Live data from Hacker News

Billionaires amass more through inheritance than wealth creation, says UBS

ft.com

351–356 of 356 posts

Re: Billionaires amass more through inheritance than wealth creation, says UBS

#351
post #51

When you have the assurance that you'll get wealth handed down to you, it opens up the possibility to explore things you're good at and take on more risk to amass greater wealth. So really, it's a push and pull situation. Billionaires do indeed know how to get rich but they're from stable backgrounds which permits them to do so. Meanwhile, most of us are stuck at 9-to-5 jobs and worried about making good on our inter…

That's partially true, but I've very much seen the flip side as well. I know a few people that had trust funds, and for them it was absolutely the worst thing that could have been given to them. It basically stunted their growth to the point that they never really escaped the orbit of their parents because their parents always had the "leash" of paying for their lifestyle. Obviously that experience isn't universal -…

Wealth is a multiplier. If the kid is a bump on the log, they’ll be even more of one with more money. If they’re driven to succeed, they’ll be able to accomplish much much more with money that can fuel their endeavors.

Re: Billionaires amass more through inheritance than wealth creation, says UBS

#352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Overwhelmingly, violent revolution doesn't actually bring about the goals of the revolution. It just installs a new power structure with variations on all the old problems. Sometimes much worse. So it isn't really a "last resort". It's more of a "well you didn't compromise, so now our choice is to burn the whole system down"

Wholeheartedly agree. For the peasants, revolutionary goals are rarely fulfilled. For the previous elite though, they rarely find continuity of power post revolution. The sans-culottes didn't quite accomplish their goals(at least immediately), but Louis XVI among other elites didn't survive. Toussaint Louverture et al didn't accomplish their goals, but the French no longer controlled Haiti. Even Lenin and Trosky didn…

All true, which brings up the question how much better will the world be with a new elite. Also, maybe today’s generation of revolutionaries will do something different.

Re: Billionaires amass more through inheritance than wealth creation, says UBS

#353
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also think it's worth calling out that his follow-up, "Capital and Ideology" in its latter sections includes several suggestions for counteracting the trend to increasing inequality. One of these is basically that _every_ person should have a windfall inheritance when they're in their early adulthood, which would give them opportunities to pursue education, try starting a business, or whatever else. And naturally,…

> And naturally, this needs to be funded by taxes on the very wealthy. This is the part where the math never works out. If you look at the richest people, they have something like tens to low hundreds of billions of dollars. Which is less than the amount of money the federal government already spends every week. If you taxed the top 100 billionaires at a rate of 100%, it would fund the existing federal government (an…

Taxing the very wealthy heavily isn’t intended to fund the state. That argument is a red herring. It should be done to reduce the concentration of power that comes with dynastic wealth, which corrupts society. Arguments to maintain our status quo are typically ideological.

Re: Billionaires amass more through inheritance than wealth creation, says UBS

#354
post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of the criticisms to Piketty, not having done the math isn't really one of them. I don't have Capital and Ideology close at hand, so I can't check how he worked it out, but consulting some other sources: - the top 1% in the US apparently have around $45.7T in wealth [1] - there are around 22M people in the 20-24 age bracket and 23 in the 25-29 age bracket [2] So suppose there are 5.5M people turning 21 every year. Gi…

> the top 1% in the US apparently have around $45.7T in wealth "The top 1%" mostly isn't billionaires, it's cardiologists and lawyers and programmers. It's people who labor for money, not people who inherited it. Most of that wealth is their homes and retirement accounts. This is the problem I have with these proposals: They get sold as applying to dynastic wealth but in actual fact end up applying to many people who…

But even if professionals have studied, inordinate wealth ought not be an entitlement, since it is a gateway to dynastic wealth via inheritance.

Re: Billionaires amass more through inheritance than wealth creation, says UBS

#355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think "class mobility" is a thing that we have to have. I don't think its a problem that needs fixing. Really? If there were zero class mobility, that would mean that no matter how hard someone works, no matter how good their business ideas are, they'll never become more wealthy than their parents were when they were born (at least, compared to someone who sat around doing nothing). And it would mean that n…

When I hear class mobility, I think moving categories, not moving up and down in your own category. I believe strongly that people need to be rewarded for getting out of bed in the morning and doing something productive. I fear the UBI because I think its human nature to choose to do nothing. I think people who claim people will still work on a UBI are kidding themselves. So in context, I believe it's important that…

The evidence people do not prefer to be lazy. UBI studies show this too. Where is your evidence?

Re: Billionaires amass more through inheritance than wealth creation, says UBS

#356

The affects of this are being proved out at a macro scale already with big tech. 5 companies now have so much cash on hand they can buy their way out of any issue that would disrupt them. It means labor in any form is disincentivized to create as they will always been on not just the loser, by the hyper-loser side of the equation where their work is stolen and they get nothing in return.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN