Big peepee=lower GDP

The left always talks about economic and racial inequalities, but what happened to talking about the inequality of penis sizes?

The Atlantic had an article with a chart showing the relationship between penile length and economic growth:

"The University of Helsinki's Tatu Westling points out a surprising strong correlation between a country's GDP growth rate and average penile length. As the chart above shows, countries that averaged smaller penis sizes grew at a faster rate than their larger counterparts between 1960 and 1985. Every centimeter increase in penis size accounted for a 5 to 7 percent reduction in economic growth. The study also showed that overall GDP was at its highest in countries with average-sized penises with GDP falling at the extremes of penis length."

So if big peepee=lower gdp, shouldn't we get rid of all big peepees? I mean that doesn't seem right to me, given that black people aren't feeling so good about race relations right now. If we were to say we need less big peepees in our society in order to simulate our private sector, it would feel like we would be targeting a lot of black people, given that they are the race with the largest peepees.

Government mandated penis size reductions for all? Hopefully Bernard Sanders can introduce a bill in Congress, although I feel like he wouldn't do such a thing given that he has a massive uncircumcised cock. I saw it when he invited me up to his summer house in Vermont. Real nice cock.

Thoughts on this my fellow endowed and unendowed monkeys?