The Richest 10% hold 76% of the wealth.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-08-2016, 07:28 PM
The Richest 10% hold 76% of the wealth.
The Richest 10% hold 76% of the wealth.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/18/pf/wealt...index.html

Should be concerned about wealth inequality? I don't think so. When you read statistics like this you ask what exactly is being measured.

Quote:The CBO analysis looked at what it called "marketable wealth," which are assets that are easily traded and have value after someone's death (e.g., real estate, stocks, bank accounts, 401(k)s and equity in a business). From those assets it subtracted nonmortgage debt (e.g., credit cards, auto and student loans).

Marketable wealth isn't the same as real wealth. Real wealth is goods and services....things that actually make your life better off. Cars, clothes dryers, food, a home, etc are all things which make your day to day life better off. A stock holding doesn't.

Stock holdings can be converted to goods and services. For instance, next week I am going to sell a block of stock and buy something nice. But keep in mind that when I convert something like stocks into something that actually makes my life better, someone else has to give up something up to purchase that stock. What they give up is money, and by giving up money to buy stock they are giving up the opportunity to use that money to buy goods and services. I sell the stock and buy the goods and services I want. They don't buy goods and services but instead buy my stock.

The poor people today, and the middle class people of today, have more goods and services than in previous human history. Homes are bigger. Appliances are more prevalent. It is easier to buy cars, etc. We work less to afford more.

Income inequality statistics, like the one measured by the CBO are meaningless. You should instead look at lifestyle inequality to determine if there is a social problem. There isn't a problem. A middle class person today, has a lifestyle much closer to a rich person of today, than a middle class person compared to a rich person 100 years ago.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2016, 07:39 PM (This post was last modified: 19-08-2016 08:09 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: The Richest 10% hold 76% of the wealth.
(19-08-2016 07:28 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  The Richest 10% hold 76% of the wealth.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/18/pf/wealt...index.html

Should be concerned about wealth inequality? I don't think so. When you read statistics like this you ask what exactly is being measured.

Quote:The CBO analysis looked at what it called "marketable wealth," which are assets that are easily traded and have value after someone's death (e.g., real estate, stocks, bank accounts, 401(k)s and equity in a business). From those assets it subtracted nonmortgage debt (e.g., credit cards, auto and student loans).

Marketable wealth isn't the same as real wealth. Real wealth is goods and services....things that actually make your life better off. Cars, clothes dryers, food, a home, etc are all things which make your day to day life better off. A stock holding doesn't.

Stock holdings can be converted to goods and services. For instance, next week I am going to sell a block of stock and buy something nice. But keep in mind that when I convert something like stocks into something that actually makes my life better, someone else has to give up something up to purchase that stock. What they give up is money, and by giving up money to buy stock they are giving up the opportunity to use that money to buy goods and services. I sell the stock and buy the goods and services I want. They don't buy goods and services but instead buy my stock.

The poor people today, and the middle class people of today, have more goods and services than in previous human history. Homes are bigger. Appliances are more prevalent. It is easier to buy cars, etc. We work less to afford more.

Income inequality statistics, like the one measured by the CBO are meaningless. You should instead look at lifestyle inequality to determine if there is a social problem. There isn't a problem. A middle class person today, has a lifestyle much closer to a rich person of today, than a middle class person compared to a rich person 100 years ago.

Wow. Isn't that great. Economic analysis from the forum dunce.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-corrosiv...ealth-gap/
You need to learn what most students learn in their first week of Economics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marginal_utility
If stock is a liquid asset, no one is giving up anything.

"The US has... a per capita GDP [PPP] of $42,000... The [recent] onrush of technology largely explains the gradual development of a "two-tier labor market"... Since 1975, practically all the gains in household income have gone to the top 20% of households... The rise in GDP in 2004 and 2005 was undergirded by substantial gains in labor productivity... Long-term problems include inadequate investment in economic infrastructure, rapidly rising medical and pension costs of an aging population, sizable trade and budget deficits, and stagnation of family income in the lower economic groups."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_of...ted_States

http://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshor...bution.php

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
19-08-2016, 09:19 PM
RE: The Richest 10% hold 76% of the wealth.
(19-08-2016 07:28 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  ...
Should be concerned about wealth inequality? I don't think so.
...

[Image: Cl895VkWAAAq2lL.jpg]

But your point, about how 'wealth' in different economies or different cultures is defined, is taken.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2016, 10:05 PM
The Richest 10% hold 76% of the wealth.
Why should humans of 100 years ago or 5000 years ago be a formal basis of judgement for quality? Isn't it up to what you seek as a factor. What one wants to judge it by they can judge it by

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
19-08-2016, 10:20 PM
RE: The Richest 10% hold 76% of the wealth.
So what you’re saying is that wealth is relative?

I would say happiness is relative, wealth is measurable.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2016, 11:52 PM
RE: The Richest 10% hold 76% of the wealth.
(19-08-2016 10:05 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Why should humans of 100 years ago or 5000 years ago be a formal basis of judgment for quality? [...]

True. The relative values of material stuff, and the expected returns on labour are totally different even from 50 years ago.

As usual, the Blowjob totally misinterprets the simplest of concepts LOL.

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-08-2016, 12:23 AM
RE: The Richest 10% hold 76% of the wealth.
(19-08-2016 10:20 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  So what you’re saying is that wealth is relative?

I would say happiness is relative, wealth is measurable.

The consumption of goods and services is measurable too. If you want to measure inequality in the consumption of goods and services....which if there is a problem that would be it...measure that. If you want to demagogue and create class warfare, measure the marketable securities people own and convince one group they are being screwed because they don't have as much.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-08-2016, 04:27 PM
RE: The Richest 10% hold 76% of the wealth.
(19-08-2016 07:28 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  A middle class person today, has a lifestyle much closer to a rich person of today, than a middle class person compared to a rich person 100 years ago.

Wow. We're doing better than the Victorian era when we used orphans to mine arsenic. We should definitely settle for this.

I'm underwhelmed.

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Paleophyte's post
20-08-2016, 04:33 PM
RE: The Richest 10% hold 76% of the wealth.
From the Journal of the American Medical Association:

The Association Between Income and Life Expectancy in the United States, 2001-2014

"The gap in life expectancy between the richest 1% and poorest 1% of individuals was 14.6 years (95% CI, 14.4 to 14.8 years) for men and 10.1 years (95% CI, 9.9 to 10.3 years) for women. Second, inequality in life expectancy increased over time. Between 2001 and 2014, life expectancy increased by 2.34 years for men and 2.91 years for women in the top 5% of the income distribution, but by only 0.32 years for men and 0.04 years for women in the bottom 5% (P < .001 for the differences for both sexes)."

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Paleophyte's post
20-08-2016, 06:38 PM
RE: The Richest 10% hold 76% of the wealth.
(20-08-2016 12:23 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(19-08-2016 10:20 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  So what you’re saying is that wealth is relative?

I would say happiness is relative, wealth is measurable.

The consumption of goods and services is measurable too. If you want to measure inequality in the consumption of goods and services....which if there is a problem that would be it...measure that. If you want to demagogue and create class warfare, measure the marketable securities people own and convince one group they are being screwed because they don't have as much.

You idiot. It's not that they don't have as much, it's that they don't even have the basic necessities.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: