"What data seems to say is that as national income grows, people do not spend their extra money in ways that yield significant and lasting increase in measured satisfaction." (p. 77)We in the social service industry—which includes the religion business—already know that wealth does not equate with happiness. I can drive you past some of the finest homes in places I have done ministry and tell you stories of how wealth does not translate into happiness.
That part of the book, "Luxury Fever," is no surprise to almost anyone who has been exposed to the lives of the "rich and famous." On the other hand, we should recognize that those with wealth are also most likely to be among the happiest and healthiest among us.
The value in the book is not its dealing with the down side of luxury, but with economics.
Most clergy are greatly deficient in two major areas. One is science, the other, economics. Since the Judeo-Christian Bible has so much to say about both cosmology and materialism, you would think that clergy would be more informed about these areas.
Not being an economist I cannot judge whether Frank's outlook has merit. Whether his conclusions are valid do not take away from the educative value of the book. He invokes the name of Adam Smith in ways that Christians invoke the name of Jesus Christ. Adam Smith is the chief guru of modern economics. If you don't know it you should. There are more references to Adam Smith than to anyone else in the book.
In case you don't read the book, but want to know the "great commandment" of Adam Smith's insight, this is a quote:
"Adam Smith introduced his concept of 'the invisible hand,' which went on to become one of the most celebrated and influential ideas of all time. His insight was that individuals seeking to promote only their own interests in the marketplace would be driven 'as if by an invisible hand,' to promote the greatest good for all." (pp. 145, 147)Frank does not let this theory go unchallenged. Even Adam Smith had some exceptions. Sometimes the independent choices of some negatively affect the situations of others. There are causes for restraints.
Skipping over pages and pages of comment and research information about the relationship between economic policies and sociological results, we move to the author's chief idea, the progressive consumption tax. Simply stated, this is an escalated tax based on excessive consumption. In other words, taxation on necessities would be minimal, taxation on luxuries increasingly large. He argues that this would be good both for the economy in general and for the wealth of individuals. He concludes:
"Whatever its political future, the progressive consumption tax is, on the best available evidence, a compellingly good idea—one that will fee up literally trillions of dollars each year to spend in ways that will create lasting improvements in the quality of our lives." (p. 279)I cringe at the simplistic things we clergy have been saying about the gaining of wealth and use of money. Whether Robert Frank's economic theories are valid or not, at least they are informative. Rather than tell people to "Go sell what you have and give to the poor," maybe we should be saying "Go tax what you spend beyond your needs and there will be no poor."
It's worth a read and some thought and discussion.