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

Why is the stock market rallying when the economy is so bad?

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

591–600 of 898 posts

Re: Why is the stock market rallying when the economy is so bad?

#591

Post by Joof »

marcusverus wrote: post #563
2019-nCoV wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most every other developed nation has greater social mobility than the US [1]. Why can't the US reach Scandinavian levels of social mobility? [1] https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/ranked-the-s...

Advocates of big government love these metrics that have been put through the academic ringer, so-as to spit out whatever tortured output is expected. Why look at this kind of esoteric figure at all? Why not look at, you know, real numbers? Spending as percentage of GDP: Denmark - 52% of GDP Norway - 55% of GDP Finland - 53% of GDP Sweden - 50% of GDP Iceland - 42% of GDP Average - 50.5% USA - 22% of GDP What does al…

Okay, but are they worse off because they can't afford as much stuff? They don't seem to be in more poverty, they're healthier, more fit and highly educated.

I can spend an extra 20k as well or poorly as I like.

Re: Why is the stock market rallying when the economy is so bad?

#593

Post by [deleted] »

eanzenberg wrote: post #580
magicsmoke wrote: post #520

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Individual assassinations don't change the system. How many rich people do you think have to be assassinated for the economic system that allows accumulated wealth inequality of this scale to change? Would killing Bill Gates or Warren Buffet somehow magically reconfigure how American society works? It's much harder to kill a system than it is to kill individual people. Like you hinted at, the American military has ha…

First, the military did eventually do quite well vs. isis, once proper resources were directed. Second, look at history to tell you what will happen if the rich get disappeared. This happened in many communist nations. Doctors, lawyers, professors, bankers, wealthy landowners were mostly murdered and their wealth stolen from them. Did it work well for those nations? Are they thriving today?

[deleted]

Re: Why is the stock market rallying when the economy is so bad?

#595

Post by malandrew »

unethical_ban wrote: post #562
eanzenberg wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The top 1% pay something like half our taxes. What share do you think is fairer?

Like Sanders says, when half a million people are homeless, our healthcare system is a joke, and our infrastructure is unmaintained, we have a LOT of work to do. And a lot of spending. There is a far-left opinion that there should be no such thing as a billionaire, that a single human's marginal tax rate should hit 100% at some point. I wouldn't say "never" to the idea at this point.

> our infrastructure is unmaintained

Bernie supporters are generally the least likely to get their hands dirty and do the kind of work necessary to build and maintain infrastructure. Pretty much everyone I meet that does that kind of work is Republican. Not saying this is a universal truth, but it's a somewhat accurate generalization.

Source for party affiliation by a sampling of occupations:

http://verdantlabs.com/politics_of_professions/

Re: Why is the stock market rallying when the economy is so bad?

#597

Post by malandrew »

eanzenberg wrote: post #459
JKCalhoun wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like there is a decade of guillotines in the future that they are either not seeing or are looking way past. But then I've always been cynical about the growing divide between the uber-wealthy and the other 99% of this country.

Get rid of the wealthy and enjoy becoming another Venezuela!

While you're not really wrong in your assessment, please take the time to post a more substantive, less flamebaity comment.

Re: Why is the stock market rallying when the economy is so bad?

#598

Post by tfehring »

eanzenberg wrote: post #582
macintux wrote: post #533

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Income != wealth

Income is taxed.

But the top 1% own much more than 37% of the wealth (and accordingly receive much more than 37% of the financial benefits of government spending) while only paying 37% of the taxes (which fund that government spending).

Re: Why is the stock market rallying when the economy is so bad?

#599

Post by TheBlight »

netsharc wrote: post #157
TheBlight wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The unemployment numbers are deceptive. >80% are furloughed and would have their jobs back as soon as lockdowns end and business picks back up.

But realistically business won't bounce back this year, will it. Big parties in packed bars? Even without any governmental restrictions, I think a lot of people will avoid these things; because they don't want to get sick. This will also affect e.g. numbers of Uber rides, as well as how much beer/food the bars/restaurants buy. Businesses connected to foreign markets will also be affected by lockdowns there; airbnb wi…

Anecdotal evidence suggests maybe people are ready to get back to normal sooner than many might suspect? e.g. https://twitter.com/nick__puckett/status/1259541624389955584

Re: Why is the stock market rallying when the economy is so bad?

#600

Post by Talanes »

arghnoname wrote: post #566
lotsofpulp wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> most will probably become wealthy again. Source?

There's a book that attempts to look at this called, "The Son Also Rises." It tracks wealth by surnames and argues that the ability to gain (or regain) wealth is inheritable. This thesis is in contradiction to some of the ways I've experienced the world, but it is a source supporting the parent's claim. For my own political inclinations I'd be happy to hear many others that support the opposite claim.

I've only dug into the briefly, so forgive me if I'm missing something obvious, but it looks like his research was mostly just tracking surnames? How would you differentiate between family lines that actually lose and regain wealth over generations, and those that happen to maintain it over that span?

Like say the Smith family was traditionally privileged and wealthy, but my great-great-grandfather lost his fortune. Am I actually any more likely to rise in fortune than the Jones' family next door that have been generationally poor for hundreds of years? Or does it only seem like that because I have many distant cousin's whose families maintained their advantages?

Post reply on HN