American Wealth, Sliced Up • Hacker News Board

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#41

Post by noduerme » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 7:34 PM UTC

marginalia_nu wrote: post #18

dayyan wrote: post #5

The acid test of intelligence is if one believes in a zero sum economy or not.

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.

I think there's a case to be made against generational wealth on the basis that it can suppress free enterprise by acting monopolistically, capturing a regulatory environment, and/or by draining liquidity from an economy. But that is clearly not the case being made by most of the people who harp on wealth inequality. Free enterprise would eventually lead to inequality all over again, so obviously that's gotta go too /s

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#42

Post by hnav » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 7:34 PM UTC

JCTheDenthog wrote: post #25

hnav wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're looking at GDP when comparing Missouri to European nations. Bulgaria has higher life expectancy than half this country.

The OP is about wealth, not life expectancy.

The standard of life you get is one you can afford. GDP PPI does a better job of capturing this than GDP, but better yet look at how long people live. The best raw GDP is gotten when you drive your working class until they collapse and die and thus is a shitty metric for measuring quality of life unless that means the ability to acquire globally manufactured trinkets to you.

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#43

Post by Epa095 » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 7:34 PM UTC

JCTheDenthog wrote: post #25

hnav wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're looking at GDP when comparing Missouri to European nations. Bulgaria has higher life expectancy than half this country.

The OP is about wealth, not life expectancy.

I guess this is the difference between people existing for the betterment of the economy vs the economy existing for the betterment of people.

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#44

Post by hnav » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 7:39 PM UTC

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…

You realize that Elon and Bezos are stealing from you when you invest and get taxed at 50% marginal, right? They certainly don't pay anywhere near that. The trick they play on you is by lumping you in with them in spirit (hard working go-getters) whereas by actual buying power you're closer to the homeless guy panhandling on the street.

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#45

Post by echelon » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 7:39 PM UTC

hnav wrote: post #14

JCTheDenthog wrote: post #2

I'd love the idea of a more equal share of wealth in America. Unfortunately most of the proposed solutions tend to be of the "make everyone equally miserable" sort, and usually come from the sorts of people that imagine themselves as the commissars and cadres of the new regime in such a situation. Europe has tried to limit to wealth of the wealthiest, and in the process seems to have utterly kneecapped their own econ…

You're looking at GDP when comparing Missouri to European nations. Bulgaria has higher life expectancy than half this country.

It's unfair to compare the US, which is incredibly and wildly diverse in race and culture, against monocultural Europe.

I grew up in the South. You'll have to kill these people to take away their sweet tea and fried chicken. And that's just one dimension.

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#46

Post by tossandthrow » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 7:40 PM UTC

JCTheDenthog wrote: post #25

hnav wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're looking at GDP when comparing Missouri to European nations. Bulgaria has higher life expectancy than half this country.

The OP is about wealth, not life expectancy.

If you move health care out of the US economy (as it largely is in the EU), you are at quite similar gdp.

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#47

Post by hnav » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 7:44 PM UTC

tossandthrow wrote: post #34

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.

Another thing that gets lost is that there are a few layers between Jeff and Elon and the rank-and-file. If everyone paid their fair share it'd be a lot less likely that every world-class city has 10% of its real estate locked up in pied-a-terres. The ability to dodge taxes really kicks in at mid 8 figures, not billions.

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#48

Post by Epa095 » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 7:44 PM UTC

MaxHoppersGhost wrote: post #16

JCTheDenthog wrote: post #2

I'd love the idea of a more equal share of wealth in America. Unfortunately most of the proposed solutions tend to be of the "make everyone equally miserable" sort, and usually come from the sorts of people that imagine themselves as the commissars and cadres of the new regime in such a situation. Europe has tried to limit to wealth of the wealthiest, and in the process seems to have utterly kneecapped their own econ…

I wish we’d focus more on living standards than wealth as I think that’s what really matters. “How can we lift up the people with low living standards in the US?” should be the question rather than “How can we keep people from becoming ultra rich?” which I think is what happened in Europe. The only reason wealth should be checked is because of undue influence on politics/power. Otherwise I don’t care if there are 1,0…

So, money is likes votes into the economy, and it decides what the economy produces. When a rich man decides that a house should be built for his two dogs, and that another human should spend their time taking care of those dogs, he can use his money to influence the economy to produce as he wants. The labour does not pop into existence from the void, similar with the materials for the house. It is a redirection of the economy to produce what he wants.

Money is not like mana, it does not conjure things into existence, it moves (through the invisible hand) the economy to produce what the owner desires.

Now, this does absolutely not mean that the economy is zero sum (over time). There are of course something the economy can do which will be productive and produce more goods, and there can be bad decisions. Wealth can absolutely be created by actually value creation, but also by a lot of parasitic processes(and inheritance). And the owner of money gets to controll what the economy does, you don't (barely).

A large concentration of wealth will mean that the economy at large will to a larger degree be used to produce what really rich people wants, instead of producing things the middle class wants.

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#49

Post by Epa095 » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 7:58 PM UTC

MaxHoppersGhost wrote: post #16

JCTheDenthog wrote: post #2

I'd love the idea of a more equal share of wealth in America. Unfortunately most of the proposed solutions tend to be of the "make everyone equally miserable" sort, and usually come from the sorts of people that imagine themselves as the commissars and cadres of the new regime in such a situation. Europe has tried to limit to wealth of the wealthiest, and in the process seems to have utterly kneecapped their own econ…

I wish we’d focus more on living standards than wealth as I think that’s what really matters. “How can we lift up the people with low living standards in the US?” should be the question rather than “How can we keep people from becoming ultra rich?” which I think is what happened in Europe. The only reason wealth should be checked is because of undue influence on politics/power. Otherwise I don’t care if there are 1,0…

Regarding your last sentence about the jealousy, I have been thinking about this quite a bit for myself, if it is actually jealousy. And I have come to the following realisation:

I would like 20$ million. It would let me live the life I want (with extra), and take care of the people I love. I would be able to spend my time doing only things I like. I am envious of people having this kind of wealth. I don't really want more, and I am not more envious of someone having 100 of millions of dollars. This you must just belive me on, but I truly don't see what I would do with more than 20$ million.

But they, the ones with hundreds of millions, are the ones I want to tax. Because I am afraid of them, afraid of the power that comes with the wealth. And if it was envy I would have wanted to tax everyone I envied, also the ones with 10-20$ million. But I am fine with them having their wealth, cause they don't scare me.

Re: American Wealth, Sliced Up

#50

Post by throwawayqqq11 » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 8:00 PM UTC

tossandthrow wrote: post #8

dayyan wrote: post #5

The acid test of intelligence is if one believes in a zero sum economy or not.

And then there are people who use this argument against redistribution and as a pro inequality argument. The pie gets bigger in more equal societies. That is the real acid test.

The pie gets bigger as long there is room for economic growth, which points to our finite planet and a zero-sum economy after all. When the non-zero wealth creation is only in the form of eg. circular investment, as we see it today, i would dismiss it as a detached numbers game.