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

American Wealth, Sliced Up

kottke.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 90 posts

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#31

Post by tossandthrow »

anon291 wrote: post #26
marginalia_nu wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there's a real contradiction between the propositions: 1. The economy is not a zero-sum game. 2. The new gilded age concentrates wealth in a way that is harmful to free enterprise, detrimental to the economy, and bad for the world.

In what way is any of this wealth distribution harmful to free enterprise? The things actually harmful to free enterprise are not even on this chart.

I would recommend you to just just read up on antitrust legislation and why we have it generally.

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#32

Post by JCTheDenthog »

pyrophane wrote: post #24
jmpman wrote: post #12

The laffer curve was used to justify lower taxes in order to maximize government revenues. When you look at an individual, you can imagine that each individual would have an optimal laffer curve. Too high of a tax rate, and people aren't incentivized to work for one more dollar. However, we never talk about the laffer curve for dead people. I'd say that it could be about as high as you want to make it, and they're no…

A handful of super-rich families got together in the 90s, hired some people to put together a campaign to re-label the estate tax as the death tax and convince everyone it was causing families to lose their small farms, and we haven’t talked seriously about it since.

Larger scale family farms that would go over the estate tax minimums make up around 4% of all farms in the US, from what I can find. Disrupting about 4% of farms upon the death of the farmer does in fact seem like a bad idea to me. But thst didn't stop Stalin from liquidating the kulaks.

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#33

Post by hnav »

Blackstrat wrote: post #20

Generally, income distribution is a solved problem. The issue is that too many people aren't willing to take the steps necessary to get the income they seek. They'd rather scream about the minimum wage, the ultra-rich, the evil white men, etc. Redistribution schemes do not work. Bottom line, stay in school, get a functional education, stay off drugs, moderate alcohol intake, and don't have kids early, particularly wh…

You don't have to wheel out the boogeyman of communism. The distribution of wealth in this country allows a person to have 1 MILLION TIMES the spending power of somebody who drives a bus, puts out fires or stitches up wounds. Crucially, the distribution is only getting worse.

I find the comment on the role of the government not being ensuring equality of outcomes especially laughable, because it is precisely that government that's been subverted to make the distribution more skewed. I guess the ruling class disagrees with you?

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#34

Post by tossandthrow »

elevation wrote: post #28

If you liquidate Elon or Bezos' wealth and distribute it to every US citizen, you're looking at a one time payment of $1-2K per US citizen, and that's only if the value of the assents holds as you attempt to liquidate everything. If you sell it off slowly, you'll get more, but a few years of payments of $50/mo from the Bezos estate is hardly a UBI utopia. I can do far better for myself than that if I'm simply allowed…

What comments like this does not realize is that moving 1-2k usd into the hands of the people is democratizing the expenditure.

Suddenly musk, bezos and friends do not decide what people work on - people do.

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#36

Post by hnav »

Blackstrat wrote: post #30
Blackstrat wrote: post #20

Generally, income distribution is a solved problem. The issue is that too many people aren't willing to take the steps necessary to get the income they seek. They'd rather scream about the minimum wage, the ultra-rich, the evil white men, etc. Redistribution schemes do not work. Bottom line, stay in school, get a functional education, stay off drugs, moderate alcohol intake, and don't have kids early, particularly wh…

I love the reaction that I see when people are told they are responsible for their own outcomes and it takes work. Getting down voted for such comments is hilarious.

On that note why are the ultra-rich so dead-set on avoiding estate taxation? Shouldn't their children be responsible for growing their own billions when their inheritance takes a 50% haircut?

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#37

Post by diziet »

Well, the labels are fundamentally misleading: According to the author's data, "40 people get 0.75 slices each", whereas that 30 slice pie is labeled as "Hedge funders, fascist VCs, and cosmetic surgeons". Even if you take a charitable view to bundle every possible related occupation, I can hardly understand how labeling 40% of the US population as "Hedge funders, fascist VCs, and cosmetic surgeons" is accurate.

The US has a very progressive taxation system: https://taxfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/FedData...

For working and middle class households, the US tax burden is usually lower than in most European states, especially once payroll/social-insurance taxes and VAT are included. The US federal tax system is also very progressive by OECD standards, so upper-income households carry a larger share of federal taxes while the lower/middle bear less of the explicit tax load

Of course, wealth is not exactly income, etc

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#38

Post by Epa095 »

JCTheDenthog wrote: post #10
actionfromafar wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The poorest US states are wealthier through redistribution of wealth to them from other states.

Mississippians average $43,000 of disposable income. Net federal money to Mississippi is roughly $9,000 per capita. Even if we assume that 100% of that $9,000 is welfare payments to the poorest, that still puts Mississippi roughly equal to Germany in terms of disposable income.

And still Mississipi has a child mortality rate og 9.65 infant deaths per 1,000 live births, compared to Germanys 3.4. Life expectancy is 72.6 vs 81.7 (!!)

Looking at income per person really misses some important factors of a societies real riches.

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#39

Post by marginalia_nu »

anon291 wrote: post #26
marginalia_nu wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there's a real contradiction between the propositions: 1. The economy is not a zero-sum game. 2. The new gilded age concentrates wealth in a way that is harmful to free enterprise, detrimental to the economy, and bad for the world.

In what way is any of this wealth distribution harmful to free enterprise? The things actually harmful to free enterprise are not even on this chart.

The wealth concentration is a symptom of a dysfunctional economy based around rent-seeking monopolies. If you address that, the wealth equality comes as a result thanks to the non-zero sum nature of the economy, as more people are able to operate businesses in a fair way.

This is almost exactly the situation that resulted during the first gilded age with standard oil. Antitrust legislation works wonders if it has teeth. Currently it does not.

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#40

Post by Epa095 »

anon291 wrote: post #26
marginalia_nu wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there's a real contradiction between the propositions: 1. The economy is not a zero-sum game. 2. The new gilded age concentrates wealth in a way that is harmful to free enterprise, detrimental to the economy, and bad for the world.

In what way is any of this wealth distribution harmful to free enterprise? The things actually harmful to free enterprise are not even on this chart.

Significant wealth inequality is a existential threat to the 'free' part of both enterprises, and the society around them.
Post reply on HN