Richest 85 people worth more than bottom half of all 7B of us

[JMapleton]

The answer is to reform trade law, tax law, and attempting to diminish the culture of corruption that is the revolving door of public service and the lobbyist industry.

This does not mean turning to socialism. It means having a bit of nationalistic pride and integrity. The answers to the majority of our problems were pondered by the founding fathers hundreds of years ago, and we need to go back to the foundation of the greatness of our nation and it's ideals in order to move forward.

Doesn't help that congress is full of spineless money grubbing sycophants.

I don't see how the general statements you've made do anything to close the wealth gap.

 

[Jeff7]

You are wrong. This is not about investment returns keeping up. The gap was created because of a massive amount of the US population saves and invests little or none of their personal income.

They do not need to outpace the wealth in order to increase their wealth gap, they simply need to START investing.

The gap exists because most people in the US have little or no household net worth. They do not strive to become homeowners. They do not invest. They do not start businesses often enough.

I don't know that the wealth gap can be entirely explained by "You didn't save enough." I can save and invest every single cent I'll earn in my life, and still not come close to approaching a point where I could glimpse the wealth that some of these people are paid over the course of a month or two. You've also got those who did a lot of hard work, going to the trouble of being born to an extremely wealthy family.


You talk about corruption and state's rights. That's part of the point of something like a progressive tax structure: People will still always pursue great wealth and the power and corrupting influence that invariably comes with it. If you make it increasingly difficult to attain more and more, to the point where a very small number of people could control a majority of the nation's total wealth, you help reduce the chances of anyone getting to such a powerful position in the first place. We've proven time and time again that our species simply can't handle power without using it to harm others in some manner, whether it be directly injuring them, or through oppression. Yet whenever we try to put systems into place to mitigate this inherent self-destructive behavior, we adapt, and slowly dismantle those systems, like an addict that just can't quit the habit.

Look at how our own government evolved: The system we have here was originally made up to divide power because of our behavioral tendencies toward corruption. You've got the different branches of government, checks and balances blah-dee-blah, and then states rights.
Then you saw things like gerrymandering show up. It's only gotten worse as our ability to gather and analyze data has improved. The voted subverted the system, permitting them to choose their voters.
Or you have people working the circle of industry, lobbyist, and regulator, not necessarily in that order. I certainly don't think that they're doing that for the good of the country.

The gap exists because of a massive portion of the population has zero net worth. It's not difficult to out pace anyone if you start from zero.

Also, when the market crashed, people cashed out and lost money, and were afraid to get back into the market and missed out when it went back up. Wealthy people on the other hand knew better and invested more when it crashed.

And the lower or middle classes can invest more when it crashed...if they had jobs, or any spare cash. Of course, since the economy tumbled, they probably didn't have those things. It's tough to invest more at a time when your finances are severely strained.
On the other hand, if this means your net worth dropped from $200M to $50M, you're not exactly a few months away from living in your car.
Or if you're already in a high-end management job during a recession, and you find a way of saving the company money in the short term, by laying off large portions of the workforce and freezing pay increases, you might find yourself being paid even more money. The rich get richer.

Ordinary people invest fearfully, wealthy people invest logically.

But again, these stats would be dramatically different if people in the US were like people in other nations, where ordinary people save large portions of their income and live frugally (ie China, where the average person saves 25% of their income).

Some people don't have the luxury of being able to invest any other way. They may invest out of fear of outright poverty in old age.
If a billionaire loses 70% of his invested worth in a crash, maybe he'll have to forego a second yacht for a few more years. If a middle-class worker loses 70% of his invested worth in a crash, maybe he'll have to forego small luxuries, like having a place to live later in life, or medical care.

 

[JMapleton]

I don't know that the wealth gap can be entirely explained by "You didn't save enough." I can save and invest every single cent I'll earn in my life, and still not come close to approaching a point where I could glimpse the wealth that some of these people are paid over the course of a month or two. You've also got those who did a lot of hard work, going to the trouble of being born to an extremely wealthy family.

Actually you could rival the wealth some are paid by doing exactly what they or their ancestors did, start a business.

Hardly no one becomes extremely wealthy solely from investing. Even Warren Buffett technically had a "business" to get him started (hedge fund).

The opportunities are out there, will you sit on your hands or take them?

 

[WelshBloke]

The gap exists because of a massive portion of the population has zero net worth. It's not difficult to out pace anyone if you start from zero.

Also, when the market crashed, people cashed out and lost money, and were afraid to get back into the market and missed out when it went back up. Wealthy people on the other hand knew better and invested more when it crashed.

Ordinary people invest fearfully, wealthy people invest logically.

But again, these stats would be dramatically different if people in the US were like people in other nations, where ordinary people save large portions of their income and live frugally (ie China, where the average person saves 25% of their income).

Wealthy peoples investments are a lot more diversified than those of your average Joe.

When theres a market crash average Joe has to cash uot because he's just been made unemployed and needs the money to pay bills and buy food. The wealthy still has an income (rents, etc) and can buy up those shares on the cheap.
Wealthy people have the luxury of being able to invest long term as they dont need the day to day cash and are insulated from the bad side of the market.

Actually you could rival the wealth some are paid by doing exactly what they or their ancestors did, start a business.

Hardly no one becomes extremely wealthy solely from investing. Even Warren Buffett technically had a "business" to get him started (hedge fund).

The opportunities are out there, will you sit on your hands or take them?

Most extremely wealthy people are wealthy because their parents were wealthy.
A few people becoming wealthy by managing to break big in business really doesnt address the wealth gap at all.

I think that you've knee jerked that people are attacking the wealthy and dont really understand what the wealth gap is or the problems that come with it.

 

[Ruptga]

Again, I am not. True communism is actually a very interesting idea. Altruistic even. Although I disagree with it, I actually have a level of respect for true communism. But the point of most conservatives is that all forms of communism eventually lead to totalitarianism or dictatorships. It's a magnet for corruption by power hungry government officials.

Care to show me a country that has actually managed to have a communist government without it becoming corrupt?

Educate yourselves. If you're gonna tldr, at least read the "Social democratic parties' move to neoliberalism" section.

Regarding corruption, just compare most of Europe's rating with the US's.

Bottom line: there is a very significant socialist element in European politics, has been for generations, and corruption is hardly a universal problem for them. Corruption in North Europe and the Nordic countries is actually less than in the US.

More to the point of the thread, I'd say growing wealth inequality is mostly because of refusal to adapt. Many people actively oppose looking for and trying better ways of doing things, i.e. working smarter. Doing the same thing again and again while expecting a different outcome is not realistic.

 

[JMapleton]

Most extremely wealthy people are wealthy because their parents were wealthy.
A few people becoming wealthy by managing to break big in business really doesnt address the wealth gap at all.

In Europe this may be true, but you're wrong about the US.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erincar...e-forbes-400-billionaires-earned-their-money/

http://www.fidelity.com/inside-fidelity/individual-investing/fidelity-2012-millionaire-outlook

Most billionaires are self made and even a higher percentage of millionaires are self made.

These are excuses people use to justify them not being wealthy.

 

[Googer]

I think these statistics are staggering.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/laurash...ve-as-much-wealth-as-the-3-5-billion-poorest/


[/LIST]

With poverty comes crime, pain, suffering... We've got to change this.

Don't be jealous because you have not the right decisions in your life to elevate your self to a higher income level. Most poor people are poor because of the choices they make. And for your information, something has been done about this before and it was called The Soviet Union.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Most billionaires are self made and even a higher percentage of millionaires are self made.

These are excuses people use to justify them not being wealthy.

That's not entirely fair. Sure, most billionaires are self-made in that their family weren't billionaires, but it's not like most of them rise up from abject poverty into indescribable wealth. Bill Gates, for example, came from a family of bankers and lawyers; they weren't billionaires by any stretch, but they were still 1%ers. Mark Zuckerberg was the son of doctors. Warren Buffett was the son of a congressman. Sure, there are examples like Oprah Winfrey or Steve Jobs coming up from very little, but the vast majority of billionaires came from a background of money, even if it wasn't "Walton-esque." It still takes hard work, determination, intelligence and drive, don't get me wrong. It's just a whole hell of a lot easier for the child of stockbrokers to make millions than it is for the child born into inner-city poverty.

 

[WelshBloke]

In Europe this may be true, but you're wrong about the US.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erincar...e-forbes-400-billionaires-earned-their-money/

http://www.fidelity.com/inside-fidelity/individual-investing/fidelity-2012-millionaire-outlook

Most billionaires are self made and even a higher percentage of millionaires are self made.

These are excuses people use to justify them not being wealthy.

And what will happen to their wealth? Do you think that the level of inherited wealth is going to go up or down?

And it still has nothing to do with the wealth gap.

 

[WelshBloke]

Don't be jealous because you have not the right decisions in your life to elevate your self to a higher income level. Most poor people are poor because of the choices they make. And for your information, something has been done about this before and it was called The Soviet Union.

Pulling out the "you're just jealous" card ranks alongside the "class war" card for fatuousness.

Also the "OMG you just want it to be like the Soviet Union!!!11!!" card.

 

[shadow9d9]

In 1964 we declared a war on poverty. In 1968 13% of Americans were poor. From '68-'80 we increased social welfare payments by 400%. In 1980 13% of Americans were poor. Lets just take more money from the rich.

Take money from the rich? There is TONS of corporate welfare, along with corporate bailouts, along with tax cuts for the rich. The rich control the government. Good job parroting talking points though!

 

[Agent11]

I don't see how the general statements you've made do anything to close the wealth gap.

The problem with the USA these days is we are caught in a status quo that is deeply flawed, predicated upon mistakes made decades ago. Everyone bitches and whines about their pet issues or concerns while the real problem is that we are investing more energy in restraining ourselves and others than we are in advancing.

You see too many billionaires vs. average people, I see too many people that are being forced to not invest in the future. If our rich were incentivized to spend their money on projects that create jobs as well as improve our economy and our geopolitical position as a nation, rather than the opposite, there would be more wealth distributed to the average American.

Why do we muck about in the middle east so much? Oil. Deepwater Horizon? Oil. Pipeline ruptures? Oil. Tar sands? Oil. Fracking? Oil/Gas/CARBON. Fracking releases radon gas as well as our precious carbon. . .WHY DO WE BURN COAL? It actually releases more radioactive waste into the environment than all nuclear reactors combined and it is not regulated because of the coal industry and their lobbyists efforts regarding releases in the form of naturally occurring radioactive isotopes. There is radon and thorium in coal. There is radon and thorium everywhere. The earth is still hot and electromagnetically active because of the heat generated from radioactive decay. This allows the carbon cycle. We live on a radioactive planet.

Chernobyl/3 Mile Island/Fukushima? An inefficient abortion of science that only became the standard reactor design because of WWII and the cold war, sustained by lobbyists to preserve a fuel cycle monopoly. The science doesn't make sense. There is no reason why we should be cooling solid fuel with water. The inventor of the light water reactor didn't want to use it for power generation for safety reasons, and invented LFTR at Oakridge as the answer.

Unlimited clean, efficient energy. When man realized how to make carbon his slave society advanced beyond human slavery. We need to make thorium our slave. If we want to keep using diesel, fine, we can always grow algae to make bio diesel to supplement our transition to hydrogen fuel cells; the obvious passenger vehicle energy source of choice for an economy when you have unlimited energy from thorium.

If American companies patent LFTR reactor designs we can sell the world reactors with negligible risk of nuclear weapons proliferation, sell them thorium, Sell them desalination plants, sell them hydrogen infrastructure, sell them hydrogen cars, sell rare earths, and consumer goods requiring rare earths, mined and isolated along with the thorium that is everywhere and that we have lots of. That is a lot of economic activity.

Everyone is so caught up in the past they cannot see how we are falling behind. Even the very nasty, very close to me geographically and leaking waste from our nuclear weapons program could be burned in LFTR and transmuted to safer isotopes with far less half lives. Think of LFTR's as cauldrons of neutron bombardment. You can do the decays on a periodic table with simple arithmetic. This also allows for a lucrative industry in radioactive isotopes with a short half life such as Pu238, invaluable for radioactive decay powered thermal batteries. There are many other radioactive isotopes that could be used for medical purposes, such as a beta decaying isotope that has a very short half life at the end of a decay chain that will only emit radiation for a presumed duration.

 

[shadow9d9]

forced birth control for those receiving welfare
ie: birth control injections that last 2-3 months

eliminate the problem b4 it even begins

the current gen is screwed. its about the future.
make it better for the next gen

edit:
why isn't this thrwead in P&N?

Could we give forced birth control for those receiving corporate welfare too?

 

[shadow9d9]

Wow, the libtard circle jerk migrates to OT.

All I see here are the same lunatic conservatives blaming non existent unions or regulations rather than the people who actually chose profit over everything else, which has been widening the income gap for decades. There isn't even a freaking "left" or "liberal" party in this country. Just one lone senator. The Democrats hold the positions that republicans 20 years ago and people are still so frakkin stupid that they think that because the Republicans are off the wall insane, that ANYTHING that differs from the party line is automatically some magical nonexistent magical left.

 

[shadow9d9]

That's wonderful, except it is completely made up. Bush gave away more with free tax cuts to the rich while spending money invading random foreign countries than all the democrats in the last 30 years. Fake narrative is still fake, no matter how many times your overlords tell you what to think.

 

[shadow9d9]

You pay the taxes, just not directly. Obama "taxes the rich" since it fairly evenly effects all members of many professions, all of the tax increase can be passed on to consumers plus a bonus. Welcome to reality.

Who are you quoting? The rich have it the sweetest they have ever had when it comes to taxes. There is a reason Romney wouldn't release his tax records as every other presidential candidate has done, and of the ONE year he released, he purposely manipulated his taxes to look higher(that he promptly changed back after he lost). Even with his manipulation, he only paid 14%, which is pathetic.

Is there anything that you think that isn't verbatim parroting of republican talking points/how you've been told to think?

 

[shadow9d9]

Capitalist society those who create wealth keep some of it.
Communist society those who are high party member take as big of a cut of all profits as possible, and poor products and low wages trickle down to the workers.

Communist society= never been tried.
Capitalist society= never been tried.

Every society has been a combination of the two.

USSR and China are/were dictatorships with a mix, which has nothing to do with communism despite what they called themselves(this is how they both formed dictatorships-by promising communism and then taking over instead).

 

[shadow9d9]

Care to show me a country that has actually managed to have a communist government without it becoming corrupt?

None have even been tried, so how can anyone show proof of it? Please educate yourself and get out from under that desk...

 

[shadow9d9]

That comment right there shows you're just an internet troll and know nothing about what you're talking about.

Every country has corruption. Have you ever been asked for a cash bribe from a police officer? Have you ever heard of a US politician sacking the Senate and taking complete power? Never happens.

Don't exaggerate. Be honest. It doesn't happen. There are countries with less corruption than the US, but we're very lucky here.

Except you just attacked a strawman.

 

[shadow9d9]

Don't be jealous because you have not the right decisions in your life to elevate your self to a higher income level. Most poor people are poor because of the choices they make. And for your information, something has been done about this before and it was called The Soviet Union.

Dictatorships have done something about the poor? Since when? Oooh.. the dictatorships that were created on the promise of "communism" and then became those dictatorships(completely the opposite of communism) CALLED themselves communist... and if there is something we all know.. if you CALL yourself something, you automatically become it! Let's not use our own brains and observations whatsoever!

 

[Agent11]

The fact that every communist revolution ends in a dictatorship is a pretty powerful fact.

 

[Ruptga]

I'm just gonna leave this here as I walk out the door. Feel free to believe whatever you want, since you were going to anyway.

It used to be, everyone was entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts. But that's not the case anymore. Facts matter not at all. Perception is everything. It's certainty.
...
Truthiness is 'What I say is right, and [nothing] anyone else says could possibly be true.' It's not only that I feel it to be true, but that I feel it to be true. There's not only an emotional quality, but there's a selfish quality.

 

[Googer]

The solution to your problem is north korea.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGxbOVscHPs&feature=youtu.be&t=7m4s

 

[ralfy]

Similar news appeared in UN reports published years ago.

 

[Mai72]

The rich are the Rothchilds and bankers who own America!

Wake up America and Anandtech! You and your children are being enslaved!!

Kennedy was murdered because he wanted to take the power AWAY from the federal banks!

http://rense.com/general77/powers.htm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...prefer-to-let-their-money-do-the-talking.html