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

271–280 of 444 posts

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

#271

Post by ImprobableTruth »

wilkommen wrote: post #234
JackFr wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> as the billionaire holds on to whatever financial product they bought forever as long as it appreciates faster than inflation. Another word for that is investment. Where do you think that money goes? You don’t earn returns on money that isn’t doing anything.

Yes you absolutely do earn returns on money that isn’t doing anything. If I buy a share of Apple and the share price goes up, I’ve just made a return on money that isn’t doing anything. The money I spent on that share didn’t enable any real economic activity other that me buying that share. My money didn’t go to Apple to enable them to grow their business. It went to some other investor who is primarily engaged in th…

What you're doing is providing liquidity to earlier investors and taking on their risk, that's absolutely your money doing something. Without this, investing in an IPO would be a much more risky endeavor.

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

#272

Post by yorwba »

spencerflem wrote: post #158
chii wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

But wages have stayed the same while housing, medicine, college, have gotten massively more expensive and & via inflation everything else is somewhat more expensive. I honestly find it absurd to suggest that we're somehow 'richer' while most young people have no hope of a stable life. Technology has made us much more productive but all that added value has been captured by the ultrarich

> wages have stayed the same while housing, medicine, college, have gotten massively more expensive and & via inflation everything else is somewhat more expensive

Which country is this where inflation affects everything except wages? Are you sure you're not comparing inflation-adjusted wages (where it's not surprising if they stay mostly the same) to nominal prices affected by inflation?

> I honestly find it absurd to suggest that we're somehow 'richer' while most young people have no hope of a stable life.

If most young people had no hope of a stable life before and then everyone got richer, so that more young people can hope to have a stable life, it can still be the case that most young people have no hope of a stable life. The only way "most young people have no hope of a stable life" could contradict "we're somehow 'richer'" is if there was a time when most young people could hope to have a stable life, and then things got worse. When was that?

> Technology has made us much more productive but all that added value has been captured by the ultrarich.

When people communicate over long distances today not by sending a letter but by calling each other, they're benefiting from technology without the added value being captured by the ultrarich. (Unless you think their mere existence sucks all joy out of hearing your loved ones' voices.)

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

#273

Post by sharemywin »

EarlKing wrote: post #172
romwell wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I want to agree with you , it so happens that your comment is just hyperbole/rhetoric and no substance. The substance of my comment is a simple model that explains why trickle-down doesn't work. If it helps, I'll add some references to support my argument: [1] TFA Thank you for the effort you put into providing your feedback.

No, parent was right, your comment lacks all substance. It supposes that 'the rich' simply hoard wealth like a mythical dragon in a cave, scrooge mcducking through it while the poor, tired masses starve to death. The truth is that they conserve their wealth by investing it, which means that money recirculates into the economy to provide for the continued prosperity of others. If they just sat on their money they'd ac…

and if by intelligence you mean paid engineering staff and sales and marketing skill then I fully agree with your statement. Which in my view is the main driver of wealth in this world.

laying out a persuasive argument and while withholding facts that materially relevant to the transaction to fool individuals without the time, resources or expertise to deal with the transaction.

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

#274

Post by rsj_hn »

Frost1x wrote: post #248
GuB-42 wrote: post #211

I don't know what the original "trickle down" theory is but if it is all about money, then both the theory and its rebuttal are just circular reasoning. The way I understand the "trickle down" idea is that the global economy is not a zero-sum game and when rich people build something, the poor indirectly take advantage of it, even if the wealth repartition curve doesn't change. For example, a rich person may use his…

>I don't know what the original "trickle down" theory is but if it is all about money, then both the theory and its rebuttal are just circular reasoning. It's more about giving preferential treatment, power, or advantage to the wealthy because they are considered the value creators and by giving them bigger breaks, advantages, or ability to make guidance decisions, they will move things in directions that benefit eve…

> It's more about giving preferential treatment, power, or advantage to the wealthy

"trickle down" is a slur against a set of economically liberal policies. It's not a "theory". It's not an economic model. And it's certainly not well-defined. It would be like arguing against "revolving door" sentencing, which is another slur.

Point being, anyone who uses the term "trickle down" is advocating some sort of propaganda, and tuning them out or calling them out for being propagandists is the best course of action. Being on the guard for these markers of propaganda is important in today's media environment, where so often advocacy masquerades as both news and science.

That does not mean that underneath all these political slurs there aren't useful debates about, for example, what is the right tax rate on capital income or property taxes. Should we increase or decrease business regulation, etc.

Those are all good discussions to have, but unlike the slurs, they are actually nuanced and people who approach them understand there are trade offs not simply reducible to "trickle down" or "revolving door". Therefore the goal of these slurs is to reduce thought. To eliminate nuance and to hide painful trade offs. To make it seem like there is one simple, obvious, correct solution to what is, in fact, a complex issue with no obvious solutions.

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

#275

Post by temp10298385 »

vixen99 wrote: post #25

Bit of a giveaway to write ' demolished the myth of 'trickle-down'. I am not familiar with the authors apart from Thomas Pickety. However would one seriously expect any other conclusion from him? He and the other authors (if they inserted the word 'myth') had an agenda and naturally, produced a report validating it.This is not to say there are no serious issues with the 98% of wealth distribution. I should not use th…

It is interesting that you think that Piketty, who has studied growth extensively, has not considered the positive sum aspects of the economy. If you read his books you will see him talk about it in excruciating detail.

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

#276

Post by [deleted] »

mtberatwork wrote: post #60
q1w2 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any tax cuts are trickle down? So the Democrat's push to reinstate the SALT tax credit (cut) are trickle down also? Are tax cuts in any bracket trickle down? When the GOP raises taxes - do they implode?

> Any tax cuts are trickle down? Of course not, but when tax cuts for the top are billed to be wealth generating mechanisms for the middle and lower classes, that is literally the definition of "trickle-down economics".

[deleted]

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

#277

Post by socialdemocrat »

mrjangles wrote: post #93

God this article is bad on so many levels I don't know where to start. First, income inequality doesn't measure income mobility. Places like the US that have a huge number of unskilled illegal and legal immigrants constantly entering at the bottom level will always have high income inequality. The question is, what happens to each individual over the course of their lives? 83% of Americans will earn more than their p…

Most western countries have equal or higher number of foreign born citizens relative to the US without having American levels of inequality. Remember that Europe e.g. is closer to areas of major conflicts such as the middle East and Africa which produces a lot of refugees.

Americans like to talk about how dirt poor Mexico is, but it is actually richer than plenty of Eastern European countries. Not to mention pretty much all of Africa, which sends refugees and illegals across the Mediterranean.

If you look at income mobility across different countries you will find that the US has quite bad income mobility. The US ranks below old class societies such as Britain.

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

#278

Post by Jensson »

cannabis_sam wrote: post #203

How the hell was this ever a myth…? It’s trivially shown to be complete and utter garbage.. Anyone pushing this type of pseudo-ideology should be laughed out of any intelligent discussion. (Sadly, in reality, these braindead morons are actually in charge of our economy..)

Trickle down is true. A McDonalds worker in a rich country earns much more than a McDonalds worker in India. You get paid more the more those around you get paid even if you yourself don't become more productive, that correlation is a fact.

Trickle down is the natural state of things, USA just prevented it from doing so. By importing low skill labor/exporting low skill jobs, making unions hostile to workers and not keeping minimum wage up it made less trickle down. Change any of those and trickle down would have worked, if workers had better legal support for effective worker friendly unions like Europe then they could get their rights themselves, if low skill jobs exceeded supply of low skill workers then pay would go up naturally, and if the government mandated a minimum wage so unions don't have to then it would have the same effect as a union. But USA went against all of those and ensured that money wouldn't trickle down.

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

#279

Post by mtberatwork »

simonsarris wrote: post #105
mtberatwork wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Any tax cuts are trickle down? Of course not, but when tax cuts for the top are billed to be wealth generating mechanisms for the middle and lower classes, that is literally the definition of "trickle-down economics".

I hope you understand that the SALT deduction that Dems want that he is referring to is a tax cut for the wealthy only. It exclusively applies to people wealthy enough to break the cap. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/02/us/politics/salt-cap-tax-...

I was responding to the parent's remark that "any tax cuts are trickle down?". As I mentioned, tax cuts on the wealthy pushed as wealth generating mechanisms for the lower classes is the literal definition of "trickle-down economics". Furthermore, who is saying the Dems never push the "trickle-down" argument themselves?

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

#280

Post by ptaffs »

Wolfenstein98k wrote: post #152
ianai wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it absolutely has been used by politicians and pundits since the 1980s into the present day and you’re the one spreading falsehoods.

It is talked about by its opponents. No one on the right uses the phrase except in response. Try and find some examples

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/derided-by-critics-trick...
Post reply on HN