Live data from Hacker News

America's 1% Has Taken $50T From the Bottom 90%

time.com

471–480 of 961 posts

Re: America's 1% Has Taken $50T From the Bottom 90%

#471

Correction: The Fed's policies have taken $50T of wealth from the Bottom 90%. When you bail out irresponsibly over-leveraged and nearly bankrupted banks and corporations, and pay for those bailouts with tax-payer money, you steal from the poor and give to the rich. Most importantly, when the Fed decides to print money ad nauseam, they create massive asset inflation, which steals from the poor and gives to the rich. T…

I dont like the Fed's easy money, but it looks like you didn't read the article.

Re: America's 1% Has Taken $50T From the Bottom 90%

#472
post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. The fed is an engine, whose purpose is to move wealth silently from the masses to the powerful monied few, via time-asymmetric inflation. (Mostly Inflation of assets presently) The resulting data looks like corporations have used their power to directly disenfranchise/disempower workers, and so the mass clamber for protective laws. More laws will be enacted by those in power. The time is certainly right for it.…

The Fed is stabilizing the price of the USD because of the coronavirus pandemic. If it were not printing money, then there would likely be a deflationary spiral that would cause a depression. That's one of the reasons why the Great Depression was so bad: the US was on the gold standard at the beginning. The US can't create gold out of thin air, so the USD started deflating, people stopped spending, and capital stoppe…

> And claiming that the Fed is the root of all our problems misses the bigger picture.

I think you are missing the bigger picture here, When Fed steps in to bail out failed companies, it increases the moral hazard, there is no reason to be responsible when you know the Fed will bail you out.

Re: America's 1% Has Taken $50T From the Bottom 90%

#473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except this wasn't the federal bailouts. Those are an entirely different beast. It's talking strictly about income stagnation. The study shows that if wages kept up with productivity (as was the case in the immediate post-WW2 era) the bottom 90% would earn $2.5 trillion per year more. > We document the cumulative effect of four decades of income growth below the growth of per capita gross national income and estimate…

Why do you think wages haven't kept up with productivity? The decoupling of wages from productivity started around 1971-1973, which is suspiciously close to the Nixon Shock and beginning of the 1970s inflation. In periods of inflation, firms with high bargaining power (notably monopolistic corporations, corporate executives, and right now, software engineers & quants) can extract the excess money floating around. Fir…

It shouldn't be surprising that regular people wages haven't kept up with productivity because they aren't what's driving it. A quant in 2020 is doing completely different work from a quant (or equivalent) in the 70s. The same can't be said for most ordinary workers.

Re: America's 1% Has Taken $50T From the Bottom 90%

#474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, what's the alternative?

Democratic control of the economy.

That would be absolutely terrifying. The economy we have now is due to experts tinkering. Allowing the masses, who can't organize their own lives, to attempt to organize the economy will lead to more deaths and misery than the current system.

Would you want a democratically elected airplane pilot with no training?

Re: America's 1% Has Taken $50T From the Bottom 90%

#475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Fed is stabilizing the price of the USD because of the coronavirus pandemic. If it were not printing money, then there would likely be a deflationary spiral that would cause a depression. That's one of the reasons why the Great Depression was so bad: the US was on the gold standard at the beginning. The US can't create gold out of thin air, so the USD started deflating, people stopped spending, and capital stoppe…

This is one of the worst takes I've read in awhile. First off, there is no general consensus about the exact cause of the Great Depression and the cause of the recovery. If you're going to make an attempt at a history lesson, at least get it right. We know that the stock market crash and banking panics played a large role in the contraction of economic activity, but there is absolutely no general consensus for the ex…

Everything you just said is basically wrong.

There IS a consensus understanding to what caused the Great Depression, they only folks who disagree tend to be charlatans pushing Gold or other deflationary bubbles such as Bitcoin.

The world is not going to adopt deflationary currency away from central banks - that would be suicidal.

Re: America's 1% Has Taken $50T From the Bottom 90%

#476
post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. The fed is an engine, whose purpose is to move wealth silently from the masses to the powerful monied few, via time-asymmetric inflation. (Mostly Inflation of assets presently) The resulting data looks like corporations have used their power to directly disenfranchise/disempower workers, and so the mass clamber for protective laws. More laws will be enacted by those in power. The time is certainly right for it.…

The Fed is stabilizing the price of the USD because of the coronavirus pandemic. If it were not printing money, then there would likely be a deflationary spiral that would cause a depression. That's one of the reasons why the Great Depression was so bad: the US was on the gold standard at the beginning. The US can't create gold out of thin air, so the USD started deflating, people stopped spending, and capital stoppe…

Perhaps, but printing money is effectively a tax. And it's not going to be the ones who are benefitting the most who are going to be paying that tax proportionally. There's no honest and justifiable reason The Feds efforts should be so top heavy.

Re: America's 1% Has Taken $50T From the Bottom 90%

#477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So your concept of fairness involves a person who has the power to assign and remove property from other people according to his judgments. Yes, and that person is Uncle Sam, Marianne, the Goddess of Democracy, it is me and you, because it is be formed from societal consensus and the republican process. > Taxation is coercive, so offering relief from coercion as an incentive is coercion. Coercion schmoercion. > You…

> Yes, and that person is Uncle Sam, Marianne, the Goddess of Democracy, it is me and you, because it is be formed from societal consensus and the republican process. Good, then you’ll have no objection to me helping myself to your surplus. For “the good of society.” > Coercion schmoercion. Its interesting how people are often quite concerned with someone else’s perceived lack of things, but references to someone bei…

> Good, then you’ll have no objection to me helping myself to your surplus. For “the good of society.”

I don't evade taxes, so you're welcome to my surplus.

> Its interesting how people are often quite concerned with someone else’s perceived lack of things, but references to someone being a victim of violence are dismissed.

By all means, please expound upon the victims of violence caused by taxpaying in modern day America. Are you referring to those flag fringe-watching sovereign citizens and tax protesters still up in arms over the 16th amendment? Freemen of the land unjustly persecuted for courtroom creativity? Wesley Snipes?

> The fish didn’t try to justify his aquatic lifestyle by reference to moral philosophers.

Indeed, for the fish is far more wiser for not getting sucked into fruitless interminable debates with unyielding ideologues.

> a moral wrong doesn’t become acceptable on the basis of someone asserting it as an integral component of some other thing

Then you'll have to provide your alternative to taxation, and indeed your alternative to governments or societies, as those can't really exist beyond taxes, at least until we achieve a post-scarcity society.

Incidentally, I should note that being against the principle of taxation not only precludes income taxes, but sales taxes and other consumption taxes, property taxes, estate taxes, tariffs, public tolls. Even if I was to suggest a revolutionarily different society- say a maximal Georgist world where the land value tax literally was the single tax levied to fund government and alleviate inequality- you would call it theft and thus NASA would continue to go unfunded.

> Just deal with the arguments as presented rather than trying to link them back to some ideology as a convenient means of dismissal.

"Taxation is theft" is a meme well-known to the internet, and this conversation we are having has been repeated over and over uncountable times. Neither of us represent original ideas. We are just rehashing the same unanswerable debate many men have had before us.

To bring up technology into this discussion- memoization can be a way to expedite a solution.

Re: America's 1% Has Taken $50T From the Bottom 90%

#478

The top 1% changes a lot. Most people don't stay in the top 1% for many years in a row. Many people below the 90th percentile benefit from the growth of the top levels when they have their brief time in the top 1%.

The reality is it’s not the 1% it’s the 0.1% and 0.01%..

It's call Pareto's Principle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle

Re: America's 1% Has Taken $50T From the Bottom 90%

#479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Romans literally debased their currency into lead as they hit hyper inflation-- then instituted price controls which led to a booming black market. The particular tricks have changed a little over time, it is just more efficient with digital money now. Ruling classes had the basics figured out millenia ago. And it never works.

You are correct, except they didn't debase it into lead. Late Roman coinage was largely copper. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_currency#Debasement

Thank you for the correction and reference :)

Re: America's 1% Has Taken $50T From the Bottom 90%

#480
> It amazes me why most people do not grasp this. I think it is lack of education.

Huh? Literally everybody grasps this. This is the most widely parroted mainstream narrative about the economy right now on the internet.

Hell, you can't throw a rock at the Wall Street Journal (conservative) or the New York Times (liberal) without hitting a sentence that mentions wealth inequality brought on by fed policy. For further evidence, your comment has been upvoted to the top because everybody on HN believes the same thing as you.

Have you ever examined the idea that it could be you who lacks education? Have you thought about what the economy would look like right now if there had been no accommodative monetary policy from the Federal Reserve for the last 10 years?

You're angry because it feels like everybody is getting rich and you aren't. What you don't understand is that bull markets are always temporary. This stuff moves in cycles.

Sky high valuations on financial assets might be making rich people SEEM ridiculously rich right now, but this is not a permanent state of being. The companies and assets they own all exist in the real world and will eventually have to back up their valuations with real earnings.

The minute inflation starts creeping up, the federal reserve will have to increase interest rates and cut off the money printer. In an instant, wealth inequality will start shifting the other direction, and valuations will fall.

Post reply on HN