I’d guess almost everyone here is in that red section (or the dark blue above it).
So, it that trend healthy for a country? Any country? Can a country withstand just a few people controlling more and more and more wealth (the trend is exactly what many of us predicted decades ago).
I’d say it’s getting more unhealthy and wouldn’t be as bad as it is now if richer people couldn’t pick up the phone and call politicians and get tax cuts, legislation in their favor, regulations voided, preferential treatment, etc). If the playing field was level (so, say, republican posters here had as much clout as any other americans) the wealth of the country wouldn’t be sucked upward to a small number of Americans (while the rest live paycheck to paycheck or can’t pay their bills).
It’s a bit refreshing when an actual billionaire tells the truth about what’s happening and the parallels to historic US trends…
"The wealth gap is at its widest point since the late 1930s, with the top 1% owning more than the bottom 90% combined, “which,” Dalio notes, “is the same sort of wealth gap that existed during the 1935-40 period (a period that brought in an era of great internal and external conflicts for most countries).”
Most people in the bottom 60% “are poor,” he writes. About 40% of all Americans would struggle to raise $400 in the event of an emergency, he says, citing a recent Federal Reserve study. The childhood poverty rate stands at 17.5% and has not shown meaningful improvement in decades. That, in turn, leads to poor academic achievement, low productivity and low incomes."
I don’t expect the outcomes to be the same but…does everybody have access to a free education through High School? Does everybody attend at the same rate? Do all of the students have parents that are dedicated to those they brought into the world in getting their education? Is everybody equal in the amount of effort they give of themselves? Does everybody sacrifice today’s wants, knowing that their needs will be more expensive as they age? The answer to all of these questions is no…so the outcomes are different. It’s a long way…to the top…if ya wanna rock and roll.
Did they make their money by outsourcing, importing, and globalization?
We need to distinguish between those unamerican elites who need punishment and real american rich folks who need protecting before discussing such things.
There is no entitlement to property and no person is entitled to the property of another, regardless of how envious they are of that property.
The government should not engage in egalitarian wealth distribution schemes. One, they are a simple violation of property rights.
More importantly, such schemes would have a ruinous effect, as we have seen in many places and situations over time.
Wealth inequality would exist in any kind of system, but is exacerbated in an inflationary money system, as the newly created money always flows to the top first and is devalued by the time it reaches the lower segments of society.
Government can provide a safety net, but in the end that is all they can do.
Wealth equality will always exist. The very fact that humans are incredibly diverse in both strengths and failings assures this.
I you did redistribute wealth equally to every human being, I assure you that the same group that has the wealth now, would soon again surge ahead, while many people would quickly lag back into poverty. The many stories of broke lottery winners attest to this fact.
I came from down near the bottom of the wealth ladder to move up where I am now well into the top 10%. I have seen many people move the opposite way as well.
While people can complain about wealth inequality, realistically there is nothing that can be done about it.
What you would see in this thread is a ton of the same arguments that were made prior to 1929 (and after tons of American workers have benefited from safety nets ever since).
Exactly. I drive a used car (paid for), have a cheap phone and a cheap plan. Don’t have a lot of flashy electronics (3D printer is my one vice). Motorcycle that’s older, used and paid for. got his with a $3,000 dollar repair bill on the car (looked around and couldn’t find one in as good of shape for that, so less expensive to pay the repair costs than guy another used car). 3 grand hit was hard to swallow, but the money was there for this type of “emergency” (and now I’ve signed up for a crap load of OT shifts to replace the savings.)
Now I work with someone who drives a brand new car (well now it’s about 2 years old), everytime a new Iphone comes out, they HAVE to get a new one. Kids have all the gaming systems, they get the name brand clothes and shoes. Once a month they take a “getaway” weekend vacation.
They smashed their car into something, afriad their insurance will cancel if they file a report, and don’t have the money to fix it so they drive around with a dented car.
Yes, a lot of how much people have for emergencies and in the bank depends on how they handle the money they have.
This thread is about wealth gap. As I am referring to in my previous post. What is the actual cause of this wealth gap? How are we to believe the wealthy are just so greedy and the poor is that bad off? For all we know we
are supporting poor peoples bad habits.
