since they get tax-free salaries (just like their counterparts at other international bureaucracies), but these numbers are the not the result of some ketamine-fueled binge.
Instead, the OECD is lying. The website refers to “poverty rate” and “poverty threshold” and “poverty measure,” but the OECD is not measuring poverty. Instead, they have concocted a new – and deliberately misleading – set of data that instead measures the distribution of income.
And if you’re wondering where they got this crazy idea, you probably won’t be surprised to learn that this is a scheme developed by the Obama Administration and it is designed so that “poverty” is only reduced if incomes become more equal, not if poor people become better off.
Even moderates such as Robert Samuelson recognize this is absurd, and here is some of what he wrote.
…the new definition has strange consequences. Suppose that all Americans doubled their incomes tomorrow, and suppose that their spending on food, clothing, housing and utilities also doubled. That would seem to signify less poverty — but not by the new poverty measure. It wouldn’t decline, because the poverty threshold would go up as spending went up. Many Americans would find this weird: People get richer but “poverty” stays stuck.
The most amazing thing about this crazy approach is that it makes it seem as if America has more poverty than nations such as Bangladesh, even though the average “poor” American has much higher living standards than all but the wealthiest people in the developing world.
And it also generates the laughable numbers in the OECD dataset, showing that Turkey and Portugal have less poverty than the United States.
The main thing to understand, though, is that this new approach is part of an ideological campaign to promote bigger government and more redistribution. Which is very much consistent with the OECD’s overall agenda, as this video explains.
The real outrage is that American taxpayers finance the lion’s share of the OECD budget, even though it is a hard-left organization that pushes policies that are contrary to U.S. interests.
And this is why I wrote that defunding the OECD is a minimal test of fiscal seriousness for lawmakers on Capitol Hill.
[…] would decline. No wonder the practitioners of this approach often produce absurd data, such as the OECD’s assertion that there’s more poverty in the United States than in basket case economies such as Greece and […]
[…] answered that question back in […]
[…] these numbers, don’t forget that Hungarians are much poorer than Americas (notwithstanding nonsensical analysis from the […]
[…] first exposed the OECD’s disingenuous approach back in 2012, noting that the Paris-based bureaucrats used an utterly dishonest definition of […]
[…] membership? That certainly seems to have been the case when the OECD put together a staggeringly dishonest measure of poverty that made the U.S. seem like it had more destitution than poor countries such as Greece, Portugal, […]
[…] so much time and effort persecuting low-tax jurisdictions. And some of their work on issues such as poverty and inequality is grotesquely dishonest and […]
[…] P.P.S. If you want to see an utterly dishonest approach to public policy, read how the OECD tried to exaggerate poverty in the United States, so much so that it even tried to imply that there was more poverty in America than Greece. […]
[…] OECD then dishonestly characterizes as a measure of poverty (this is how the OECD came up with the absurd claim that there’s more poverty in the United States than in comparatively poor countries such as […]
[…] Let’s augment that analysis by looking at a graphic the Economist put together several years ago. It’s based on the OECD’s Better-Life Index, which is a bit dodgy since it includes measures such as the Paris-based bureaucracy’s utterly dishonest definition of poverty. […]
[…] worst policy research I’ve ever seen, over nearly four decades in the field, is the OECD’s grotesquely dishonest data on poverty (it even motivated a special page to acknowledge “poverty […]
[…] The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development […]
[…] other words, Greenhouse is relying on data that deliberately confuse absolute living standards and relative living standards. Why? Presumably to try to make the United […]
[…] wonder the practitioners of this approach often produce absurd data, such as the OECD’s assertion that there’s more poverty in the United States than in basket case economies such as Greece […]
[…] other words, Greenhouse is relying on data that deliberately confuse absolute living standards and relative living standards. Why? Presumably to try to make the United […]
[…] other words, Greenhouse is relying on data that deliberately confuse absolute living standards and relative living standards. Why? Presumably to try to make the United […]
[…] Given its track record of shoddy and biased output, is anyone surprised that the Paris-based Organization for Economic […]
[…] deshonesta de pobreza (que es lo que obtenemos de grupos izquierdistas como la ONU y la OCDE , por no mencionar la Asociación de Igualdad de Bienestar, el Instituto de Economía Laboral […]
[…] it has used dodgy, dishonest, and misleading data when pushing big-government policies regarding poverty, pay equity, inequality, and comparative […]
[…] choose a dishonest definition of poverty (which is what we get from leftist groups like the UN and OECD, not to mention the Equal Welfare Association, Germany’s Institute of Labor Economics, and […]
[…] is the same dishonest data manipulation that the OECD uses when exaggerating America’s overall poverty rate (other groups that have used this […]
[…] The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. […]
[…] is the same dishonest data manipulation that the OECD uses when exaggerating America’s overall poverty rate (other groups that have used this deliberately […]
[…] statists at the OECD put together a ranking asserting that poverty is a bigger problem in the United States than in Greece, Portugal, or […]
[…] is the same dishonest data manipulation that the OECD uses when exaggerating America’s overall poverty rate (other groups that have used this […]
[…] it relies on dodgy, dishonest, and misleading data when pushing big-government policies regarding poverty, pay equity, inequality, and comparative […]
[…] don’t like the OECD’s dodgy, dishonest, and misleading use of data on issues such as poverty, pay equity, inequality, and comparative […]
[…] even concocted dishonest poverty numbers to advocate more redistribution in the United […]
[…] the way, since the OECD is a left-leaning bureaucracy that is guilty of periodically rigging numbers against the United States, you can be confident that this AIC data isn’t structured to favor […]
[…] Given its track record of shoddy and biased output, is anyone surprised that the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation […]
[…] instance, the bureaucrats at the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development actually put out a study claiming that there was more poverty in the United States than in nations such as Greece, Portugal, […]
[…] Falsely asserting that there is more poverty in the United States than in poor nations such as Greece, Portugal, Turkey, and Hungary. […]
[…] Falsely asserting that there is more poverty in the United States than in poor nations such as Greece, Portugal, Turkey, and Hungary. […]
[…] if we’re talking about the left’s new definition of poverty (promoted by the statists at the OECD), which is measured relative to a nation’s median level of income, then you can have […]
[…] are several assertions here that cry out for correction (poverty indices should measure actual poverty rather than income distribution) and elaboration (is inequality bad when all income classes in America have more income than their […]
“Instead, the OECD is lying.”
Yeah, the whole world is after you and conspiring to taint the greatness of America.
Abstract of this garbage of an article: a pathetically biased and deluded author can’t cope with reality and don’t know a flying fuck about the daily life of millions of his fellow citizens.
Meanwhile the US are ranked #27 on the inequality-adjusted human development index, have the highest income inequalities of the OECD countries, and the bottom 90% of the population haven’t seen the color of the GDP growth in the last 35 years (and actually got poorer through the inflation).
Enjoy your blinders buddy, it’s not like the rest of the world cares.
[…] even concocts dishonest poverty numbers to advocate more redistribution in the United […]
[…] even concocts dishonest poverty numbers to advocate more redistribution in the United […]
[…] even concocts dishonest poverty numbers to advocate more redistribution in the United […]
[…] You probably won’t be surprised, given their history of mendacity, to learn that the left-wing bureaucrats at the Paris-based OECD also are peddling dishonest […]
[…] You probably won’t be surprised, given their history of mendacity, to learn that the left-wing bureaucrats at the Paris-based OECD also are peddling dishonest […]
[…] Falsely asserting that there is more poverty in the United States than in poor nations such as Greece, Portugal, Turkey, and Hungary. […]
[…] Falsely asserting that there is more poverty in the United States than in poor nations such as Greece, Portugal, Turkey, and Hungary. […]
[…] even concocts dishonest poverty numbers to advocate more redistribution in the United […]
[…] bureaucracies such as the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development fabricate deliberately dishonest numbers when advocating more welfare spending in the United States. But we’d be much better off if we […]
[…] Robert Rector exposes the dishonest tactic (promoted by the Obama Administration and used by the OECD) of measuring income differences instead of actual […]
[…] bureaucracies such as the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development fabricate deliberately dishonest numbers when advocating more welfare spending in the United States. But we’d be much better off if we […]
[…] bureaucracies such as the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development fabricate deliberately dishonest numbers when advocating more welfare spending in the United States. But we’d be much better off if we […]
[…] bureaucracies such as the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development fabricate deliberately dishonest numbers when advocating more welfare spending in the United States. But we’d be much better off if we […]
[…] I must say that the sloppiness in this inequality study is trivial compared to the junk-riddled methodology of the OECD’s poverty study, which actually purported to show that there’s more deprivation in America than there is in […]
[…] response: Also hard to argue with this suggestion. It’s very worrisome how leftists are operating behind the scenes to push more […]
[…] amounts of redistribution and dependency. And you won’t be surprised to learn that the OECD supports this dishonest and misleading […]
[…] very much reminds me of the OECD’s laughably dishonest research on poverty, which purports to show that there is more poverty in the United States than there is in […]
[…] even concocts dishonest poverty numbers to advocate more redistribution in the United […]
[…] even concocts dishonest poverty numbers to advocate more redistribution in the United […]
[…] the left wants to redefine poverty in ways that enable redistribution to people who aren’t […]
[…] the left wants to redefine poverty in ways that enable redistribution to people who aren’t […]
[…] even concocts dishonest poverty numbers to advocate more redistribution in the United […]
[…] If you want to get agitated, click here to see how a bureaucracy in Paris is using American tax dollars to push a crazy new definition of […]
[…] statists at the OECD put together a ranking asserting that poverty is a bigger problem in the United States than in Greece, Portugal, or […]
[…] Shifting to a bigger stage, my least favorite international bureaucracy has made the preposterous claim that poverty is a bigger problem in America than it is in basket-case nations such as Greece and […]
[…] Shifting to a bigger stage, my least favorite international bureaucracy has made the preposterous claim that poverty is a bigger problem in America than it is in basket-case nations such as Greece and […]
[…] Speaking of poverty, you may be surprised that bureaucrats at the OECD assert that America has more poverty than some very poor nations. But that’s only because the Paris-based bureaucracy is trying to advance Obama’s […]
[…] I explained last year, this crazy approach makes it seem as if there’s more poverty in America than in nations such […]
[…] OECD, in an effort to promote redistributionism, has concocted absurdly misleading statistics claiming that there is more poverty in the US than in Greece, Hungary, Portugal, or […]
[…] I’m particularly nauseated by the OECD’s support for value-added taxes and their ridiculous assertion that poverty is higher in America than Greece or Turkey. […]
[…] OECD, in an effort to promote redistributionism, has concocted absurdly misleading statistics claiming that there is more poverty in the US than in Greece, Hungary, Portugal, or […]
[…] And the claim about less poverty is laughable. I’m guessing the author naively relied upon the slipshod analysis from the statists at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Those bureaucrats put together a moving-goalposts measure of income distribution and falsely categorized it as a tool for measuring p…. […]
[…] And the claim about less poverty is laughable. I’m guessing the author naively relied upon the slipshod analysis from the statists at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Those bureaucrats put together a moving-goalposts measure of income distribution and falsely categorized it as a tool for measuring p…. […]
Poverty can be “relative” or “absolute.” According to the World Bank, “poverty” is purchasing power of less than $1.25/day. If we used that, then a lot of starving, homeless folk would not be considered “poor.” Similarly, what is an acceptable standard of living in one country is a scandal in another. In the middle ages, the wealthiest lacked running water, indoor toilets, and electricity. Would you call them “poor”? Today, you can’t get a job or function in society without electricity, baths with running water, and even an internet connection. In the early 1980s, owning your own PC was the height of luxury. “Relative” poverty refers to RELATIVE to one’s own society. How do you measure that? How do you define that? 1/2 the median income has been widely accepted as an internationally comparable relative measure of poverty, so you are comparing apples to apples, instead of to oranges.
[…] statists at the OECD put together a ranking asserting that poverty is a bigger problem in the United States than in Greece, Portugal, or […]
[…] statists at the OECD put together a ranking asserting that poverty is a bigger problem in the United States than in Greece, Portugal, or […]
[…] statists at the OECD put together a ranking asserting that poverty is a bigger problem in the United States than in Greece, Portugal, or […]
[…] To get your blood boiling, read this horrifying post about how a left-wing international bureaucracy conspiring with the Obama White Hous… to redefine poverty in ways that make America look bad. Rate this:Share […]
[…] Porter got much of his information from the OECD. Dan Mitchell describes the OECD thusly….. […]
[…] And the claim about less poverty is laughable. I’m guessing the author naively relied upon the slipshod analysis from the statists at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Those bureaucrats put together a moving-goalposts measure of income distribution and falsely categorized it as a tool for measuring p…. […]
[…] OECD, in an effort to promote redistributionism, has concocted absurdly misleading statistics claiming that there is more poverty in the US than in Greece, Hungary, Portugal, or […]
[…] With support from left-wing international bureaucracies such as the OECD, the Obama White House wants to rig the poverty numbers to justify even more redistribution. Rate […]
[…] OECD, in an effort to promote redistributionism, has concocted absurdly misleading statistics claiming that there is more poverty in the US than in Greece, Hungary, Portugal, or […]
[…] OECD, in an effort to promote redistributionism, has concocted absurdly misleading statistics claiming that there is more poverty in the US than in Greece, Hungary, Portugal, or […]
[…] Financial Times reports that the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which is reflexively supportive of bigger government and more intervention, has endorsed eurobonds. Mr Hollande…won backing from the OECD, which in its twice-yearly […]
Reminds me of the Dr. Evil from the past demanding a $1 million ransom for not blowing up the world and everybody laughing at him. What nonsense.
Now what does OECD stand for again?
Organization for the Endorsement of Complacency and Decline ?
Organization of Excellence Contraction and Decline ?
Organization for the Encouragement of Complacency and Decline ?
Organization of Endeavor Curtailment and Decline ?
Organization for the Extinguishment of Competition and Decline ?
Organization for the Enrichment of Civil-servants and Decline ?
Organization of Enticement Curtailment and Decline ?
Organization of Effort Curbing and Decline ?
Organization of Excellence Curtailment and Decline ?
Organization of Efficiency Cutting and Decline ?
The “decline” ending remains in all variations because that is the terminal fate of Western World voter lemmings – and the politicians they elect to sell them snakeskin oil shortcuts to prosperity.