Richest 10% control 70% of America's wealth

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Cave Man, May 24, 2019.

  1. Cave Man macrumors 604

    Cave Man

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2007
    Location:
    Neander Valley, Germany; just outside Duesseldorf
    #1
  2. GermanSuplex macrumors 6502a

    GermanSuplex

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2009
    #2
    Best economy of all time!

    That number isn’t the alarming one. It’s the more dense concentration at the very top.
     
  3. jkcerda macrumors 6502a

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
  4. GermanSuplex macrumors 6502a

    GermanSuplex

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2009
    #4
    Cheat/lie/break laws/hide/obstruct more. What’s wrong with every company, individual, entity paying the same amount? Trump pockets his golf trip income then uses his water bill to write that off.
     
  5. BeeGood macrumors 68000

    BeeGood

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2013
    Location:
    Lot 23E. Somewhere in Georgia.
    #5
    Because that’s clearly how rich people get rich

    Class warfare 101.

    You want a flat tax for everyone? Go ahead. Then all of the folks screaming about how “unfair” everything is can see what “fair” actually means.
     
  6. jkcerda macrumors 6502a

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #6
    Same laws that apply to you apply to him.
     
  7. Vanilla Ice macrumors 6502

    Vanilla Ice

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2011
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #7
    Can we just become a socialist country by now? It’s just so not fair that there are rich people in America.
     
  8. BigMcGuire Contributor

    BigMcGuire

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2012
    Location:
    California
    #8
    Socialism works! Humanity has a rich history of proof that humans will do the right thing when it comes to making sure everyone gets fair and equal treatment. Amen. Preach it!
     
  9. hawkeye_a, May 24, 2019
    Last edited: May 24, 2019

    hawkeye_a macrumors 65816

    hawkeye_a

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2016
    #9
    I wonder if wealth is better distributed in N.Korea, China, India, Cuba and Venezuela. /s

    [​IMG]
     
  10. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #10
    I think that is how a hell of a lot of people and businesses get rich - not by competing better in a free market.
     
  11. statik13 macrumors regular

    statik13

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2008
    #11
    It does in the right spots. Family units for example are very socialist, and that works well. Eventually maybe we will be mature enough to see it work outside the fam unit, but not likely in any of our lifetimes.

    My big concern isn’t the people who get rich in their own lifetimes, it is those who pass exorbitant wealth on to their children when they die. All that leads to is further increasing the rich vs poor gap and less opportunities for others.

    Nobody needs to inherit 1 billion simply because of who their daddy is. Cap it at 5 million. After that, charge 90% inheritance tax.
     
  12. niji Contributor

    niji

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2003
    Location:
    tokyo
    #12
    the graph says:
    50% of all households share only 1% of all US wealth.
     
  13. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #13
    If you understand the first thing about statistics (and economics) 10% of the population owning 70% of the wealth is utterly predictable.

    To begin with, ten percent of the US population is more than 30 million people. To find that 70% of the nation's wealth is so broadly owned is, if anything, a testament to the success of the capitalist system we have constructed. It's a far cry from the neo-feudalism that persisted (and still persists) in many other parts of the world.

    As a member of the "Ten Percent" I find nothing alarming about that number. My status is due to me being towards the latter half of a working life where I slowly and steadily built up capital, and as a result of inheriting (some of) the assets my parents accumulated. It is certain possible that at some stage that wealth will be passed on to an individual (or individuals) who are currently in the lower strata of the economic population.

    Where you get into problems is at the upper margins. The problem isn't how much the 10% own. It's not the top 1% either. The problem is with the wealth and power that is accruing to the top 0.0001%. The 300 or so hyper-billionaires - some of whom are amassing wealth, power, influence, and nigh-on control over our political, social, and economic system. To the extent that the rest of us poor rich people are being shut out of the conversation.
     
  14. DearthnVader macrumors 6502a

    DearthnVader

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Location:
    Red Springs, NC
    #14
    People that work hard and play by the rules get the shaft, nothing new here.

    Not everyone is going to be rich, I think we can all live with that, but a nice middle class station in life that affords working people to buy a house and cars at reasonable interest rates, with enough left over for vacation, retirement savings, and kids college tuition savings.

    The middle class is the cornerstone of the American dream, yet it has been shrinking away as wealth grows up to the top few percent.

    The trouble lies in the banking system, and lower class people not understanding the economics of borrowing.
     
  15. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #15
    Most of the people I know with limited budgets spend at least as well as I do to be fair.
     
  16. GermanSuplex macrumors 6502a

    GermanSuplex

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2009
    #16
    Yeah, its a total joke. Theoretically, we could have the greatest economy ever with two people controlling the wealth. Literally.
    --- Post Merged, May 25, 2019 ---
    May sound stupid, and I know we have social differences of opinion, but I'm heartened when I see different people - even online - see what's going on and have common ground. I have a great job. Great insurance. It's still expensive to get care. I still can't afford to have what I need. It's nuts how much "things" cost.
     
  17. chagla macrumors 6502a

    chagla

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2008
    #17
    I'm curious to know whether this gap was widened before or after Regan? My personal conversation with few individuals who grew up in 70s says overall income, quality of life, cost of living, wages etc were pretty good.

    Yes, some people are born rich, they haven't worked "hard" to become rich. But a lot of people, businesses amass wealth by cheating, exploiting labor. Big businesses now paying double digit minimum wage because of new labor laws, certainly not because of goodness.
     
  18. BenTrovato macrumors 68030

    BenTrovato

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Location:
    Canada
    #18
    “The share of assets held by the top 10% of the wealth distribution rose from 55% to 64% since 1989, with asset shares increasing the most for the top 1% of households. These increases were mirrored by decreases for households in the 50-90th percentiles of the wealth distribution,” Fed researchers said.

    No one ever talks about this. For someone to be rich, there has to be someone to be poor. Some might like the opportunity to word hard and make your own wealth but in our system, that means that someone (or many someones) will have to be poor for that person to be rich. As much as our current system rewards the person who works hard, it only does so at the expense of someone else. Perhaps we can't have it where everyone wins.
     
  19. Huntn, May 25, 2019
    Last edited: May 27, 2019

    Huntn macrumors P6

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #19
    This slogan is deceptive, and means absolutely nothing in the Second Era of Tycoons. Don’t be a GOP pawn. It’s what the GOP says to the sheep. Unless if by work, you mean vote smarter.

    Hint, it should not be for the GOP, who embraces income inequality and says things like Get a Job! as their BS solution, while blatantly giving out welfare for the wealthy. When it comes to job numbers, you never hear them discuss the aspect of good $$ jobs, how many of those that exist as compared to minimum, capitalist slave wage jobs.

    Also consider that the US has fundamentally changed, in a transition that started in the 1960s, a time when individuals with high school education or less could find a decent factory job, or you could even make enough in a small family owned business, as an employee to support yourself. That is before greed got the better of us, and our patriotic corporations decided to hand Asia our technology and millions of jobs in the name of profits while undermining our job market. (My impression is that this is not the only country where this happened.)

    Who is responsible? We are. Maybe we the collective are too stupid to understand where our interests lay or we can wake up and stop being led around by our wedge issues.

    Greed is a given, cheap foreign labor has killed a substantial source of income available to citizens, and automation is the next threat. How long are we going to enable the Capitalists to be gluttons though official government policy? The sooner you start listening to populist rebel rousers like AOC, the better, who simply state it is not ok for the top 10% to control 90% of the wealth. As the trend accelerates, as the rich gobble up more, we will have less and less money available for everything we need to maintain a stable, prosperous country. We need the tax money for infrastructure and education, and those with the money should be paying high percentages of their income to support the system. You make the people who have the money cough it up for the common good.

    While education is important, I don’t believe that if a magic wand was waved and everyone was given a bachelors degree, that that much would change. Capitalism is the problem, and while I am not a business expert, my impression is that our system would not magically provide millions of good paying jobs, just because our people are educated. Look at India, they’ve had this issue (educated who can’t find jobs in India) for decades.

    The real question is what economic system is going to take us into the future? Capitalism run by the GOP is not the answer. More likely it’s going to be a socialism based system, and those who of us who are really smart are going to have to settle for on being on top economically, but not by a thousand fold.

    America’s Income Gap Is Really an Education Gap
    https://taxfoundation.org/americas-income-gap-really-education-gap/

    9E91735E-E80E-4358-B0FC-084074D4B203.jpeg
     
  20. sean000 macrumors 68000

    sean000

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2015
    Location:
    Bellingham, WA
    #20
    Reaganomics is often cited as having contributed to widening the wealth gap. He championed trickle down tax cuts for the wealthy, deregulation, and union busting. I think it was just one of many factors though. Our companies started exporting jobs overseas long before that, and then we had the oil embargo, inflation, and recession with high unemployment of the 70’s. The economy grew again in the 80’s, but it was a very different economy that brought huge gains for the investment class (this was the golden era for Wall Street) and it prioritized short term gains over long term goals across the board. It was a good time to be the heir of a wealthy real estate developer, and nobody exemplified the greed and excess of the 1980’s like Donald Trump. I can still remember seeing him on Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous and thinking he was the worst of the 80’s in a nutshell: money without taste or morals. Back then he seemed like an older version of a bully in a John Hughes movie (one that James Spader would have played well).

    The 20th century American Middle Class that existed between WWII and the 1970’s was an incredible achievement the likes of which had never been seen. It was the product of the New Deal and a booming manufacturing economy that lasted for decades. We still had a lot of problems with racism, sexism, etc. but we saw a much better quality of life for more Americans and fewer seniors living out their final years in poverty. Sadly greed won out in the end companies abandoned American workers for cheap labor overseas. Yes this led to cheap products for American consumers, but we sacrificed long term sustainability for short term gains.

    Even though we outsourced our labor to other countries, there is still plenty of work to be done in our country, but much of it is not work private companies want because the profits would be minimal. It takes government funding to invest in rebuilding our infrastructure and to fix many of our social problems (e.g., education, healthcare, homelessness, affordable housing), but if we continue to cut taxes in favor of the rich and the companies that make them richer we will continue to see the middle class shrink as poverty grows. Trump’s trade wars might be an attempt to correct some of what went wrong, but he’s sacrificing the livelihood of many Americans to achieve a Pyrrhic victory with no long term strategy to win the war. The wealthiest Americans will be fine, but what about the rest?
     
  21. LordVic macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    #21
    yeah. I posted in a nother thread a bunch of stats about the widening gap in incomes (I'd have to go digging for it)

    But mostly, since the 80's the rate of inflation has far outpaced the income levels (especially at the bottom end). the Cost of living numbers have far far far exceeded basic incomes levels. IIRC, the numbers were something silly too, like the average household income may have gone up 200-300% since the 80's, but costs of living have ranged anywhere from 400% to 1000% increases.

    The biggest shift was notably started under 80's economic conditions, and Reagan's loosening of regulations in belief of "Trickle Down" economics would redistribute the wealth accordingly.

    It has not. And Reagan's, and subsequent governments who follow the same trickle down thoery, have only further hurt more people than they have helped.
     
  22. sean000 macrumors 68000

    sean000

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2015
    Location:
    Bellingham, WA
    #22
    Reminds me of the Uncle Tupelo song Postcard. Many Uncle Tupelo songs had to do with rust belt economic depression:

     
  23. chagla macrumors 6502a

    chagla

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2008
    #23
    Exactly. Rich will continue to get richer at the expense of middle and poor class. To the Republicans, that IS acceptable unfortunately. As you stated, due to cheap labors, companies want to maximize profits by outsourcing jobs overseas. If they were to move operations to USA, their profit may shrink a bit. For American companies, I think government should mandate that 60% (?) of jobs are kept in the states? Debatable of course but then you will have people screaming that's "socialism".

    It's sickening that any attempt to improve socio-economic status of the poor and middle class is considered "socialism". Instead of labeling everything "socialism", ask yourself whether it's a GOOD idea or BAD idea.
     
  24. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #24
    My bet is that we're headed for a hard economic crash because wealth has become too concentrated. There is no economy if one person owns everything, and winner-take-all systems tend to be unstable. Wealth inequality is reaching the levels that occurred just before the Great Depression (see link), and this modern trend started with Reaganomics.

    [​IMG]
    Source given at link above.
     
  25. pshufd macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    #25

Share This Page

111 May 24, 2019