The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy • Hacker News Board

Re: The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy

#231

Post by perl4ever » Wed, May 30, 2018, 3:37 AM UTC

jadedhacker wrote: post #184

perl4ever wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't care about class competition, nor do I need a "lot" (by the standards of the wealthy) of things to be happy in life. But I like things (art, collectibles) that wouldn't exist except for social competition of the rich, regardless of whether I will ever own them. I like that they exist. When people won't shut up about how terrible possessions and competition are, it tells me they are so torn up and conflicted a…

I mean, it's undeniable that the rich create luxury goods that are often aesthetically pleasing, but they are items that are enjoyed almost exclusively by the rich. At most, the average person might observe one of these on the street. Publicly funded art would create accessible beautiful things, not merely inaccessible toys you can dream about but never have. EDIT: I kind of feel like this argument is like, well if w…

Future Versailles isn't a justification of having the Sun King in the first place, but retrospectively it's different - judging monarchy as bad now isn't a reason to tear it down now. Nor is the fact you or I can't own it. I've been to Versailles, and while it wouldn't harm me any more to destroy it than destroying the Buddhas of Bamiyan, it does seem to me somewhat better that it continue to exist.

I'm not sure what you mean by "accessible" art. Most things that are restricted to a select few become more accessible over time. Versailles is a good example of this, since you can take tours now. I'm not sure if it is an example of what you mean by "publicly funded", either.

Re: The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy

#232

Post by gwenzek » Wed, May 30, 2018, 4:58 AM UTC

FrozenVoid wrote: post #210

ElevenLathe wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well that escalated quickly. I'm not saying "people with adequate, diversified retirement savings are evil capitalists." I'm just saying that "We shouldn't count the value of people's houses when determining how wealthy they are." is absurd. Clearly it should count. They own it. It's not a political stance, just a pro-accuracy one.

The problem with it these people will not sell their houses. Its not a liquid capital. Selling their only house would be something like once-in-lifetime decision. What i'm saying, and you're failing to understand is that a if citizen A has a million dollar house and 10K in savings but his income is very low, he is actually much much poorer than citizen B who has 1.01million in cash, 80K salary and rents an apartment.…

Also the article explains that the main wealth of the 9.9% is that they live in the best neighborhood, with the best schools and the best neighbora. They use their zip code to recognize themselves. So it make sens that they place a big chunck of their wealth into their house because your house is your social status.

Re: The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy

#233

Post by seibelj » Wed, May 30, 2018, 12:29 PM UTC

Latteland wrote: post #211

seibelj wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, so build low-income housing in rich districts (unless you are saying the presence of poor kids destroys the good school) and stop using zoning to limit what kinds of residences can be built (lot-size, multi-family, building height, etc.). In the suburb of Saint Louis where my wife grew up, each lot had to be at least 1 acre, and had to be single-family. Given how expensive it was to live there, realistically the…

I think we'd be better off if poorer people were not concentrated, of course today it's economic concentration or discrimination that makes it harder to equalize things. Not only am I lucky to live in a good school district for my kids, but people in my more wealthy area are much more willing to support school levys and donate money and time. There is some lower income housing, but in a boom town like Seattle you get…

The reason housing is so expensive is that there isn’t enough housing, supply and demand. If you allow developers to build housing commiserate with demand, the prices don’t get to SF levels.

Re: The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy

#234

Post by hndamien » Wed, May 30, 2018, 2:26 PM UTC

jacob019 wrote: post #230

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not jacob019, who originally made the comment, but as I understand it, the point was not the debt. The point was the maintenance. When the basement floods, it's my problem, not the landlords. When the attic fan fails (I was surprised that attics had fans), it's my problem. When the driveway concrete starts to buckle, it's my problem. In that sense, the house owns you, not the other way around.

this.

That’s what I thought you meant at first, hence my size comment.

Re: The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy

#235

Post by marnett » Wed, May 30, 2018, 8:04 PM UTC

dgreensp wrote: post #183

analog31 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't have thought this until I had kids, who "forced" me to greatly expand my social milieu beyond my fellow geeks and musicians. Our kids got involved in some activities (e.g., violin lessons) that are almost exclusively the domain of the upper middle class. I remember attending a large group recital with maybe 100 kids, and virtually none of them were obese.

I have young kids. If violin lessons are apparently so expensive as to require you to be a millionaire (not merely, say, a six-figure-earner), what is a class or event I can go to to see all the poor, obese kids that I haven’t come across yet? I don’t live in a frou frou part of my town. It seems more likely to me that cultural forces are at play.

> what is a class or event I can go to

they are poor. they don't go to events or extracurricular classes...those cost money.

Re: The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy

#236

Post by therealdrag0 » Wed, May 30, 2018, 9:19 PM UTC

slg wrote: post #120

stagger87 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Roughly 40% of households have an income between 35k and 100k. This makes your statement that "there is hardly a middle class" absurdly wrong.

This is nothing specifically against you or your comment, but it highlights the problem with how we talk about these things. A single 25 year old making $75k in the suburbs of Youngstown, Ohio is in no way comparable to a family of 4 making $75k living in the San Francisco. We really should frame the numbers in relation to the per capita poverty line for that city/region. For example, middle class should be something…

I like that idea. Have you seen someone do this before? Would be interesting to see some numbers.

Re: The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy

#237

Post by anonymouskimmer » Thu, May 31, 2018, 1:29 PM UTC

anbende wrote: post #152

jokoon wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. What the article is trying to point out is that the 9.9% thinks he's not so wealthy, so he is against inequality, but he still, somehow, for his own comfort and merit belief system, likes his higher income. Trying to talk about ranges of income, would it the top N%, is pointless. You could strip out the hypocrisy like so: "I am not at the top, so I am still against inequality, but I am comfortable, but si…

I see what you're saying. The next tier down from the rich are more culpable (and well-off) than they realize. I get that that is the authors point, and I agree that it's a good one and one worth making. What I'm saying, is that saying "the 9.9%" have the majority of the wealth (50-60%) is a little disingenuous, because while wealth goes up exponentially, at that point you start running out of money at the high end.…

"$1m in net-worth quite comfortable but not "rich" by even a very liberal definition of the term in most cities (remember most of that is going to be locked up in a primary residence)."

Selling the $1M house nets about $800k after capital gains. 5% investment interest on that nets about $40k/year without touching the principal.

It's definitely possible for a family of two to live on this amount fairly comfortably in a quite decent apartment in a quite decent neighborhood away from the coasts. I know because I was, and making debt service payments on top of it.

Get a part time job as a package handler at UPS or FedEx - for the exercise, of course - and you're sitting pretty.

A middle-income lifestyle without having to work meets the cutoff for my definition of rich.

Re: The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy

#238

Post by anonymouskimmer » Thu, May 31, 2018, 1:38 PM UTC

closeparen wrote: post #187

Jill_the_Pill wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say so. 23% of married retired couples and 43% of single retirees subsist on their social security; 50% or so have pensions, and some rely on their children. It's the wealthiest minority who have sufficient investments to live off of.

> 50% or so have pensions A pension should be considered equivalent to the assets that would produce the same returns.

Except you can't borrow against it, or liquidate it in case of an emergency/opportunity. And it means nothing to your heirs.

Accountants have ways of accounting for pension/annuity returns. Their accounting tricks should be used in these cases.

Re: The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy

#239

Post by anonymouskimmer » Thu, May 31, 2018, 2:03 PM UTC

bhawks wrote: post #135

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One still has a generation who were educated on subsidised education now reducing those subsidies, per capita, to the next. The former then expects the latter to work to fund their Social Security, Medicare and pensions as opposed to working to redistribute those hand-outs over the broader population. (Not taking a stance. Simply eliding a policy theme. My bet is SS, Medicare and pensions will be dismantled within a…

There has been no reduction of education spending on a per-capita basis (or any other form of measurement). https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/spending_chart_1970_202... It has grown at an amazing rate (as have Medicare/pensions etc). Half of the income of the middle 20% of retired folks (those making less than $65K) comes from the government subsidies you'd like to cut. The 2nd 20% gets 2/3rds their income from th…

"There has been no reduction of education spending on a per-capita basis (or any other form of measurement)."

You have the per student basis? And how much of this so-called "education spending" goes to things which have nothing to do with the students (such as research only loosely affiliated with a university - e.g. through its medical school)?

Re: The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy

#240

Post by anonymouskimmer » Thu, May 31, 2018, 2:21 PM UTC

doktrin wrote: post #171

reggieband wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author did make the argument that revolutions that start from the middle are usually less violent and chaotic. I don't have the relevant education to know if that is true but I do know that I'd rather lead a revolution than be the victim of it. To be fair to the author, that is his ultimate point. It feels to me that the idea of sacrifice has become a secular heresy. Humility as well. If the middle class has any…

> If the middle class has any hope of allying with the lower class then those two traits will have to ascend from ashes. The real questions is: are we too far gone and is it too late? I'd honestly ask a slightly different question : how much longer will the lower and middle classes pose a realistic threat to the elites? To date, economic and social elites have always been at the theoretical mercy of the masses simply…

>I'd honestly ask a slightly different question : how much longer will the lower and middle classes pose a realistic threat to the elites?

As long as weapons of mass destruction can be engineered by a person with a couple of thousand in resources. Bioweapons are technologically getting easier and easier to make.

The lower classes may have fewer really smart people, but they are not totally lacking.

And never forget that the upper classes do occasionally spawn a class-conscious wannabe hero.