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 EuropeÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s bankrupt welfare states.
- The OECD is pushing a Ã¢â‚¬Å“Multilateral ConventionÃ¢â‚¬Â 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 ObamaÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s class-warfare agenda, publishing documents endorsing Ã¢â‚¬Å“higher marginal tax ratesÃ¢â‚¬Â so that the so-called rich Ã¢â‚¬Å“contribute their fair share.Ã¢â‚¬Â
- The OECD pulled off a hat trick of bad policy in a 2010 document, promoting a value-added tax, ObamaÃ¢â‚¬â„¢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 (click for larger image), 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 Ã¢â‚¬â€ but not by the new poverty measure. It wouldnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t decline, because the poverty threshold would go up as spending went up. Many Americans would find this weird: People get richer but Ã¢â‚¬Å“povertyÃ¢â‚¬Â 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.