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

The top 10% owns 87% of the stocks

awealthofcommonsense.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 606 posts

Re: The top 10% owns 87% of the stocks

#21

Post by pydry »

iLoveOncall wrote: post #14

In the US you need to earn only $178,611 as a HOUSEHOLD to be in the top 10%. That's less than $90K per person. Comparatively, you need to earn $663,164 to be in the top 1%, and more than $3M to be in the top 0.1%. I just want to highlight this to remind that the top 10% is by far not made up exclusively of ultra-rich individuals like people on internet like to believe.

Protip: if you ever want to downplay inequality, gloss over wealth inequality and focus on income inequality to the exclusion of all else.

It's VERY effective.

Re: The top 10% owns 87% of the stocks

#22

Post by arvinsim »

blackeyeblitzar wrote: post #2

Financial education - spending less, saving up, and investing - is common sense but maybe needs to be taught in school. Or maybe the new sovereign wealth fund will indirectly reduce this inequality without needing every individual to take action. Not sure what other options there are.

Financial education is useless if you don't have capital.

Most poor people are just earning enough to live day by day. Getting financial literacy would help little.

Re: The top 10% owns 87% of the stocks

#23

Post by chgs »

iLoveOncall wrote: post #14

In the US you need to earn only $178,611 as a HOUSEHOLD to be in the top 10%. That's less than $90K per person. Comparatively, you need to earn $663,164 to be in the top 1%, and more than $3M to be in the top 0.1%. I just want to highlight this to remind that the top 10% is by far not made up exclusively of ultra-rich individuals like people on internet like to believe.

Top 1% by income or by wealth.

The former is less meaningful as it ignores your cost of living.

Re: The top 10% owns 87% of the stocks

#24

Post by KronisLV »

blackeyeblitzar wrote: post #2

Financial education - spending less, saving up, and investing - is common sense but maybe needs to be taught in school. Or maybe the new sovereign wealth fund will indirectly reduce this inequality without needing every individual to take action. Not sure what other options there are.

> spending less, saving up, and investing

On a personal level, sure, that's responsible (for whoever can actually afford to do that), but if everyone is living frugally and don't spend that much money at all, doesn't that have pretty horrible effects on the numerous businesses that actually need consumers?

Re: The top 10% owns 87% of the stocks

#25

Post by OtomotO »

weatherlite wrote: post #4

So a stock market and/or real estate crash can actually be good to reduce inequality . In fact I think its about the only way to dramatically reduce inequality. Think about young people trying to buy their 1st home now, its becoming impossible.

The rich stay rich no matter what.

Hell, there are companies and families who supported the third Reich openly.

They were rich before world war 2, they were rich after and they are still rich today.

Not to mention none of them had to go to the Nuremberg trials...

It's their system, it's their game.

Re: The top 10% owns 87% of the stocks

#26

Post by kaptainscarlet »

weatherlite wrote: post #4

So a stock market and/or real estate crash can actually be good to reduce inequality . In fact I think its about the only way to dramatically reduce inequality. Think about young people trying to buy their 1st home now, its becoming impossible.

It makes the rich poorer but keeps the poor in the same place.

Re: The top 10% owns 87% of the stocks

#27

Post by iLoveOncall »

pydry wrote: post #21
iLoveOncall wrote: post #14

In the US you need to earn only $178,611 as a HOUSEHOLD to be in the top 10%. That's less than $90K per person. Comparatively, you need to earn $663,164 to be in the top 1%, and more than $3M to be in the top 0.1%. I just want to highlight this to remind that the top 10% is by far not made up exclusively of ultra-rich individuals like people on internet like to believe.

Protip: if you ever want to downplay inequality, gloss over wealth inequality and focus on income inequality to the exclusion of all else. It's VERY effective.

The article also uses income...

Anyway, if anything the distribution based on wealth would even more starkly be hyper-focused at the top, the people in the 10-9% range aren't exactly sitting on mountains of gold.

Re: The top 10% owns 87% of the stocks

#29

Post by __loam »

swiftcoder wrote: post #12
denkmoon wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 2008 stock market crash famously reduced inequality. Definitely didn't increase inequality by leaving the average person (via government bailouts) holding the bag.

The 2008 crash was also famously centred around mortgages, rather than pure stocks

[flagged]

Re: The top 10% owns 87% of the stocks

#30

Post by iLoveOncall »

chgs wrote: post #23
iLoveOncall wrote: post #14

In the US you need to earn only $178,611 as a HOUSEHOLD to be in the top 10%. That's less than $90K per person. Comparatively, you need to earn $663,164 to be in the top 1%, and more than $3M to be in the top 0.1%. I just want to highlight this to remind that the top 10% is by far not made up exclusively of ultra-rich individuals like people on internet like to believe.

Top 1% by income or by wealth. The former is less meaningful as it ignores your cost of living.

Income, like the article used.
Post reply on HN