Live data from Hacker News

The top 10% owns 87% of the stocks

awealthofcommonsense.com

111–120 of 606 posts

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

#111
post #91

[flagged]

> Grok suggests around 15% of US adults are involved in starting or running new businesses, based on recent data. This makes it sound like much of the people in the 10% are there because they started with most of the stock of the companies they created.

.. or those that own stocks are more likely to be in a position to start a company.

one of these possibilities seems more likely than the other if you ask me.

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

#112

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.

Interestingly, studies show that poor people often have much better financial planning (for the sole reason that they would often not eat otherwise) than richer people. The thing they lack is money.

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

#113
post #31

I 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…

It’s different this time around. The sheer complexity of society makes it hard to ascertain exactly the true nature of the situation. People who voted for trump aren’t even aware he’s part of the problem of wealth inequality. They aren’t even aware wealth inequality is the problem. At worst we will get an angry mob stampeding the White House with no real direction or objective. Are rich people the problem or is it th…

The memecoin stuff is just chefs kiss. Now he wants to impose tarrifs while not having the local production capacity. The citizens will pay for that. The rich will get the tax cuts and funding while everyone else will get austerity and be required to pull up your bootstraps.

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

#114
post #31

I 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…

It’s different this time around. The sheer complexity of society makes it hard to ascertain exactly the true nature of the situation. People who voted for trump aren’t even aware he’s part of the problem of wealth inequality. They aren’t even aware wealth inequality is the problem. At worst we will get an angry mob stampeding the White House with no real direction or objective. Are rich people the problem or is it th…

> They aren’t even aware wealth inequality is the problem.

It seems like a symptom. Primarily because "wealth management" does seem to be a skill. So the expectation would be that even if you equalized all wealth tomorrow and suddenly educated everyone to the same level in it's management then in a very short time a large imbalance would again be created.

> but they aren't sure what it is or who to blame,

It's impossible to acknowledge that both of you are most likely equally wrong but just in different directions? If you worked together you'd get much further yet you can't even grant them basic personal agency. What a bummer. Inequality abounds.

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

#115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the rich have cash flow and can continuously invest during crashes There are a lot of levered rich people. Musk would be screwed if he got margin called on Tesla.

So you are telling me there is hope after all? (I mean, unless there's a federal ruling that it's unconstitutional to let a Musk and his money part ways.)

Hope for what? Who would benefit?

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

#116
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The population might not be happy, but they don't have the means to change it. Revolutions don't happen when people are mad, they happen when the ones who can afford armies and equipment sense the possibility of coming out on top. 250 years ago George Washington could have financed the entire Revolutionary War out of his own pocket and he still would have retained two thirds of his wealth. Instead he put the losses o…

> 250 years ago George Washington His wealth was mainly in very illiquid land. A lot of it was near worthless unless US won the war since it was beyond the line drawn by the Royal Proclamation of 1763 and white settlers were generally banned from settling there. Otherwise like many landholders back in the day he was semi-broke and had limited access to cash. Of course after the war of course he was both compensated f…

Well, most of Elon Musks assets today are also not cash and highly dependent on the federal government going his way on key issues. He's certainly not dumb doing what he does if his goal is to get richer and more powerful. But unlike 200 years ago, we can watch live how that stuff plays out.

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

#117
The only thing that should matter is that the poorest segment of society becomes richer over time.

And it has (in inflation-adjusted terms, lower income Americans have become richer over many decades).

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

#118

Sincere question about communism: Let's say hypothetically that the distribution of stock ownership was more even across the population, and variance was largely (but not completely) due to length of time in the workforce. And further, that the stock owned by workers is a large enough block that they effectively have controlling shares at many companies. Maybe I'm talking about a different universe, but please imagin…

Yes, it would be so. In fact, if automation starts taking jobs from people on a larger scale, it would be a way to reduce economic inequality.

That concep/idea is called: Universal Basic Dividend.

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

#120

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.

> Think about young people trying to buy their 1st home now, its becoming impossible.

At least in Finland today it's much easier for young people to buy their 1st home now compared to 15 years ago. Interest rates are roughly where they were 15 years ago, but house prices in real terms have gone way down. There's also huge market asymmetry with large amount of vacant properties that nobody wants to buy, and relatively few buyers.

Post reply on HN