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

Just Be Rich

keenen.xyz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–570 of 1001 posts

Re: Just Be Rich

#561

Post by bkirkby »

As economist Russ Roberts often points out in these inequality discussions, the quintiles that are used to show growth only in the upper class does not refer to the same people over time. When you follow people over time, they generally move up into higher quintiles thus "getting richer."

https://russroberts.medium.com/do-the-rich-capture-all-the-g...

He also talks about "what happened in 1972" is more about demographic shifts due to divorce, single parent homes, and children leaving home sooner:

https://cafehayek.com/2013/11/inequality-in-two-graphs.html

Re: Just Be Rich

#562

Post by CrazyStat »

chrisseaton wrote: post #549
lou1306 wrote: post #539

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The comment was about house owning, though. Owning a house is becoming more and more a thing for the upper classes, it wasn't always like this.

> Owning a house is becoming more and more a thing for the upper classes Something like 60% of US people own a home. 30% even own their home completely outright, with no mortgage. Obviously 30%, let alone 60%, of the population cannot be considered 'upper class', and 'middle class' is probably even a stretch. The home ownership rate seems broadly stable since the 60s to me, with gentle ups and downs with the economy,…

> Obviously 30%, let alone 60%, of the population cannot be considered 'upper class', or even 'middle class'.

Huh? Why can't 30% (or 60%, for that matter) of the population be middle class?

Wikipedia [1]:

> The American middle class is a social class in the United States.[1][2] While the concept is typically ambiguous in popular opinion and common language use,[3] contemporary social scientists have put forward several ostensibly congruent theories on the American middle class. Depending on the class model used, the middle class constitutes anywhere from 25% to 66% of households.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_middle_class

Re: Just Be Rich

#563

Post by teddyh »

jordan314 wrote: post #516
teddyh wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whenever this topic comes up, I like to link to these excellent and eye-opening articles: • 5 Things Nobody Tells You About Being Poor , May 27, 2011: ( https://www.cracked.com/blog/5-things-nobody-tells-you-about... ) • The 5 Stupidest Habits You Develop Growing Up Poor , January 19, 2012: ( https://www.cracked.com/blog/4-things-politicians-will-never... ) • 4 Things Politicians Will Never Understand About Poor Peop…

Second link: https://www.cracked.com/blog/the-5-stupidest-habits-you-deve...

Whoops, mis-copy-and-paste. Thanks!

Re: Just Be Rich

#564

Post by juancampa »

donnythecroc wrote: post #64
Barrin92 wrote: post #49

I'm just gonna quote what I think is a very important part from the Graham piece itself >" People who don't look any deeper than the Gini coefficient look back on the world of 1982 as the good old days, because those who got rich then didn't get as rich. But if you dig into how they got rich, the old days don't look so good. In 1982, 84% of the richest 100 people got rich by inheritance, extracting natural resources,…

The problem is all down to the basic human need of a home. In the 70s and 80s even 90s someone on a teacher's salary could own their own home in a major world city - say London. Now, literally zero chance. Because homes have become an asset class and the rich can outbid regular people so they are pushed out. That's the problem. I couldn't care less how many billionaires there are if regular people can afford a decent…

Exhibit A. A-Rod (Baseball player) owns 13k units: https://www.merlynnacquisitions.com/post/a-rod-owns-13-000-u...

Re: Just Be Rich

#565

Post by bkirkby »

Barrin92 wrote: post #49

I'm just gonna quote what I think is a very important part from the Graham piece itself >" People who don't look any deeper than the Gini coefficient look back on the world of 1982 as the good old days, because those who got rich then didn't get as rich. But if you dig into how they got rich, the old days don't look so good. In 1982, 84% of the richest 100 people got rich by inheritance, extracting natural resources,…

You seem to be talking about a caricature of the "silicon valley rich."

Who are you talking about when you say "this mentality of earned wealth completely rids the owner of any sense of responsibility"?

Re: Just Be Rich

#566

Post by 0wis »

ramblerman wrote: post #35

Great article, I wasn't aware the share of the middle class had dropped so significantly. I think there is also another factor that plays a role in the de-democratization of wealth. In the olden days you could be the biggest fish in your pond, but as that pond grows it's becoming more and more a winner takes all ocean. > As more occupations become scalable, jobs that were previously stable are becoming risky. Telehea…

It can also be seen as a huge opportunity to create niche-stars. There is little value for the world in thousands copycats when you can have a large distribution. However, there is value to find the best fit. I have hope in a future in which everyone can find the best doctor to fit its own needs or even better, where the number of doctor "specialities" is broader.

Re: Just Be Rich

#567

Post by chrisseaton »

CrazyStat wrote: post #562
chrisseaton wrote: post #549

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Owning a house is becoming more and more a thing for the upper classes Something like 60% of US people own a home. 30% even own their home completely outright, with no mortgage. Obviously 30%, let alone 60%, of the population cannot be considered 'upper class', and 'middle class' is probably even a stretch. The home ownership rate seems broadly stable since the 60s to me, with gentle ups and downs with the economy,…

> Obviously 30%, let alone 60%, of the population cannot be considered 'upper class', or even 'middle class'. Huh? Why can't 30% (or 60%, for that matter) of the population be middle class? Wikipedia [1]: > The American middle class is a social class in the United States.[1][2] While the concept is typically ambiguous in popular opinion and common language use,[3] contemporary social scientists have put forward sever…

One in three of people do not have middle class professions. Only about 35% of people go to college at all!

But anyway even if you don't agree with that, the original claim was that they were 'upper class'! Which is obviously ludicrous. You do not need to be an elite to own a house - drive down almost any suburban street in American you'll see people who own houses.

Re: Just Be Rich

#568

Post by adamhp »

reader_mode wrote: post #82
ironman1478 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. Poverty doesn't just cause immediate issues it can also cause long term issues that can effect not only adults, but the children who grew up in that environment. This is largely because families in poverty tend to also abuse their kids at higher rates (this includes mental abuse) or at least foster an extremely unhealthy environment due to the stress it causes. So even a generation later it can be difficult for…

I grew up in a family of 7 (4 younger siblings), during civil war, father was into gamling and drinking, mother was unemployed and constantly on the verge of a mental breakdown (understandable given the conditions she was living in). To paint the picture, I have vivid memories of vomiting a boiled onion I ate after not eating for days (I think I was arround 5 years old). And we were poor well into my early 20s untill…

> So I don't think it's something you can solve with money alone, having functional parents is always going to set you up to do better in life.

Do you think your parents being in poverty (if they were) or a similar situation made it as difficult for them as it was for you? It seems to be an obviously vicious cycle that is difficult to break without education and opportunity for people in these situations.

Re: Just Be Rich

#569

Post by sobellian »

clydethefrog wrote: post #359
EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK wrote: post #56

"tons of people are struggling to meet their basic needs" That's just not true. There are billions less people struggling to meet their basic needs now, than there was in 1982. World is much more equal now than it was in 1982.

This data of jump in equality is often cited, but it's often left out that the majority of the people lifted out in poverty is from a country where they have a planned economy and gladly lock up or even execute the rich that do not cooperate with measures to stimulate wealth equality.

Which do you think a more likely cause for improving circumstances in that case, totalitarianism or improved trade relations with the world's largest economy?

Re: Just Be Rich

#570

Post by nl »

sharperguy wrote: post #533
saddlerustle wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty much every mainstream economist put the blame for this squarely on the massively increased regulation of the housing market since the 70s causing a massive decrease in the amount of new construction, not wealth itself.

I keep hearing people debate about why housing prices are so high but it confuses me. Didn't housing prices fall dramatically in the 2008 financial crisis? Didn't various governments put vast amounts of money into the economy in an effort to ensure house prices returned to their previous levels and continued to rise? It seems as if high housing prices are an explicit policy of most major powers at this time.

> Didn't housing prices fall dramatically in the 2008 financial crisis?

No, not really.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/240991/average-sales-pri...

> Didn't various governments put vast amounts of money into the economy in an effort to ensure house prices returned to their previous levels and continued to rise?

No.

They put lots of money into the economy as Keynesian economic expansion policy, to combat unemployment.

House prices simply weren’t as dramatically effected as you seem to think. Check the statistics on the previous link if you don’t believe me.

Post reply on HN