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

The ultra-rich are claiming an increasing share of global wealth

lemonde.fr

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 71 posts

Re: The ultra-rich are claiming an increasing share of global wealth

#11

Post by simianwords »

boh wrote: post #8
simianwords wrote: post #4

Rich people having too much wealth is not necessarily that bad a thing because most of the investment is in productive companies. It’s not like they are using their wealth on frivolous consumption. Which means redistribution would only change who controls the investment and not the actual consumption patterns of people. Implication is that poor people will consume the same as before after redistribution with perhaps…

I'm glad you approve of "most of the investment", unfortunately "productive companies" don't do as well as various financial instruments which operate largely on symbolic capital. Private equity, which is only accessible by "rich people", doesn't exactly worry too much about productivity vs leveraged buyouts. It's interesting that you feel so strongly about other people succeeding though. It might seem strange but ot…

1. if we are talking about billionaire's wealth like Bezos, Musk etc - all their wealth is in their own company. you can decide for yourself as to whether these companies are productive or not

2. private equity is a necessary evil that tries to make something out of companies that never had a good future anyway. not a lot of billionaire wealth is in PE. in fact pension firms are one of the largest stakeholders in PE which means the common people have stake in them too. what is your take on that?

3. i want other people to succeed too - our society is built such that any rando can convince YC and get funding.

Re: The ultra-rich are claiming an increasing share of global wealth

#12

Post by simianwords »

antinomicus wrote: post #9
simianwords wrote: post #4

Rich people having too much wealth is not necessarily that bad a thing because most of the investment is in productive companies. It’s not like they are using their wealth on frivolous consumption. Which means redistribution would only change who controls the investment and not the actual consumption patterns of people. Implication is that poor people will consume the same as before after redistribution with perhaps…

Who paid you to make this comment? This is so unbelievably out of touch I have a hard time believing it is anything other than Astro turf.

do you have any specific points against what i said? i'm willing to change my beliefs but i made these beliefs after pondering about it.

Re: The ultra-rich are claiming an increasing share of global wealth

#13

Post by hobs »

simianwords wrote: post #10
hobs wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is a yacht but frivolous consumption? A supercar? A private jet? Designer clothes? The list goes on for miles.

what percentage of billionaires wealth goes into consumption? take a guess.

What absolute value does? Percentages are a very weird way to look at it when people are starving. (also, tax them more)

Re: The ultra-rich are claiming an increasing share of global wealth

#14

Post by simianwords »

hobs wrote: post #13
simianwords wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what percentage of billionaires wealth goes into consumption? take a guess.

What absolute value does? Percentages are a very weird way to look at it when people are starving. (also, tax them more)

i'm willing to talk about absolute as well. lets try to understand how many lives can be saved if billionaires completely cut their frivolous spending. lets be clear that this has to be compared against how much wealth they brought for others and whether they could have done this if the incentive for personal spending did not exist.

assuming billionaires spend .1% of their wealth on frivolous purchases - you would net a one time amount of around 20 billion dollars. you can't do anything with this let alone save poverty. if you could then you can simply ask the government to move 20 billion around. they have tried it and it doesn't work.

Re: The ultra-rich are claiming an increasing share of global wealth

#15

Post by m463 »

simianwords wrote: post #4

Rich people having too much wealth is not necessarily that bad a thing because most of the investment is in productive companies. It’s not like they are using their wealth on frivolous consumption. Which means redistribution would only change who controls the investment and not the actual consumption patterns of people. Implication is that poor people will consume the same as before after redistribution with perhaps…

One friend of mine says that people mindfully spending their money outperform government spending which tends to be much more wasteful.

Re: The ultra-rich are claiming an increasing share of global wealth

#16

Post by lovich »

simianwords wrote: post #4

Rich people having too much wealth is not necessarily that bad a thing because most of the investment is in productive companies. It’s not like they are using their wealth on frivolous consumption. Which means redistribution would only change who controls the investment and not the actual consumption patterns of people. Implication is that poor people will consume the same as before after redistribution with perhaps…

ah yes, I remember the prime caveat of capitalism where having a few people with all the decision making power at the top causes the wisdom of the crowd to make better micro economic decisions.

There is no functional difference between a handful of plutocrats deciding capital allocation and a handful of monarchs deciding capital allocation. If you are pro capitalism you should be against letting wealth, and the associated decision power, accumulate in a few individuals

Re: The ultra-rich are claiming an increasing share of global wealth

#17

Post by lovich »

simianwords wrote: post #11
boh wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm glad you approve of "most of the investment", unfortunately "productive companies" don't do as well as various financial instruments which operate largely on symbolic capital. Private equity, which is only accessible by "rich people", doesn't exactly worry too much about productivity vs leveraged buyouts. It's interesting that you feel so strongly about other people succeeding though. It might seem strange but ot…

1. if we are talking about billionaire's wealth like Bezos, Musk etc - all their wealth is in their own company. you can decide for yourself as to whether these companies are productive or not 2. private equity is a necessary evil that tries to make something out of companies that never had a good future anyway. not a lot of billionaire wealth is in PE. in fact pension firms are one of the largest stakeholders in PE…

> ... our society is built such that any rando can convince YC and get funding.

I disagree.

What proof do you have that the random homeless guy and a kid graduating Stanford that was paid for by their parents, can convince YC to get funding?

Re: The ultra-rich are claiming an increasing share of global wealth

#18

Post by simianwords »

lovich wrote: post #17
simianwords wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. if we are talking about billionaire's wealth like Bezos, Musk etc - all their wealth is in their own company. you can decide for yourself as to whether these companies are productive or not 2. private equity is a necessary evil that tries to make something out of companies that never had a good future anyway. not a lot of billionaire wealth is in PE. in fact pension firms are one of the largest stakeholders in PE…

> ... our society is built such that any rando can convince YC and get funding. I disagree. What proof do you have that the random homeless guy and a kid graduating Stanford that was paid for by their parents, can convince YC to get funding?

i don't have proof. but if your suggestion is to make that easier then i'm with you.

i don't think redistribution is the best way to achieve it (for the same reasons i mentioned above).

Re: The ultra-rich are claiming an increasing share of global wealth

#19

Post by simianwords »

lovich wrote: post #16
simianwords wrote: post #4

Rich people having too much wealth is not necessarily that bad a thing because most of the investment is in productive companies. It’s not like they are using their wealth on frivolous consumption. Which means redistribution would only change who controls the investment and not the actual consumption patterns of people. Implication is that poor people will consume the same as before after redistribution with perhaps…

ah yes, I remember the prime caveat of capitalism where having a few people with all the decision making power at the top causes the wisdom of the crowd to make better micro economic decisions. There is no functional difference between a handful of plutocrats deciding capital allocation and a handful of monarchs deciding capital allocation. If you are pro capitalism you should be against letting wealth, and the assoc…

there is a meaningful difference between monarch deciding capital allocation and a CEO deciding how to spend money on their own company.

China is a good example - they had something like a monarch allocating capital throughout the country and setting prices. Even they realised it is not scalable.

Re: The ultra-rich are claiming an increasing share of global wealth

#20

Post by seventytwo »

simianwords wrote: post #4

Rich people having too much wealth is not necessarily that bad a thing because most of the investment is in productive companies. It’s not like they are using their wealth on frivolous consumption. Which means redistribution would only change who controls the investment and not the actual consumption patterns of people. Implication is that poor people will consume the same as before after redistribution with perhaps…

Ah, yes. Which is why we should return to tradition of the fiefdoms of yore, where the dukes and sultans famously brought great wealth and prosperity to their indentured servants!

Thank you, omnipotent billionaires, for your generosity and grace!

Post reply on HN