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

Top 1% Control 39% of World's Wealth

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 36 posts

Re: Top 1% Control 39% of World's Wealth

#11

Post by czr80 »

dylangs1030 wrote: post #5
dtrizzle wrote: post #2

I hate headlines like this. Wealth is not finite.

The sensationalism surrounding this is really kind of sad. It also drives a knife through the intellectual aptitudes of my circle of friends. People don't really understand game theory or sociological models well enough to understand that this sort of wealth distribution makes sense, when you look at data. The biggest impediment to this, in my experience, is that people expect reality to intuitively make sense, and o…

Ok. I understand game theory. What do you mean that this "makes sense"?

Re: Top 1% Control 39% of World's Wealth

#12

Post by jbooth »

dylangs1030 wrote: post #5
dtrizzle wrote: post #2

I hate headlines like this. Wealth is not finite.

The sensationalism surrounding this is really kind of sad. It also drives a knife through the intellectual aptitudes of my circle of friends. People don't really understand game theory or sociological models well enough to understand that this sort of wealth distribution makes sense, when you look at data. The biggest impediment to this, in my experience, is that people expect reality to intuitively make sense, and o…

This sort of wealth distribution is almost without precedent in the modern economy. It happened before in the 1920s and didn't end well.

If you understand "game theory or sociological models well enough to understand that this sort of wealth distribution makes sense, when you look at data", can you explain it to me? I was under the impression that it's a disturbing trend and would love to be comforted.

Re: Top 1% Control 39% of World's Wealth

#14

Post by dylangs1030 »

marknutter wrote: post #8

And yet they only have 24 hours in the day to live their life like everybody else. I only envy people's wealth up to a point, after which having more money doesn't really do a whole lot for you because enjoyment of that wealth just doesn't scale. And if everybody's wealth is increasing worldwide, what good does it do us to point out that it's increasing faster for some than others? After all, their wealth is increasi…

The article wasn't deriding wealth in tune with the usual tone of that headline. But you're right, it shouldn't bother you.

Friends of mine react with disgust that someone can make $200k or much, much more as a programmer, consultant, startup entrepreneur (particularly in the last case).

"Who needs all that money? What are you going to do with it all?" These are typically people who wouldn't mind having that much money either. It doesn't matter what's done with it all. Successful people drive the economy. It's the opposite, being miserly with money, that's bad for the economy.

Re: Top 1% Control 39% of World's Wealth

#15

Post by dylangs1030 »

lifeguard wrote: post #7

If you work hard, and become successful, it does not necessarily mean you are successful because you worked hard, just as if you are tall with long hair it doesn’t mean you would be a midget if you were bald. Historically, a story about people inside impressive buildings ignoring or even taunting people standing outside shouting at them turns out to be a story with an unhappy ending. 99 percent is a very large percen…

Did you read the article? This isn't about Occupy Wall Street at all. It's not criticizing the 1% and doesn't seem in line with your comment here.

Re: Top 1% Control 39% of World's Wealth

#16

Post by marknutter »

dylangs1030 wrote: post #14
marknutter wrote: post #8

And yet they only have 24 hours in the day to live their life like everybody else. I only envy people's wealth up to a point, after which having more money doesn't really do a whole lot for you because enjoyment of that wealth just doesn't scale. And if everybody's wealth is increasing worldwide, what good does it do us to point out that it's increasing faster for some than others? After all, their wealth is increasi…

The article wasn't deriding wealth in tune with the usual tone of that headline. But you're right, it shouldn't bother you. Friends of mine react with disgust that someone can make $200k or much, much more as a programmer, consultant, startup entrepreneur (particularly in the last case). "Who needs all that money? What are you going to do with it all?" These are typically people who wouldn't mind having that much mon…

It's hard to see headlines like this and not think it's deriding the wealthy. It could have been put in a much more innocuous way, like "99% of the world's population controls 61% of the world's wealth". That just doesn't seem to have the same punch, though.

Re: Top 1% Control 39% of World's Wealth

#17

Post by lifeguard »

dylangs1030 wrote: post #15
lifeguard wrote: post #7

If you work hard, and become successful, it does not necessarily mean you are successful because you worked hard, just as if you are tall with long hair it doesn’t mean you would be a midget if you were bald. Historically, a story about people inside impressive buildings ignoring or even taunting people standing outside shouting at them turns out to be a story with an unhappy ending. 99 percent is a very large percen…

Did you read the article? This isn't about Occupy Wall Street at all. It's not criticizing the 1% and doesn't seem in line with your comment here.

Do you know what the occupy movement is about at all? I don't think so. It is not about Wall Street.

Re: Top 1% Control 39% of World's Wealth

#18

Post by mseebach »

lifeguard wrote: post #7

If you work hard, and become successful, it does not necessarily mean you are successful because you worked hard, just as if you are tall with long hair it doesn’t mean you would be a midget if you were bald. Historically, a story about people inside impressive buildings ignoring or even taunting people standing outside shouting at them turns out to be a story with an unhappy ending. 99 percent is a very large percen…

That article is well written but that's concealing a lot of logical fallacies. Hard work might not be a perfect predictor of success, but it's a lot stronger than the relationship between baldness and height.

I also enjoyed the vague, there but not quite, threat of violence that you quoted the beginning of.

Also, the fallacious audacity of claiming to speak for the 99%. If the 99% had any kind of common ground to their concerns, they could elect a vast majority in every single elected body in the US and get their way, almost overnight (in practice, it'll take four years).

Re: Top 1% Control 39% of World's Wealth

#19

Post by dylangs1030 »

rooshdi wrote: post #9
dylangs1030 wrote: post #3

Excellent motivation to become wealthy, but not necessarily new information.

How is it motivating? If anything, it highlights the growing disparity of wealth in the world. Seems like humanity is going backwards.

Which side do you want to be on? The side that controls the greatest piece of the pie or the side that is the pie?

Does that sound too cynical to you? It's just my opinion, but I'm not going to hold it against mankind that some people have A Lot More Stuff. Wealth is not a finite resource, it can be had in a variety of different ways for the creative. Inheritances aside, if getting rich is the side effect to booming innovation, I'm not too bummed about it. It's business, and the rich have no compuctions about selling you something to feel better about mankind's slow devolution into hedonism, so why not get on board with them?

When you become rich, you will have more power, influence and resources to Save The World. Start there?

Re: Top 1% Control 39% of World's Wealth

#20

Post by dylangs1030 »

lifeguard wrote: post #17
dylangs1030 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read the article? This isn't about Occupy Wall Street at all. It's not criticizing the 1% and doesn't seem in line with your comment here.

Do you know what the occupy movement is about at all? I don't think so. It is not about Wall Street.

No, but Wall Street is the biggest success (that I know of) of that movement.

I'm not saying your ideological stance is wrong, I'm saying it doesn't seem relevant to this article.

Post reply on HN