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

Do the Rich Need the Rest of America?

blogs.wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 23 posts

Re: Do the Rich Need the Rest of America?

#11

Post by olefoo »

rdj wrote: post #6
api wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which "Atlas" are you referring to? If you mean that the American people are tired of supporting a billionaire welfare class, then yeah, maybe.

While both remarks were somewhat snarky, I'd like to hear your evidence that "the American people" are supporting the "billionaire welfare class". It's the first time I've ever heard the table turned like that and would like to learn more.

The billionaire welfare class would be the ones who:

1. have their liabilities capped by statute (see BP, GE, Peabody, etc. )

2. have their debts made whole by government action (see most financial companies in 2008)

3. have ownership of or share fractional ownership in a US Senator

4. Are the beneficial owner of a defense contractor.

5. from a long way off look like oligarchs

Re: Do the Rich Need the Rest of America?

#12

Post by starkfist »

api wrote: post #10
chadmalik wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Um, I guess you were frozen in cryostasis pre-2007 and missed the entire financial "crisis" which involved something on the order of $14 trillion (i.e. 1 year's GDP or > the entire national debt) was funneled in the form of free money, loan guarantees, etc. into the pockets of Wall Street and the rich. Welcome, and prepare to be surprised at our new president's middle name and how crazy Mel Gibson really is.

America already totally forgot about that. All I read now is people blaming overpaid union workers (what few there are of those) for our government financial woes. Lobbyists? Bailouts? Corrupt contractors? Endless wars to make the world safe for international corporations? Nah, it's the unionists who are bankrupting us! (I'm not necessarily that big of a fan of public sector unions... just saying there are much fatte…

Wars and defense contractor money comes out of a mysterious black pool of federal tax dollars. One can actually kinda measure how unionized county sheriffs making $600,000 a year in California are bankrupting the state.

Re: Do the Rich Need the Rest of America?

#13

Post by api »

olefoo wrote: post #11
rdj wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While both remarks were somewhat snarky, I'd like to hear your evidence that "the American people" are supporting the "billionaire welfare class". It's the first time I've ever heard the table turned like that and would like to learn more.

The billionaire welfare class would be the ones who: 1. have their liabilities capped by statute (see BP, GE, Peabody, etc. ) 2. have their debts made whole by government action (see most financial companies in 2008) 3. have ownership of or share fractional ownership in a US Senator 4. Are the beneficial owner of a defense contractor. 5. from a long way off look like oligarchs

#3 made me LOL

Is there an exchange for senators? Do they have ticker symbols?

I forgot about liability caps. Those are huge.

Re: Do the Rich Need the Rest of America?

#14

Post by muhfuhkuh »

kd0amg wrote: post #7
rbranson wrote: post #3

Why do people even pay attention to this drivel? Who is going to dream up their fancy meals, drive their fancy cars, clean their fancy housing, and manage their financial empire? This just touches the surface. Who's going to educate the middle class they depend on for execution, protect their property and legal rights? The rich have more to gain through society, law, and government than any other class.

The article's claim isn't that they don't need the middle and lower classes, just that they don't need the American middle and lower classes (instead, what they need from those classes can come from foreigners).

I would love to see an American (even a rich one) navigate (for example) China's business atmosphere and not end up stymied.

I'm often reminded, when someone claims to have the "secret" to some other country's vast "untapped" market, to an interview with Jack Welch when he was still at the helm of General Electric.

Much earlier on, he knew of China's burgeoning economy, and wanted GE to be at the forefront of it, marketing products bearing their service mark on all manner of product. They decided to start with light bulbs, and picked out a plot of land in an industrial area of Northern china and started making them. Within just a few years, China went from the typical 4-5 light bulb companies or factories (which Welch indicates is the norm for any market regardless of population) to 2,700. Every mayor of every town in the nearby area decided to poach one worker from GE's factory, replicate the manufacturing process, secured funding from Central Bank for machines to make bulbs from the US, and set to work competing directly against GE.

Somehow, I don't think China is any kind of market for anyone but the Chinese. Call me crazy.

Re: Do the Rich Need the Rest of America?

#15

Post by olefoo »

api wrote: post #13
olefoo wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The billionaire welfare class would be the ones who: 1. have their liabilities capped by statute (see BP, GE, Peabody, etc. ) 2. have their debts made whole by government action (see most financial companies in 2008) 3. have ownership of or share fractional ownership in a US Senator 4. Are the beneficial owner of a defense contractor. 5. from a long way off look like oligarchs

#3 made me LOL Is there an exchange for senators? Do they have ticker symbols? I forgot about liability caps. Those are huge.

> Is there an exchange for senators?

It's called K street, I believe. But, it's a strictly private equity game, capitalism at it's most unfettered; if you know what I mean.

Re: Do the Rich Need the Rest of America?

#16

Post by api »

olefoo wrote: post #15
api wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

#3 made me LOL Is there an exchange for senators? Do they have ticker symbols? I forgot about liability caps. Those are huge.

> Is there an exchange for senators? It's called K street, I believe. But, it's a strictly private equity game, capitalism at it's most unfettered; if you know what I mean.

Nit pick: actually, capitalism would be about succeeding without a government teat to suck on. :)

Re: Do the Rich Need the Rest of America?

#17

Post by kls »

api wrote: post #8
rdj wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While both remarks were somewhat snarky, I'd like to hear your evidence that "the American people" are supporting the "billionaire welfare class". It's the first time I've ever heard the table turned like that and would like to learn more.

America subsidizes its rich tremendously. I have absolutely no problem with the genuinely self-made rich. I have a big problem with billionaire welfare queens. Direct subsidies: - In 2008-2009, America bailed out its financial class to the tune of almost a trillion dollars. Some of this was paid back, but it still amounted to a zero-interest loan to people worth $1M+. A lot of it ended up in offshore accounts and bon…

The tax code is filled with loopholes that require complex accounting to achieve, amounting to a huge regressive tax on those who do not have personal accountants.

As a person that broke the mark about 6 years ago, I have to agree. The first year that I "made it" was the first year that I could afford a real CPA. The loopholes where amazing. I ended up paying slightly less taxes than the year before and earned twice as much.

As much as I take advantage of the system (anyone in their right mind would). It is unfair, I feel that I pay enough, but it is ridiculous that we have to use loop holes in the first place.

The politicians raise taxes on the rich to win some points with the voting mass, they create some loopholes with a wink, wink to the rich who go along because in the end it is the same net. Meanwhile the taxes are not spread even, the rich and middle class end up bearing the brunt of taxation while it hurts the middle class far worse.

Re: Do the Rich Need the Rest of America?

#18

Post by chc »

api wrote: post #10
chadmalik wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Um, I guess you were frozen in cryostasis pre-2007 and missed the entire financial "crisis" which involved something on the order of $14 trillion (i.e. 1 year's GDP or > the entire national debt) was funneled in the form of free money, loan guarantees, etc. into the pockets of Wall Street and the rich. Welcome, and prepare to be surprised at our new president's middle name and how crazy Mel Gibson really is.

America already totally forgot about that. All I read now is people blaming overpaid union workers (what few there are of those) for our government financial woes. Lobbyists? Bailouts? Corrupt contractors? Endless wars to make the world safe for international corporations? Nah, it's the unionists who are bankrupting us! (I'm not necessarily that big of a fan of public sector unions... just saying there are much fatte…

It's not that union workers are overpaid as a rule, but that a few unions manage to get unmaintainable benefits for their workers (particularly the more influential ones) in order to justify high union dues and bring more power to those union bosses. A lot of union workers I know don't really like their unions too much, but it doesn't matter — those unions have become hungry political entities that are no more the sum of their workers than the American government is the sum of its populace.

Re: Do the Rich Need the Rest of America?

#19

Post by abalashov »

api wrote: post #8
rdj wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While both remarks were somewhat snarky, I'd like to hear your evidence that "the American people" are supporting the "billionaire welfare class". It's the first time I've ever heard the table turned like that and would like to learn more.

America subsidizes its rich tremendously. I have absolutely no problem with the genuinely self-made rich. I have a big problem with billionaire welfare queens. Direct subsidies: - In 2008-2009, America bailed out its financial class to the tune of almost a trillion dollars. Some of this was paid back, but it still amounted to a zero-interest loan to people worth $1M+. A lot of it ended up in offshore accounts and bon…

Thank you; I couldn't have asked for a more comprehensive and encyclopedic reply to the parent post!

I share your pet peeve about businesspeople who have deemed academia an unnecessary economic sink.

Re: Do the Rich Need the Rest of America?

#20

Post by api »

kls wrote: post #17
api wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

America subsidizes its rich tremendously. I have absolutely no problem with the genuinely self-made rich. I have a big problem with billionaire welfare queens. Direct subsidies: - In 2008-2009, America bailed out its financial class to the tune of almost a trillion dollars. Some of this was paid back, but it still amounted to a zero-interest loan to people worth $1M+. A lot of it ended up in offshore accounts and bon…

The tax code is filled with loopholes that require complex accounting to achieve, amounting to a huge regressive tax on those who do not have personal accountants. As a person that broke the mark about 6 years ago, I have to agree. The first year that I "made it" was the first year that I could afford a real CPA. The loopholes where amazing. I ended up paying slightly less taxes than the year before and earned twice…

I've experienced this a little bit too.

The richer you are, the bigger the loopholes get. When you get really rich, you can do offshore accounting and all kinds of big-ticket tax-dodging that results in you paying less taxes as a percentage of your income than the person who makes your lattes.

I'm actually in favor of a flat tax (maybe trailing off to zero at the extreme low end of the scale) with absolutely no loopholes. Everyone pays X percent on all income, period. You might have a few deductions, but they would be for things like healthcare, child care, and education and would be strictly monitored.

That would actually raise taxes on the rich dramatically.

Post reply on HN