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

Myths of the 1 Percent: What’s Putting People at the Top

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 144 posts

Re: Myths of the 1 Percent: What’s Putting People at the Top

#111

Post by AstralStorm »

humanrebar wrote: post #108
dcre wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Walton fortune was generated by Sam Walton's employees but captured by Sam Walton. What does property mean, indeed.

Those are two different subjects, then. There is inherited money and generated money. If we think it's easy to generate money the wrong way, then there's not much point in lambasting inheritances. That's actually a legitimate way to get money, at least compared to using (unfair) power and information imbalances to always give yourself an (unfair) sweet deal.

One leads to the other. You can hire more specialists in making money and capturing labour.

Re: Myths of the 1 Percent: What’s Putting People at the Top

#112

Post by charlesdm »

AstralStorm wrote: post #109
charlesdm wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of heirs that continue to participate in business. Taking their money away isn't going change much, aside from taking their money away. You act as if all inherited wealth is just sitting in bank accounts. Some is, some isn't, some heirs are active in and good at business, others aren't.

It is not doing as much as it should. What it does is bring profits to financiers who control it. This as opposed to direct investment (VC or starting new enterprises). even having a controlling share in a company is not exactly the same. Working on a business is not enough of most of the money gets frozen in fixed assets or rented away to bankers.

Honestly, VC is probably one of the least attractive investment opportunities around. It's a crapshoot, very high risk, and the returns (if you even get any) are low.

It's a lot easier making money through Private Equity deals.

If I had $100m, I wouldn't be putting it in a VC fund. Not saying I wouldn't make direct investments, but I would only make those on the assumption the money is gone.

I don't think anyone makes investments in the stock market and private equity on the assumption the money is gone.

Re: Myths of the 1 Percent: What’s Putting People at the Top

#113

Post by auggierose »

Retra wrote: post #103
auggierose wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you get that wrong. Trump and Brexit are the direct result of democratic decisions in countries with a long history of democracy. Denying that isn't helping.

Yes, democratic decisions resulting from massive propaganda campaigns, funded by some extremely wealthy personalities. Obviously the problem here is democracy, not the very few overtly corrupt and overly powerful people undermining it.

And these overtly corrupt and overly powerful people exist within old democracies. You might have a nice and naive imagination of what democracy could be, but you shouldn't deny what it is RIGHT NOW.

Re: Myths of the 1 Percent: What’s Putting People at the Top

#114

Post by mamon »

dcre wrote: post #87
humanrebar wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...unearned rents and inheritances are a big problem The Walton fortune was earned... by Sam Walton. If he wasn't allowed to leave it to his family, what does property even mean?

The Walton fortune was generated by Sam Walton's employees but captured by Sam Walton. What does property mean, indeed.

Sam Walton's employees would not be able to generate that fortune on their own. You seem to underestimate the role of leadership, vision and other business skills in creating a company. Not to mention that many of those employees probably also made their own small fortunes along the way.

Also, you make it sound like Sam Walton somehow has a debt of gratitude to a society for it allowing him to get rich. I think that no such debt ever exists: in exchange for those billions of dollars Walton made society has already gotten something equally valuable in return, i.e. Wal-Mart mall in every city, providing cheap and easy access to all kinds of consumer goods. That's how business works: making money by providing services that society finds valuable.

Re: Myths of the 1 Percent: What’s Putting People at the Top

#115

Post by ryandrake »

haberman wrote: post #93
Solid_State wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, Mark Zuckerberg went to high school at Phillips Exeter. Their current tuition is $39,000 per year for day students, and $50,000 for boarders, of which he was one (although he went during 1999 equivalent tuitions). On the 1-10 self-made scale they have, with 1 being inheritance and 10 being self-made, he ranks an 8. So that is the bearing for this scale they made to keep in mind - the 8 of 10 toward "self-made"…

Financial aid exists. Phillips Exeter's web page says that families with income under $75,000 pay $0 of tuition: https://www.exeter.edu/admissions-and-financial-aid I went to boarding school and came from a family of two church musicians. Some of my classmates came from wealthy families, others came from very modest backgrounds.

Raise your hand if you think Mark Zuckerberg got need-based financial aid. Hint: Both parents were doctors. Him being ranked at the same "self-made level" as a middle class kid that went to a state school is ludicrous.

Re: Myths of the 1 Percent: What’s Putting People at the Top

#116

Post by ryandrake »

ameister14 wrote: post #71
sidlls wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg aren't 5 or lower means this scale is not credible. Both of these individuals had access to substantial capital and social connections, well above any meaningful definition of "middle-class", to jumpstart their businesses.

I don't think that's entirely fair - let's say your parents made $500,000 a year; if you made 90 billion, wouldn't that still be self-made? Sure, it's not as self-made as Carnegie or Rockefeller who would have been 10/10 as child-laborers turned wealthiest men in the world, but it's not exactly Trump or JP Morgan Jr., either.

When your parents are among the top 1% in the country (and, presumably, act as a risk-cushion in case you were to fail), it is difficult for me to buy that you are self-made.

Re: Myths of the 1 Percent: What’s Putting People at the Top

#117

Post by 200x0 »

fnovd wrote: post #96
200x0 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I said, vastly different views, to the point of being annoying. We, as a country, are not in the business of "country-building" but rather survival and that of avoiding pain. Our government doesn't need talented individuals - they just need brainwashed populace and stability for their power. Thinkers are direct infraction to the system and usually are not tolareted. Also, what do you expect disarray of talented in…

So you solution (highlighted in point 4) is to move to a Western country and become part of the problem?

Only way of fixing most of the third-world countries is within Western countries. You don't understand how "problems" work in the third-world, the real problems can't be fixed on-the-ground, most attempts only end up enriching the bloodthirsty puppets of yours and establishing their domain of power even further into the roots of these animal farms.

Also, individuals, including me, never signed up to fight unwinnable fight against your tyranny when we were born, so give me a fucking break.

Re: Myths of the 1 Percent: What’s Putting People at the Top

#118

Post by dcre »

mamon wrote: post #114
dcre wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Walton fortune was generated by Sam Walton's employees but captured by Sam Walton. What does property mean, indeed.

Sam Walton's employees would not be able to generate that fortune on their own. You seem to underestimate the role of leadership, vision and other business skills in creating a company. Not to mention that many of those employees probably also made their own small fortunes along the way. Also, you make it sound like Sam Walton somehow has a debt of gratitude to a society for it allowing him to get rich. I think that…

The fact that leadership is necessary (which I do not deny) does not imply that some particular share of the resulting surplus value should go to said leadership. The share of surplus value captured by capital is something we get to decide as a society, and the idea that "as much as capital can manage to capture" is a natural and just share is a pervasive and pernicious lie.

Re: Myths of the 1 Percent: What’s Putting People at the Top

#119

Post by fallingfrog »

aantix wrote: post #54
Mitchhhs wrote: post #22

Is inequality a feature or a bug of capitalism? Seems like the general thinking is that its a feature in-so-much as it encourages innovation, entrepreneurship, etc. It seems like it becomes a bug when it reaches a level in which it creates a positive feedback loop of more inequality. As with anything, i've noticed the discussion is really about how much, not should it exist at all. Almost every debate in American pol…

"Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free." -- Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

“Alike and equal are not the same thing at all.”

― Madeleine L'Engle, A Wrinkle in Time

Re: Myths of the 1 Percent: What’s Putting People at the Top

#120

Post by Finbel »

aantix wrote: post #54
Mitchhhs wrote: post #22

Is inequality a feature or a bug of capitalism? Seems like the general thinking is that its a feature in-so-much as it encourages innovation, entrepreneurship, etc. It seems like it becomes a bug when it reaches a level in which it creates a positive feedback loop of more inequality. As with anything, i've noticed the discussion is really about how much, not should it exist at all. Almost every debate in American pol…

"Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free." -- Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

That got black and white quick.
Post reply on HN