> It's the same with your $200k debt per US citizen number.
Not really: in a progressive system, one's share of that debt when net worth is considered is probably more like $20k, thanks to wealth disparity. And again, given equitable spending per citizen (regardless of taxes paid), they really do have about $160k per citizen in that investment fund.
I'm curious what you're getting at with 'progressive system' statement.
I was just pointing out the absolute division of the numbers for both seem like a similar, if ultimately meaningless, metric.
I won't profess to be an economist and/or understand the intricate differences between the US and NO government taxing/budgeting/accounting, so any enlightenment is welcome.
Not really: in a progressive system, one's share of that debt when net worth is considered is probably more like $20k, thanks to wealth disparity. And again, given equitable spending per citizen (regardless of taxes paid), they really do have about $160k per citizen in that investment fund.