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

American Wealth, Sliced Up

kottke.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 90 posts

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#11

Post by hatthew »

asjldkfin wrote: post #3

Can somebody explain how this graph makes sense? It seems to imply the top 2 people own 30% of the wealth, which is not what the data states.

Yeah the graph is more for vibes than an actual analogy. The yellow slice represents the top 1%, purple 90-99%, green 50-90%, and red bottom 50%. It would make a bit more sense if those slices were labeled "1 person", "9 people", "40 people", and "50 people" respectively.

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#12

Post by jmpman »

The laffer curve was used to justify lower taxes in order to maximize government revenues. When you look at an individual, you can imagine that each individual would have an optimal laffer curve. Too high of a tax rate, and people aren't incentivized to work for one more dollar. However, we never talk about the laffer curve for dead people. I'd say that it could be about as high as you want to make it, and they're not going to work any more or less for an additional dollar. And their children who inherit that wealth, also.. higher laffer curve. Somehow Republicans don't bring that up when they advocate lower taxes on the rich.

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#13

Post by cactacea »

asjldkfin wrote: post #3

Can somebody explain how this graph makes sense? It seems to imply the top 2 people own 30% of the wealth, which is not what the data states.

compare to https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/dataviz/dfa/distr...

rest of america == bottom 50%

hedge funders, fascist VCs, etc == 50-90%

walton children == 90-99%

elon bezos == 99.9%

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#14

Post by hnav »

JCTheDenthog wrote: post #2

I'd love the idea of a more equal share of wealth in America. Unfortunately most of the proposed solutions tend to be of the "make everyone equally miserable" sort, and usually come from the sorts of people that imagine themselves as the commissars and cadres of the new regime in such a situation. Europe has tried to limit to wealth of the wealthiest, and in the process seems to have utterly kneecapped their own econ…

You're looking at GDP when comparing Missouri to European nations. Bulgaria has higher life expectancy than half this country.

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#16

Post by MaxHoppersGhost »

JCTheDenthog wrote: post #2

I'd love the idea of a more equal share of wealth in America. Unfortunately most of the proposed solutions tend to be of the "make everyone equally miserable" sort, and usually come from the sorts of people that imagine themselves as the commissars and cadres of the new regime in such a situation. Europe has tried to limit to wealth of the wealthiest, and in the process seems to have utterly kneecapped their own econ…

I wish we’d focus more on living standards than wealth as I think that’s what really matters. “How can we lift up the people with low living standards in the US?” should be the question rather than “How can we keep people from becoming ultra rich?” which I think is what happened in Europe. The only reason wealth should be checked is because of undue influence on politics/power. Otherwise I don’t care if there are 1,000 trillionaires as long as as many Americans as possible have a good quality of life. I think for many the obsession with redistributing wealth comes from a deep seated jealousy.

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#17

Post by hatthew »

myroon5 wrote: post #9

That graph literally just has fake labels. In reality, millionaires collectively have more than an order of magnitude more wealth than billionaires: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/4zjnFxGWYkEF4nqMi/...

The data on the graph is real, but the labels are made up for vibes.

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#18

Post by marginalia_nu »

dayyan wrote: post #5

The acid test of intelligence is if one believes in a zero sum economy or not.

I don't think there's a real contradiction between the propositions:

1. The economy is not a zero-sum game.

2. The new gilded age concentrates wealth in a way that is harmful to free enterprise, detrimental to the economy, and bad for the world.

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#19

Post by LVB »

asjldkfin wrote: post #3

Can somebody explain how this graph makes sense? It seems to imply the top 2 people own 30% of the wealth, which is not what the data states.

I want to see the breakdown of fascist vs. non-fascist VCs, too!

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#20

Post by Blackstrat »

Generally, income distribution is a solved problem. The issue is that too many people aren't willing to take the steps necessary to get the income they seek. They'd rather scream about the minimum wage, the ultra-rich, the evil white men, etc. Redistribution schemes do not work. Bottom line, stay in school, get a functional education, stay off drugs, moderate alcohol intake, and don't have kids early, particularly when you aren't married. Yes, I'm aware that there are those people for whom such steps are insurmountable. That's where community organization come into play, e.g., churches, NGOs. It isn't the government's role to ensure equal outcomes. That's called communism. And it fails everywhere it's tried.
Post reply on HN