Liberalism has failed.
Perhaps to save it Just give a few trillion to the people in msci world stock locked for ten years or so to teach them.
The top 10% owns 87% of the stocks
41–50 of 606 posts
Re: The top 10% owns 87% of the stocks
#42So 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.
You guys are so obsessed with inequality because you're always looking in the other guy's cup. I don't care about inequality at all - only absolute living standards. The US has been an unequal place all its history and it's a tremendous country to live in.
Here's a recipe for happiness: stop comparing yourself to others and stop trying to keep up with the Joneses. It's old advice, but it's clearly been forgotten.
Re: The top 10% owns 87% of the stocks
#43So 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 2008 stock market crash famously reduced inequality. Definitely didn't increase inequality by leaving the average person (via government bailouts) holding the bag.
Indeed, the bailout if banks in multiple countries is the biggest transfer from the rest of us, to the rich there has ever been.
Absolutely enormous amounts of money.
Re: The top 10% owns 87% of the stocks
#44So 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.
This is astronomically incorrect it’s basically an info hazard. A market crash like that would result in extremely broad layoffs, major global supply chain instabilities, and a cataclysmic knock on effect of capital losses into nearly every walk of life on earth. Not to mention, as many already have, the federal govt would undoubtedly bail out the worst actors and leave the poor to fend for themselves. Just yesterday…
Arguably even doing it the first time around was a mistake.
Re: The top 10% owns 87% of the stocks
#45I think about this from time to time and I suppose everything is cyclical in the end. Most of us would have been some peasant in the feudal age and when it gets really bad it always ends in a revolution of some sort. It's just on a global scale and timeframe now. As more of the population feels the effects of inequality they won't appeased by just fancy toys and shiny things, they will want change by force. My only s…
There is always an exponential distribution of wealth, it isn’t rational to argue against it. What needs argument is what the exponent is.
Re: The top 10% owns 87% of the stocks
#46So 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.
You guys are so obsessed with inequality because you're always looking in the other guy's cup. I don't care about inequality at all - only absolute living standards. The US has been an unequal place all its history and it's a tremendous country to live in. Here's a recipe for happiness: stop comparing yourself to others and stop trying to keep up with the Joneses. It's old advice, but it's clearly been forgotten.
Even the most basic of primates have a sense of fairness and get unhappy if someone is hoarding.
Re: The top 10% owns 87% of the stocks
#47So 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.
I think its to recognize the role of Middle Men. With the tech (and globalization), Middle Men have been getting real fat.
Lina Khan types need solid support and fire power to make a dent.
Re: The top 10% owns 87% of the stocks
#48I think about this from time to time and I suppose everything is cyclical in the end. Most of us would have been some peasant in the feudal age and when it gets really bad it always ends in a revolution of some sort. It's just on a global scale and timeframe now. As more of the population feels the effects of inequality they won't appeased by just fancy toys and shiny things, they will want change by force. My only s…
> just on a global scale and timeframe now
And nuclear. We have yet to see our first nuclear civil war.
Re: The top 10% owns 87% of the stocks
#49In 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.
And now I'm wondering if this statistic is based on taxable income, because the extra rich mostly avoid those events too.
Re: The top 10% owns 87% of the stocks
#50So 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.
> 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.
This would assume rich people have all their money in stocks, which is not correct.