Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%
vanityfair.com
Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%
1–10 of 86 posts
Re: Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%
#2The worst kind of article is the kind that makes you want to flag it for being inappropriate and rant about it at the same time.
Re: Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%
#3This is written more like a speech by a politician than as an attempt at analysis. The type of economic inequality that successful startups yield, and which accounts for a lot of the entries in the Forbes 400, is described merely as a theory cherished by the rich, and dismissed with evidence it would be a compliment to call anecdotal. And while there's a lot of talk about how the rich own the government, he doesn't even attempt to analyze whether this is more or less true now than it was 50 years ago, when there was less economic inequality (on paper).
Re: Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%
#4It's really difficult to take this sort of article seriously. Whether it's the talk of the top 1% "taking" (which is strange, because everything else in the article is trying to demonstrate ther undeservingness) or this:
> While many of the old centers of inequality in Latin America, such as Brazil, have been striving in recent years, rather successfully, to improve the plight of the poor and reduce gaps in income, America has allowed inequality to grow.
Wait, is the problem poverty or inequality? If "the plight of the poor" is simply that they're not as comfortable as those in the top 1%, but they still have cars, and TVs, ad microwaves, I'm never going to be impressed by this sort of article.
Re: Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%
#5The more divided a society becomes in terms of wealth, the more reluctant the wealthy become to spend money on common needs. The rich don’t need to rely on government for parks or education or medical care or personal security—they can buy all these things for themselves. In the process, they become more distant from ordinary people, losing whatever empathy they may once have had. They also worry about strong government—one that could use its powers to adjust the balance, take some of their wealth, and invest it for the common good. The top 1 percent may complain about the kind of government we have in America, but in truth they like it just fine: too gridlocked to re-distribute, too divided to do anything but lower taxes.
Not only is this paragraph entirely unsubstantiated in the essay, but I doubt that it's even true. Perhaps the author could have interviewed people in this top 1% or cited polling data or something. Instead they went with caricature.
Re: Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%
#6The worst kind of article is the kind that makes you want to flag it for being inappropriate and rant about it at the same time.
you want to lag the article just because you disagree with it?
Re: Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%
#7Top 1% in income is, hmm, $500kish? I hate to break it to you, but that isn't a CEO of a Fortune 500 company (that would imply the had 99 employees apiece, right?) or a hedge fund owner. That's like a couple dozen people who post to HN, or someone with a successful medical practice, or a well-rewarded peon who has leverage in an industry made of money. (A quant, for example.)
$500k is a lot of money, but it isn't "senators are at your beck and call, own houses in six countries" money.
[Edit to add: guesstimate based on misremembered data. Real number closer to 400k.]
Re: Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%
#8Top 1% in income is, hmm, $500kish? I hate to break it to you, but that isn't a CEO of a Fortune 500 company (that would imply the had 99 employees apiece, right?) or a hedge fund owner. That's like a couple dozen people who post to HN, or someone with a successful medical practice, or a well-rewarded peon who has leverage in an industry made of money. (A quant, for example.) $500k is a lot of money, but it isn't "se…
250k of household income puts you at the 98.3 percentile, so any two married valley engineers probably qualify, and they probably can't afford a house.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_...
Re: Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%
#9This is written more like a speech by a politician than as an attempt at analysis. The type of economic inequality that successful startups yield, and which accounts for a lot of the entries in the Forbes 400, is described merely as a theory cherished by the rich, and dismissed with evidence it would be a compliment to call anecdotal. And while there's a lot of talk about how the rich own the government, he doesn't e…
[deleted]
Re: Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%
#10Top 1% in income is, hmm, $500kish? I hate to break it to you, but that isn't a CEO of a Fortune 500 company (that would imply the had 99 employees apiece, right?) or a hedge fund owner. That's like a couple dozen people who post to HN, or someone with a successful medical practice, or a well-rewarded peon who has leverage in an industry made of money. (A quant, for example.) $500k is a lot of money, but it isn't "se…
250k of household income puts you at the 98.3 percentile, so any two married valley engineers probably qualify, and they probably can't afford a house. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_...
Those figures are from 2005. Does anyone have more recent numbers? (a quick Google search doesn't turn up anything in the same format. Going to bed now, I'll search again in the morning).