Live data from Hacker News

Explore Wealth and Income Inequality in the World Wealth and Income Database

wid.world

221–230 of 248 posts

Re: Explore Wealth and Income Inequality in the World Wealth and Income Database

#221

1. When everyone was a farmer, the difference between the best possible farmer and the worst farmer just wasn't that great. Maybe you're 2x faster at picking corn, or 3x better at hunting deer. But a few guys literally built a communication tool (WhatsApp) to be used by billions of people. So maybe in the old world you could pick 2x as much corn, but in today's world you can build 1 billion times the communication to…

When the income comes from free trade, then the value comes from increasing the pie. When the income comes from forcible exchanges (such as taxation) then the value comes from transference.

Re: Explore Wealth and Income Inequality in the World Wealth and Income Database

#222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a rich but unequal society - it's much more peaceful. That's not true. Violence is caused by inequality. Areas where everyone's equally poor are about as peaceful as areas where everyone's equally rich. It's dramatic inequality that causes violence. This is true no matter whether you look at neighborhood level, city level, national level etc.

Do you have any sources for this? I don’t see how it can possibly be true. For one thing I don’t see how you can define areas where everyone is poor. Even looking at a place like North Korea, the top government officials are very well off compared to the average person. In general, poorer countries are much less safe than richer ones. Poorer neighborhoods are much less safe than richer ones. I can see the point that…

http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/338347?seq=1#page_scan_t...

Re: Explore Wealth and Income Inequality in the World Wealth and Income Database

#223

1. When everyone was a farmer, the difference between the best possible farmer and the worst farmer just wasn't that great. Maybe you're 2x faster at picking corn, or 3x better at hunting deer. But a few guys literally built a communication tool (WhatsApp) to be used by billions of people. So maybe in the old world you could pick 2x as much corn, but in today's world you can build 1 billion times the communication to…

1) Capitalism is creating commodities, like corn, and then shipping them. Picking one billion corn stalks is a lot more cost and effort than picking one corn stalk.

With software nowadays, you create the first product, and then with the push of a button, can duplicate and distribute it to billions, almost instantly, almost for free. What this means is you are not really making a commodity any more. Which means that in those parts of societies where this mode of production prevails, you're not even really working within a system of capitalism any more. The system of production outgrows the economic system it is in, just like town trade and manufacture outgrew feudalism centuries ago.

2/3) The helpful thing is to look at what is actually happening, as in a scientific experiment. The real world is not people sitting on top of piles of money, like a dragon in some fairy tale. Those who get the fruit of other's labor by rentier means - landlords, lenders and most importantly stockholders and owners, can only spend so much on luxury goods. They also need only so much as that aforementioned stacks of Credit Suisse gold bars stored somewhere for a rainy day. Most of the money is reinvested.

Where is the money invested? New construction projects, new companies, new loans - or further capital for existing projects. At companies owned, San Francisco apartments etc., more and more of wages go to profit and rent, as that is necessary for inequality. So the worker has less money to buy commodities. But more and more capital is being spent to build more and more commodities. The workers/consumers can not buy these increasing commodities made by the more enriched investors. Credit can kick the can down the road for a time, but if things don't go back to equilibrium, things get worse (see the 2008 taxpayer TARP bailout of banks, 2000 dot-bomb crash etc.)

There's a documentary called the One Percent, where a conversation between Bill Gates Sr., Warren Buffett and Chuck Collins (Oscar Meyer heir) is retold. He is talking about the inheritance tax (now corporate spinned to be called the death tax) and says if things are as unequal as they are now without an inheritance tax, what will happen when one does happen?

I myself don't think there's some liberal, social democratic solution. Idle class heirs have this self-destructive tendency to pull more and more power to themselves, to the point where they begin to undermine their own long-term power. At some point a very radical change comes. That has been the history of the past centuries. The US depression of the 1930s was so long ago, it's hard for Americans to fathom it, and I would guess most people think it could never happen again, but it could. It could even be worse.

Re: Explore Wealth and Income Inequality in the World Wealth and Income Database

#224
post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at the poor in Bernie Sanders types economies in Venezuela or Cuba and tell me how many TVs they have. Maybe the US should be more like Denmark, maybe not. But when inequality comes up the socialists come out, so i make the point.

Bernie Sanders type economies are Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland, Germany, etc... I took your initial posts as a sound argument I disagree with, now I think you're trolling.

I don’t ever hear Sanders saying one good thing about capitalism. I don’t hear his supporters saying anything nice about it easier- i really do feel like it needs defending.

In 2011, Bernie Sanders explained that "These days, the American dream is more apt to be realized in South America, in places such as Ecuador, Venezuela and Argentina..."

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/bernie-sanders-jeremy-corb...

Re: Explore Wealth and Income Inequality in the World Wealth and Income Database

#225
post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The federal income tax is a small part of the annual taxes paid in the US, you aren't showing enough information to provide more than a guess about how fairly the tax system is working.

Look up the total federal tax rate, it's available. It's not skewed as much as just federal income tax, but it's still significantly skewed. The top 5% pay 53% of all federal taxes including social security and Medicaid.[1] [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15573269

Federal tax is still a small chunk of the taxes paid in America, it's still guesswork and the "tax breaks" are even more prevalent there.

Re: Explore Wealth and Income Inequality in the World Wealth and Income Database

#226
post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No he's pointing out that we 'anti-tax' the poor currently via entitlements and maybe we shouldn't as much because it allows them a sustainable way to not escape poverty.

Following that argument, if we taxed them, their ways to not escape poverty would be even less sustainable. Victory! Ridiculous conclusion from a simplistic argument.

Way to miss the point by leaving out half of it.

We're giving people reasons to stay in poverty: don't work, and their food/housing/healthcare will be provided for; start working, and all that gets yanked away and whatever is earned is diminished by taxation (direct and indirect). Faced with that, there's little reason to "escape poverty".

"Stop subsidizing so much" does not equate to "start taxing them". I'm all for massive reductions in both subsidizing and taxation. Help the abject & deserving poor, yes; the rest should have their disincentives to work removed and their punishment by taxation relieved.

Re: Explore Wealth and Income Inequality in the World Wealth and Income Database

#227
post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bernie Sanders type economies are Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland, Germany, etc... I took your initial posts as a sound argument I disagree with, now I think you're trolling.

I don’t ever hear Sanders saying one good thing about capitalism. I don’t hear his supporters saying anything nice about it easier- i really do feel like it needs defending. In 2011, Bernie Sanders explained that "These days, the American dream is more apt to be realized in South America, in places such as Ecuador, Venezuela and Argentina..." http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/bernie-sanders-jeremy-corb...

I'm more inclined to interpret that as an observation on the opportunity of upward mobility in the US rather than an appeal to mimic Venezuela.

And as for capitalism, the core of it mandates a perfect information symmetry and rational actors, of which the latter is dependant on the former, and the former has never been actualised. The US (or any country really) doesn't have a fair capitalist market, nor does it need defending.

Re: Explore Wealth and Income Inequality in the World Wealth and Income Database

#228

1. When everyone was a farmer, the difference between the best possible farmer and the worst farmer just wasn't that great. Maybe you're 2x faster at picking corn, or 3x better at hunting deer. But a few guys literally built a communication tool (WhatsApp) to be used by billions of people. So maybe in the old world you could pick 2x as much corn, but in today's world you can build 1 billion times the communication to…

I don’t think the total size of the pie matters so much as the proportion. Also, it’s relative positioning that determines happiness—i’d much rather live in a place where I can look my neighbor in the eye than one where I can leverage my privileges to provide myself many times a better life than my neighbor. I’m american; my quality of life could plummit without affecting my happiness much at all. But I have no idea…

It's all about envy, then ?

Re: Explore Wealth and Income Inequality in the World Wealth and Income Database

#229

1. When everyone was a farmer, the difference between the best possible farmer and the worst farmer just wasn't that great. Maybe you're 2x faster at picking corn, or 3x better at hunting deer. But a few guys literally built a communication tool (WhatsApp) to be used by billions of people. So maybe in the old world you could pick 2x as much corn, but in today's world you can build 1 billion times the communication to…

regarding #2 and 3 - there is some sort of social psychological principle where it doesn't matter if the pie has been made bigger. You will end up with discontent if the inequality happens nonetheless. So while it may not be rational, you still have to avoid it unless you want French Revolution scenarios.

There is another social psychological fact : envy happens all the time in every society, and the more people are alike and socially close to each other, the more they envy themselves.

Re: Explore Wealth and Income Inequality in the World Wealth and Income Database

#230
post #52

Changing the graph from "Share %" to "Average Income or Wealth" shows a much more optimistic looking chart, with every country ramping upwards, almost at an exponentially positive rate. The world as a whole is moving away from poverty and quality of life is improving which IMO is the most important metric here. Far more important to the average person than the relative wealth ratios at the top vs the bottom, which ye…

Averages can be troublesome. Compare Population A where 9 people have $1 each, and one person has $100, to Population B where 9 people have $5 each and one person has $40. Which population is poorer? Which would you rather live among? EDIT: How about Population C, where 9 people have $10 each and one person has $10,000?

It's a difficult question because we don't know what sort of goods we can buy in thoses society.

Assuming wealth is the same, population B is better.

( If you don't like averages maybe we should also compute standard mean salaries )

Post reply on HN