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

20 year study of global wealth demolishes the myth of ‘trickle-down’

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 444 posts

Re: 20 year study of global wealth demolishes the myth of ‘trickle-down’

#71

Post by esarbe »

pydry wrote: post #51
esarbe wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The frustrating thing is that this kind of rhetoric actually works. They call themselves "the makers" and "job creators" while all they are doing is leveraging their upbringing in a wealthy social environment that provided them with the necessary connections to get a comfy job. Their actual added value is minimal, but they sell it so good that (almost) everyone actually believes the myth. Sad.

It's a natural function of a parasite to trick the host into thinking it is necessary. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/141031-zo...

That's probably a good part of it, yes.

Re: 20 year study of global wealth demolishes the myth of ‘trickle-down’

#72

Post by pydry »

syshum wrote: post #58
pydry wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>the folks who earned It's quaint that there are people out there who believe that income at the top strata of society is primarily earned. Those dividend payments, rents and capital gains (realized) that make up the bulk of top earner incomes happen while they sleep. A minimum wage is earned. A doctor's wage is earned. A golden parachute after a CEO ruins a company? Somebody with a trust fund? A person living off di…

So if I worked as a doctor for 20 years, invested most of my income in that 20 years in to dividend paying stocks, then at age 45 or so retire to live off my dividends that my hard work paid of, I did not earn any of that?

A lot of people have retired on a large S&P nest egg, spent relatively frugally relative to their wealth and ended up even wealthier after 5 years. It's not that uncommon.

How would you say that money used to support them and grow their wealth was "earned" if they didnt work?

The truth is it was earned. Just not by them. It's glaringly obvious if you think about it for just one second but we maintain a polite fiction all the same.

Re: 20 year study of global wealth demolishes the myth of ‘trickle-down’

#73

Post by Werewolf255 »

syshum wrote: post #58
pydry wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>the folks who earned It's quaint that there are people out there who believe that income at the top strata of society is primarily earned. Those dividend payments, rents and capital gains (realized) that make up the bulk of top earner incomes happen while they sleep. A minimum wage is earned. A doctor's wage is earned. A golden parachute after a CEO ruins a company? Somebody with a trust fund? A person living off di…

So if I worked as a doctor for 20 years, invested most of my income in that 20 years in to dividend paying stocks, then at age 45 or so retire to live off my dividends that my hard work paid of, I did not earn any of that?

I mean, no? In this specific example, the doctor is buying instruments which derive their interest from exploiting the labor and capital of those in the offering company, and after 20 years, the doctor is just living off others work because he 'earned it'. Plus, of course, in this perfect market scenario, no crashes or corrections can ever occur.

Re: 20 year study of global wealth demolishes the myth of ‘trickle-down’

#74

Post by yorwba »

pepperonipizza wrote: post #62
anothernewdude wrote: post #53

Robespierre did nothing wrong.

What the hell is this type of comment?! This is the same stupid phrase neo-nazi use to joke about the Holocaust. Thousands have been killed by the terror, even some of his allies turned against him because how bloody it was.

> Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: 20 year study of global wealth demolishes the myth of ‘trickle-down’

#75

Post by chii »

yorwba wrote: post #26

The article makes a weird jump between pointing to global wealth inequality and claiming that this disproves trickle-down effects. But trickle-down doesn't claim that wealth differences between rich and poor should decrease! Rather, it's about absolute gains, where poor people get higher incomes the richer other people are. (I.e. increasing wealth inequality is good if it is the rich getting richer, instead of the po…

an excellent point.

I think over all, people are much richer today than 2 decades ago - even those who are poor relative to the rich. Richness doesn't just include cash in hand, but the availability of goods and services. The fact that the internet is available (to be purchased) is a form of wealth, but this is often not counted.

Re: 20 year study of global wealth demolishes the myth of ‘trickle-down’

#77

Post by bottled_poe »

romwell wrote: post #10

Ahh, the good old trickle-down, aka "piss in my eyes and tell me it's raining" (which is the only way trickle-down actually works). It was pure mythology from the start; there's never been any basis for it to begin with. It's a pity we even have to debunk it like that. Go figure, give a million hungry people $20 each, and see $20M return to the economy the next day as they spend it on food. Give a billionaire $20M, s…

While I want to agree with you, you’re comment is just hyperbole/rhetoric and no substance.

Re: 20 year study of global wealth demolishes the myth of ‘trickle-down’

#78

Post by jpadkins »

jl6 wrote: post #9
codegrappler wrote: post #2

I guess I’m not surprised that a bunch of folks who have made a career out of advising politicians on income inequality….discovered income inequality in their study. The two questions in my mind are: 1. Should we trust the government to spend the money more wisely than the folks who earned it? Or said another way, how do you combat the almost inevitable corruption you see with large government spending? 2. What will…

Maybe people shouldn’t be incentivized to work at insane rates, and maybe nobody needs a $1m+ salary?

of course no one needs $1M salary, but is it morally right to prevent or harm people who want to hustle and earn $1M+ a year?

Ambition and competitive spirit are double edged swords. We should be prudent before trying to social engineer these things away.

Re: 20 year study of global wealth demolishes the myth of ‘trickle-down’

#79

Post by verve_rat »

q1w2 wrote: post #34
romwell wrote: post #10

Ahh, the good old trickle-down, aka "piss in my eyes and tell me it's raining" (which is the only way trickle-down actually works). It was pure mythology from the start; there's never been any basis for it to begin with. It's a pity we even have to debunk it like that. Go figure, give a million hungry people $20 each, and see $20M return to the economy the next day as they spend it on food. Give a billionaire $20M, s…

I haven't seen a politician advocate for trickle down since the early 1980s. Why is this strawman still the target for low-effort articles?

"Job creators" is the same old horse shit in newer, more marketable, clothes.

Re: 20 year study of global wealth demolishes the myth of ‘trickle-down’

#80

Post by tzs »

codegrappler wrote: post #2

I guess I’m not surprised that a bunch of folks who have made a career out of advising politicians on income inequality….discovered income inequality in their study. The two questions in my mind are: 1. Should we trust the government to spend the money more wisely than the folks who earned it? Or said another way, how do you combat the almost inevitable corruption you see with large government spending? 2. What will…

> What will incentivize people to work at insane rates if the vast majority of their income and wealth is taxed? Would I be willing to put in the long hours and sacrifices usually required to work up to a $1m+ salary if it’s taxed at a 90% rate?

There are at least three kinds of people working insane rates.

First, there are people working insane rates because they need the money for essentials. They are in low hourly rate jobs, and have to put in insane hours to get enough money for basic things like food and shelter for their families.

Second, there are people working insane rates because they like what they are doing. These are the people that if what they liked was painting would be your classic "starving artist" types, but if they happen to like doing something that people will actually pay a lot for like programming they can end up doing great financially as a welcome side effect.

Third, there are people working insane rates because they want to accumulate vast wealth.

My guess is that the vast majority of people working insane rates are in the first two groups, and that much of those in the third group are working at things for which it would be an improvement if we had less people doing them.

Post reply on HN