How the Richest 400 People in America Got So Rich

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
1-1-2013

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/richest-400-people-america-got-201519751.html

How the Richest 400 People in America Got So Rich



According to the IRS, which recently released 2009 data from the 400 richest individual income tax returns, the real runaway growth in wealth has come from capital gains. In the last years of the bubble, the "Fortunate 400" made nearly half their income from capital gains (a.k.a.: profit from the rising value of an investment, such as stocks or property) and less than 10% of their income from old-fashioned wages.

The average income of a top-400 earner grew by 650% between 1992 and 2007 to a whopping $344 million. Over that time, the average salary didn't even double. But the average capital gains haul increased by 1,200%. So how do the richest get richer? Not from their wages. From their investments

Who are these people?

Four in ten in this group were executives, managers, and supervisors at nonfinancial firms. Eighteen percent were financiers. Next came law (7 percent), medicine (6 percent), and real estate (4 percent).

Remember that as this is happening, the long-term capital gains tax rate has fallen from 28 percent in 1990 to 20 percent for the latter half of the 1990s to 15 percent under George W. Bush.
========================================================

Update on how the Billionaires did in 2012

1-4-2013

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/dail...ncreases-wealth-22-2b-2012-182819240.html?l=1

Top 100 Billionaires add $241 Billion in 2012

The world’s billionaires added a lot more zeros to their bank accounts in 2012.


According to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, the 100 richest people around the globe boosted their net worth by a collective $241 billion over the last 12 months. As of Dec. 31, 2012, these tycoons controlled a combined $1.9 trillion of the world’s wealth.

Microsoft Co-Founder Bill Gates took the No. 3 spot in 2012, raking in $7 billion after Microsoft’s shares rose 2.9% last year

Berkshire Hathaway Chairman Warren Buffett also had an extremely lucky year. The 82-year-old increased his wealth by $5.1 billion in 2012.
 
Last edited:

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
It's clear they are not "Job Creators" as argued by the Rich Republicans on here.

They are leeches on the country that must be dealt with and Americans are starting to do so.
 

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
145
106
Rich people usually tends to destroy jobs. Simply because there is more money doing so in speculating. Thats why we got huge hedgefunds. And why your coffee is sold and bought like 300 times before its even produced. Average Joe is always the loser.
 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,994
779
126
Just a reminder that the top 400 income earners have an effective tax rate of 16% while i, as a middle/upper middle wage earner has an effective tax rate in the 22-25% range. We tax hard work more than we do passive income.

Let that stew in your mind when you remember that the bitch idiot conservatives on ATPN are fighting tax increases in the rich.
 

BrightCandle

Diamond Member
Mar 15, 2007
4,762
0
76
If they are investing in other firms then there is a decent chance they are funding some jobs. Companies do issue stock and bonds for capital as well as human resources spend depending on what it is they do. So I don't think you can immediately claim that they don't fund jobs with that money.

However I do remember reading a very convincing article a few years ago with quite a lot of data that showed that trickle down was a myth and that the wealthy mostly kept their money rather than spending it in the economy. This compared to the middle classes which tended to spend it in the economy, thus you had more economic activity if you spread wealth around. I do wish I could remember where the article came from because without the reference its not a very useful memory!
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
3
0
crying-baby-001.jpg
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
3
0
It's clear they are not "Job Creators" as argued by the Rich Republicans on here.

They are leeches on the country that must be dealt with and Americans are starting to do so.

BTW, those "leeches" pay more in taxes in one year than you will your entire life.
 

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
145
106
Just a reminder that the top 400 income earners have an effective tax rate of 16% while i, as a middle/upper middle wage earner has an effective tax rate in the 22-25% range. We tax hard work more than we do passive income.

Let that stew in your mind when you remember that the bitch idiot conservatives on ATPN are fighting tax increases in the rich.

Regressive tax system. I dont think I have seen it anywhere else in the world.
 

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,492
3,163
136
You have to figure in your wonderful 401K takes most of the risk from the employer and places it on the shoulders of the worker.
Pretty slick if you ask me.
Considering the success rate at killing off unions AND pensions.
Which for the large part, were not tied to how the market is doing.
But that a dog for a different day...
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
3
0
Thats what you keep telling yourself.

Are you really that dumb? The average income of a top-400 is $344 million per that article. Taxes at even the lowest 15% is $51,000,000. How long do you think it will take mcowned at his middleclass income to pay in $51 Million in taxes?

Rich people usually tends to destroy jobs.

Stop posting until you have even a small clue about how an economy works.
 
Last edited:

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
BTW, those "leeches" pay more in taxes in one year than you will your entire life.

So? They make more in a year than I will in my entire life (unless you're suggesting that we should ALL pay a flat dollar amount (not %) of taxes?).
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
3
0
So? They make more in a year than I will in my entire life (unless you're suggesting that we should ALL pay a flat dollar amount (not %) of taxes?).

Oh sure, go after me rather than the one who called them leeches.
 

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,628
183
106
1-1-2013

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/richest-400-people-america-got-201519751.html

How the Richest 400 People in America Got So Rich



According to the IRS, which recently released 2009 data from the 400 richest individual income tax returns, the real runaway growth in wealth has come from capital gains. In the last years of the bubble, the "Fortunate 400" made nearly half their income from capital gains (a.k.a.: profit from the rising value of an investment, such as stocks or property) and less than 10% of their income from old-fashioned wages.

The average income of a top-400 earner grew by 650% between 1992 and 2007 to a whopping $344 million. Over that time, the average salary didn't even double. But the average capital gains haul increased by 1,200%. So how do the richest get richer? Not from their wages. From their investments

Who are these people?

Four in ten in this group were executives, managers, and supervisors at nonfinancial firms. Eighteen percent were financiers. Next came law (7 percent), medicine (6 percent), and real estate (4 percent).

Remember that as this is happening, the long-term capital gains tax rate has fallen from 28 percent in 1990 to 20 percent for the latter half of the 1990s to 15 percent under George W. Bush.

I have a fix, tax Capital Gains over a Million$ at the income rate.
 

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
145
106
Are you really that dumb? The average income of a top-400 is $344 million per that article. Taxes at even the lowest 15% is $51,000,000. How long do you think it will take mcowned at his middleclass income to pay in $51 Million in taxes?



Stop posting until you have even a small clue about how an economy works.

What you obvious fail to notice is that their actual income is much higher and thats the core problem. 400 people sitting on half the entire US wealth. Yet their contribution to the US budget is a mere 0.7% Those people are the real leechers on the american economy.
 

KlokWyze

Diamond Member
Sep 7, 2006
4,451
9
81
www.dogsonacid.com
What you obvious fail to notice is that their actual income is much higher and thats the core problem. 400 people sitting on half the entire US wealth. Yet their contribution to the US budget is a mere 0.7% Those people are the real leechers on the american economy.

Obvious point is not obvious to people that must incorporate cognitive dissonance on any and all observations of reality.

They aren't arguing the point that they get their wealth by sitting on money and simultaneously disproving trickle-down economics, but merely pointing our some erroneous fact without addressing the core problems with and the existence of the completely out-of-balance wealth disparity in the US.

Their only purpose is too protect the wealthy's assets at the cost of all of us, including themselves. Bizarre.
 
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
Just a reminder that the top 400 income earners have an effective tax rate of 16% while i, as a middle/upper middle wage earner has an effective tax rate in the 22-25% range. We tax hard work more than we do passive income.

Let that stew in your mind when you remember that the bitch idiot conservatives on ATPN are fighting tax increases in the rich.

Good, Your all for bigger government but bitch and moan about your taxes. How else are we suppose to fund your tyrannical government?

Let that stew in your mind when you remember that the bitch idiot liberals on ATPN are fighting spending cuts .
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
3
0
Obvious point is not obvious to people that must incorporate cognitive dissonance on any and all observations of reality.

They aren't arguing the point that they get their wealth by sitting on money and simultaneously disproving trickle-down economics, but merely pointing our some erroneous fact without addressing the core problems with and the existence of the completely out-of-balance wealth disparity in the US.

Their only purpose is too protect the wealthy's assets at the cost of all of us, including themselves. Bizarre.

This article describes the majority of thier income comes from Capital Gains. That proves they are not sitting on their income. That money is invested, not stuffed in a matress somewhere.
 

desy

Diamond Member
Jan 13, 2000
5,446
214
106
It also means if you gave more money to the middle class to invest that would happen too with greater benefit to more people
They aren't creating jobs any more than anybody with a spare buck to invest could
 

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
145
106
They aren't creating jobs any more than anybody with a spare buck to invest could

Anyone with a spare buck is much more likely to invest in an actual job. Rich dont tend to invest in jobs, they tend to invest in speculation, and if anything, the destruction of jobs.
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
3
0
What you obvious fail to notice is that their actual income is much higher and thats the core problem. 400 people sitting on half the entire US wealth. Yet their contribution to the US budget is a mere 0.7% Those people are the real leechers on the american economy.

Yep, they make more money and that must be stopped.

400 people are NOT sitting on half the entire US wealth.

U.S._Distribution_of_Wealth%2C_2007.jpg


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth

It's closer to 5% so 15 Million people are sitting on 1/2 of the US Wealth, not 400. And by comparison the top 5% pay 41% of all Federal Taxes. Maybe leech has a new meaning I didn't get a notice on.
 

desy

Diamond Member
Jan 13, 2000
5,446
214
106
:)
Well, Buffet invests in Blue chips which tend to create jobs, there are diff types of rich just as there are anybody else.
I did watch a show about the ultra rich once and just the stuff they buy pretty much always appreciates, antiques, precious metals and stones, property. Its hard to lose once you get up to that level unless bad vices destroy the legacy