Live data from Hacker News

How America's Top 20 Percent Perpetuates Inequality

bostonreview.net

101–105 of 105 posts

Re: How America's Top 20 Percent Perpetuates Inequality

#101
post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

utterly ridiculous in the eyes of a good chunk of the world I normally find that people outside of the US are not so nearly informed as they think they are about the driving dynamics of US politics, especially when it comes to things like "why do people vote the way they do". For the most part, people outside of the US start with their non-American cultural biases which makes them extraordinarily susceptible to what…

> I normally find that people outside of the US are not so nearly informed as they think they are about the driving dynamics of US politics, especially when it comes to things like "why do people vote the way they do". I'd be more than happy to bet that they are typically a lot better informed than you'd guess and that the reverse (Americans being informed about the dynamics of politics in other countries) would be d…

I didn't claim that Americans understand politics in other countries that well at all.

I'd be more than happy to bet that they are typically a lot better informed than you'd guess

And yet every person I've talked to who has an outside-looking-in view of US politics was positively stunned that Trump won the election. Their left-leaning news sources and celebrities absolutely convinced them that there was no way that America would elect Trump. Once again, they didn't understand American politics as well as they thought they did. Rather than admitting their ignorance, they tend to rationalize.

Re: How America's Top 20 Percent Perpetuates Inequality

#102
post #4

It's not a bad article, but it makes the same observations about opportunity we've read about a thousand times before. The article mostly describes the status quo, but doesn't say much about the root causes or about possible solutions. Maybe the full book is better, but I doubt it. The author doesn't strike me as a person with deep insights. One sentence from the article really sticks out: "The American ideal of a cl…

He may (or may not) be contradicting himself, but the argument isn't wrong. By hoarding wealth, the richest prevent their own wealth from growing (out of risk aversion and greed), and they end up either voluntarily transferring wealth or it's taken from them by an angry underclass. You can see why (after the fact), they would've preferred the former. Posted this yesterday but Acemoglu and Robinson's Economic Origins…

> By hoarding wealth, the richest prevent their own wealth from growing (out of risk aversion and greed)

The list of US' richest people nowadays consists of founders of Microsoft, founders of Google, founder of Facebook, founder of Amazon and founder of Oracle. So how many of today's richest became richest by hoarding and hoarding alone, Scrooge McDuck style?

Re: How America's Top 20 Percent Perpetuates Inequality

#103

I always get a little annoyed when people talk about benefits of some tax deduction accruing to the "rich". It's not that it's technically wrong but, but rather a sort of a truism - if you can take the max deduction and have a high marginal tax rate you will accrue more benefit (whether it's 529 or mortgage interest deduction). That being said, you also are likely to pay more taxes both nominally and proportionally i…

"deduction", perhaps, but what about "reductions"? The AHCA had a provision to eliminate a 2% additional tax on dividend income (IIRC) for people earning over $200k. Removing that is, as far as I can tell, only a benefit to "the rich" (by some definition, maybe not yours).

A very small segment of the rich who rely on dividend payments for cashflow and are not financially savvy enough to hold dividend-producing stocks in a trust or tax-shielded accounts.

Special provision for higher tax on dividend income after a certain threshold (a) complicates the tax code (b) increases the cost of tax preparation, therefore removing disposable income that would be spent elsewhere from those sectors of the economy and (c) encourages companies to favor stock buybacks over dividend payments, which introduces its own distortions into the economy.

And oh, by the way, it's completely avoidable if you suspect your income will exceed $200k and are willing to spend 10 minutes to rebalance your taxable accounts in favor of growth stocks, real estate and municipal bonds.

Other than that it's an excellent provision in the tax code.

Re: How America's Top 20 Percent Perpetuates Inequality

#104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"What people who promote class warfare desire is financial results without work or risk because that's how they perceive those with money attained it." Which also happens to be the truth. Sure, hard work and risk were involved, but generally not on the part of the people who ended up with the money.

As another commenter pointed out, to be in the top 20% a household only needs to earn $112k a year. That's like 2 teachers getting married, or 2 nurses, or 2 mid level office workers/government workers. And this college fund implies there are kids involved. So a household with $112k/year and kids should be taxed heavily as possible because they didn't earn it? If they live in a high cost area or have any debt/medical…

No, I simply want there to be progressive taxation with a relatively high marginal tax rate, and for people to actually pay the taxes they owe, instead of hiding them in tax shelters.

My income is comfortably in the region where I have to pay the marginal tax rate in my country (56%), and I pay it happily because I know it pays for valuable services and welfare for everyone.

Post reply on HN