Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. Income Inequality Hits a New Threshold

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 209 posts

Re: U.S. Income Inequality Hits a New Threshold

#51

Post by marnett »

evrydayhustling wrote: post #40
jeffreyrogers wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that's not what I said. I'm arguing for the same thing you are. But income inequality isn't itself a problem if there is mobility between the income groups. They statistics in the Bloomberg article show income inequality but don't show lack of mobility, and then say we've hit "a disturbing new threshold". There may be lack of mobility along with income inequality, but the article doesn't demonstrate it.

Other comments have brought additional evidence about declining wage mobility. I'll add that the article's stats about the impact of race demonstrate lack of mobility. Working while black seems to mean a 20% pay cut, regardless of education. As an American, I've always based a lot of national pride on our history as a (relative, for some groups) meritocracy with a lot of mobility. It's really sad to see rapid erosion…

Most opportunities for mobility were linked to America being a nation of rapid growth, not because of the kindness of some national ethos. As our growth opportunities slow, you can be sure the haves will do everything in their power to prevent loss of ground to the have-nots.

Re: U.S. Income Inequality Hits a New Threshold

#52

Post by gameswithgo »

jeffreyrogers wrote: post #2

The statistics for gender are misleading. If you're just comparing the average wage of men and women then of course women are going to earn less: they work less than men on average. If you control for age and whether women have children the gap shrinks a lot (in some areas it reverses). And an increasing share of wages going to the top income brackets isn't in itself cause for concern, only if the members of the top…

>And an increasing share of wages going to the top income brackets isn't in itself cause for concern

Yes it is, history teaches us that it leads to dissastisfaction and in some cases violent revolution.

Re: U.S. Income Inequality Hits a New Threshold

#53

Post by gameswithgo »

ribosometronome wrote: post #50
knuththetruth wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And an increasing share of wages going to the top income brackets isn't in itself cause for concern, only if the members of the top income brackets are largely static does it matter (since it means income is going to a small group of individuals, rather than a broader group of individuals who are swapped in and out of the top income groups). So a society in which there's competition to be among a handful of feudal l…

>So a society in which there's competition to be among a handful of feudal lords, but where everyone else suffers tenuous and desperation is unconcerning? How so? To be fair, he did say it's concerning if the top income brackets are static, so as long as we shuffle out our feudal lords from time to time, we should be okay.

yes, but he just made that idea up, and it doesn't make a lot of sense, also probably never happens.

Re: U.S. Income Inequality Hits a New Threshold

#54

Post by loeg »

knuththetruth wrote: post #32
ameister14 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you sure the income inequality creates the immobility and isn't just linked to the immobility in other ways? The demonstration of other countries implies the latter, but even that is really hard to prove.

Yes, because history. There are no historical examples where wealth was held by the few and social mobility increased broadly. Only when resources are more evenly distributed among social classes has that ever happened.

The graphed figure is not wealth, but income. The (great-)grandparent poster is suggesting that as long as people bounce between income levels, i.e., they have some higher paying years and some lower paying years, it has a smoothing effect on the net income inequality.

Re: U.S. Income Inequality Hits a New Threshold

#55

Post by jandrese »

microcolonel wrote: post #46
knuththetruth wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And an increasing share of wages going to the top income brackets isn't in itself cause for concern, only if the members of the top income brackets are largely static does it matter (since it means income is going to a small group of individuals, rather than a broader group of individuals who are swapped in and out of the top income groups). So a society in which there's competition to be among a handful of feudal l…

> robber barons You mean, like, people who did productive business? How dare they!

How dare they ruthlessly exploit a powerless serf class and the natural environment for their personal gain! Wait, that's exactly what we're saying.

Re: U.S. Income Inequality Hits a New Threshold

#56

Post by gameswithgo »

benmw333 wrote: post #39
knuththetruth wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And an increasing share of wages going to the top income brackets isn't in itself cause for concern, only if the members of the top income brackets are largely static does it matter (since it means income is going to a small group of individuals, rather than a broader group of individuals who are swapped in and out of the top income groups). So a society in which there's competition to be among a handful of feudal l…

"where everyone else suffers tenuous and desperation is unconcerning?" Capitalism in the US has created more wealth and lifted more people out of poverty than any other nation in the history of mankind. Your statement applies to third world countries... not the United States. Oh, we're also the most free and most prosperous nation ever. That helps.

>Capitalism in the US has created more wealth and lifted more people out of poverty than any other nation in the history of mankind

citation needed

>Oh, we're also the most free

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_freedom_indices#List_b...

>and most prosperous nation ever

https://www.cnbc.com/2015/11/02/the-worlds-most-prosperous-n...

Re: U.S. Income Inequality Hits a New Threshold

#57

Post by ajross »

metalliqaz wrote: post #41
ameister14 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh...the gilded age resulted in massive industrial and income expansion, the rise of the US onto the world stage financially and the lowering of maternal death rates, raising of life expectancy and a general post-industrial boom. Wages and average per capita savings doubled. It was also associated with the immigration of tens of millions of impoverished people, which is part of the reason for the massive inequality n…

Excuse me but those benefits weren't result of the Guilded Age. Correlation, not causation. Both things were a result of the industrial revolution and globalization.

Exactly. As was communism for that matter. Ultimately almost all major economic change had technology at its root. And where that change has undesirable side effects it's the job of government to address them.

Re: U.S. Income Inequality Hits a New Threshold

#58

Post by moate »

benmw333 wrote: post #39
knuththetruth wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And an increasing share of wages going to the top income brackets isn't in itself cause for concern, only if the members of the top income brackets are largely static does it matter (since it means income is going to a small group of individuals, rather than a broader group of individuals who are swapped in and out of the top income groups). So a society in which there's competition to be among a handful of feudal l…

"where everyone else suffers tenuous and desperation is unconcerning?" Capitalism in the US has created more wealth and lifted more people out of poverty than any other nation in the history of mankind. Your statement applies to third world countries... not the United States. Oh, we're also the most free and most prosperous nation ever. That helps.

CITATION NEEDED

Re: U.S. Income Inequality Hits a New Threshold

#59

Post by dzonga »

Those that are okay, with this are 'temporarily embarrassed millionaires' who don't have millions yet. Fact, remains only people that love capitalism are capitalists themselves. for the rest of us we're doomed, if we don't embrace BI, Unions and a massive welfare state. Also full 100% inheritance tax.

Re: U.S. Income Inequality Hits a New Threshold

#60

Post by metalliqaz »

benmw333 wrote: post #39
knuththetruth wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And an increasing share of wages going to the top income brackets isn't in itself cause for concern, only if the members of the top income brackets are largely static does it matter (since it means income is going to a small group of individuals, rather than a broader group of individuals who are swapped in and out of the top income groups). So a society in which there's competition to be among a handful of feudal l…

"where everyone else suffers tenuous and desperation is unconcerning?" Capitalism in the US has created more wealth and lifted more people out of poverty than any other nation in the history of mankind. Your statement applies to third world countries... not the United States. Oh, we're also the most free and most prosperous nation ever. That helps.

Non sequitur. Capitalism requires some income inequality, but runaway income inequality will not be beneficial. Eventually, people get sick of eating rotten cabbage and the guillotines come out.

Side note: "most free nation ever" is a total fiction as part of American exceptionalism. For just one example out of many, there are still religious blue laws on the books in towns across the country, and many are still enforced.

Post reply on HN