Normally I form my perception of what is best through examining results in the world. So my belief of the best form of economy or the best way to manage is based on what has the best results. However, no matter how I try to be objective my personal beliefs factor into how I evaluate the results. In most matters I think my personal beliefs color my judgement but to a reasonable extent.

On the topic of wealth concentration I may let my belief that human beings deserve a reasonable standard of living to color my beliefs to a larger extent than normal. Still I believe that economic performance is better when the concentration of wealth does not become too severe. What is too severe? I am not sure, that is part of the reason for this page to help me develop my ideas.

How do I measure economic performance. I don't have a specific answer but in general terms by the standard of living of those in the economy. And I believe failing to meet certain minimums for all people is more important that providing fabulous wealth to a lucky few. However, I also believe, an economy will do a better job of meeting those goals by allowing for those that provide value to be rewarded and rewarded well. So I am seeking to clarify my understanding of what are good results, what might be signs of trouble in economic data etc..

1. National Bureau of Economic Research - income data - Consentration of wealth data from 1913 through 1998 in the USA. Includes some very interesting data on % of income earned by top 1% and top 10%. In addition, includes interesting data on share of income by capital, labor and entrepreneurial
2. Average-Wage Earners Fall Behind - by Jonathan Krim and Griff Witte, Washington Post, Dec 2004. An exploration of those attempting to make it in the new "middle class" economic status in the USA. This has to do with consentration of wealth as a measure of results and of how