Unequal distribution of wealth

[Cuyo]

It's not distributed, It's earned

Far more often, it's inherited.

millionaire-myths: Personal Finance News from Yahoo! Finance

2. Millionaires Just Inherited Their Money
According to Thomas J. Stanley's book, "The Millionaire Next Door: The Surprising Secrets of America's Wealthy," only 20% of millionaires inherited their riches. The other 80% are what you'd call nouveau riche: first-generation millionaires who earned their cash on their own. Many millionaires simply worked, saved, and lived within their means to generate their wealth -- think accountants and managers: regular people going to work every day. Most millionaires didn't get their riches overnight when a rich relative died -- they worked for the money.

Run the same study on Billionaires, with a "B."

 

[boedicca]

Far more often, it's inherited.

millionaire-myths: Personal Finance News from Yahoo! Finance

2. Millionaires Just Inherited Their Money
According to Thomas J. Stanley's book, "The Millionaire Next Door: The Surprising Secrets of America's Wealthy," only 20% of millionaires inherited their riches. The other 80% are what you'd call nouveau riche: first-generation millionaires who earned their cash on their own. Many millionaires simply worked, saved, and lived within their means to generate their wealth -- think accountants and managers: regular people going to work every day. Most millionaires didn't get their riches overnight when a rich relative died -- they worked for the money.

Run the same study on Billionaires, with a "B."

All 403 of them?

In a country of 300 Million people, we should focus public policy on 403 people?

Instead of a study, you can read about each one of them here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_billionaires

I see quite a few high tech entrepreneurs among the group.


And to put this in perspective: if we seized the entire wealth of the top 15, it would pay for less than Three Months of the current deficit spending by DC. Assuming an average wealth of $5B (which is probably on the high side) for the remaining 388, would cover another year and a half of such spending. Confiscating every single dime of wealth from the EVUL 403 Billionaires would cover the deficit for less than two years at our current rates of spending.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Americans_by_net_worth

And then what?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Why are you wasting time posting here? There are children starving in Africa. Did you get that? CHILDREN STARVING IN AFRICA.
Go make them a sandwich or something and STFU.

And did you really compare comparatively high wage factory work to child prostitution??

Jews are dying in Israel, too. But I am not joining the IDF.

Jimmy Carter's mom joined the JFK Peace Corps.

Child prostitution? Get your head out of your ass. We all know Rabbi's are like Catholic Priests. It's creep when you mention child prostitution

Did you post a pic of a starving child to make a political point?
Did you say Jews are dying to make a political point?
I see the mention of child prostitution brought you to post here. Maybe you need mental help?

I don't think I posted a picture of a starving child. Why woud I?

Jews are dying to make a political point. It is part of what the settlement shit is about. It has roots in silly interpretations of religious texts, but also in political battles over Jerusalem.

I see you keep focusing on child prostitution. It's creepy. I post no pictures of children, starving or not --- yet you keep images of children in your warped mind?

 

[The Rabbi]

Jews are dying in Israel, too. But I am not joining the IDF.

Jimmy Carter's mom joined the JFK Peace Corps.

Child prostitution? Get your head out of your ass. We all know Rabbi's are like Catholic Priests. It's creep when you mention child prostitution

Did you post a pic of a starving child to make a political point?
Did you say Jews are dying to make a political point?
I see the mention of child prostitution brought you to post here. Maybe you need mental help?

I don't think I posted a picture of a starving child. Why woud I?

Jews are dying to make a political point. It is part of what the settlement shit is about. It has roots in silly interpretations of religious texts, but also in political battles over Jerusalem.

I see you keep focusing on child prostitution. It's creepy. I post no pictures of children, starving or not --- yet you keep images of children in your warped mind?

You're not sure whether you posted a pic of a starving child? And mention of child prostitution brings you into the discussion. And I'm creepy??

 

[bigrebnc1775]

millionaire-myths: Personal Finance News from Yahoo! Finance

2. Millionaires Just Inherited Their Money
According to Thomas J. Stanley's book, "The Millionaire Next Door: The Surprising Secrets of America's Wealthy," only 20% of millionaires inherited their riches. The other 80% are what you'd call nouveau riche: first-generation millionaires who earned their cash on their own. Many millionaires simply worked, saved, and lived within their means to generate their wealth -- think accountants and managers: regular people going to work every day. Most millionaires didn't get their riches overnight when a rich relative died -- they worked for the money.

Run the same study on Billionaires, with a "B."

All 403 of them?

In a country of 300 Million people, we should focus public policy on 403 people?

Instead of a study, you can read about each one of them here:

Category:American billionaires - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I see quite a few high tech entrepreneurs among the group.


And to put this in perspective: if we seized the entire wealth of the top 15, it would pay for less than Three Months of the current deficit spending by DC. Assuming an average wealth of $5B (which is probably on the high side) for the remaining 388, would cover another year and a half of such spending. Confiscating every single dime of wealth from the EVUL 403 Billionaires would cover the deficit for less than two years at our current rates of spending.

List of members of the Forbes 400 (2008) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And then what?

George Soros is on that list and he's not going to give up his money

 

[Gadawg73]

If every billionaire in America gave ALL of their $$ to Washington how many days would it last?
Less than a year.
And how would the economy grow if that happened?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Far more often, it's inherited.

millionaire-myths: Personal Finance News from Yahoo! Finance

2. Millionaires Just Inherited Their Money
According to Thomas J. Stanley's book, "The Millionaire Next Door: The Surprising Secrets of America's Wealthy," only 20% of millionaires inherited their riches. The other 80% are what you'd call nouveau riche: first-generation millionaires who earned their cash on their own. Many millionaires simply worked, saved, and lived within their means to generate their wealth -- think accountants and managers: regular people going to work every day. Most millionaires didn't get their riches overnight when a rich relative died -- they worked for the money.

Run the same study on Billionaires, with a "B."

Okey dokey.

Self-Made VS Inherited Billionaire Fortunes | Money Tip Central

This shows us, first of all, that of the 60 richest people in the world, 53% live in the United States, 29% live in Europe, 5% live in the Middle East, India, and Hong Kong each, and 3% live in Russia.

Second, it shows us that, of the 53% living in the United States, 69% are self-made billionaires, versus 31% who inherited their wealth.

Furthermore, of the percentage living in the Middle East, 58% are self-made, versus 42% who inherited.

Continuing, we see that 100% of Russia's billionaires are self-made, and 71% of Hong Kong's are. Now, my math tells me that this would all mean that . . . Ta Da!!! Most billionaires are also self-made, just like millionaires.

Thanks for asking.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Yet true. Great concentrations of wealth in non-electable, therefore unaccountable, hands destabilizes economies and governments.

That is an opinion.
It is only when great concentrations of wealth are used for harmful purposes.
As opposed to say, Venezuela, where the wealthy elite are able to use their fortunes to keep people in poverty and insure they have no freedoms, no voice and no right of public discourse.
We have no such issues here in the US.
Clearly there are advantages to wealth. That is why we as Americans strive to do the best we can at our careers to assist us in advancing financially.

 

[Big Fitz]

If every billionaire in America gave ALL of their $$ to Washington how many days would it last?
Less than a year.
And how would the economy grow if that happened?

more people on welfare, that's for sure.

 

[Cuyo]

millionaire-myths: Personal Finance News from Yahoo! Finance

2. Millionaires Just Inherited Their Money
According to Thomas J. Stanley's book, "The Millionaire Next Door: The Surprising Secrets of America's Wealthy," only 20% of millionaires inherited their riches. The other 80% are what you'd call nouveau riche: first-generation millionaires who earned their cash on their own. Many millionaires simply worked, saved, and lived within their means to generate their wealth -- think accountants and managers: regular people going to work every day. Most millionaires didn't get their riches overnight when a rich relative died -- they worked for the money.

Run the same study on Billionaires, with a "B."

Okey dokey.

Self-Made VS Inherited Billionaire Fortunes | Money Tip Central

This shows us, first of all, that of the 60 richest people in the world, 53% live in the United States, 29% live in Europe, 5% live in the Middle East, India, and Hong Kong each, and 3% live in Russia.

Second, it shows us that, of the 53% living in the United States, 69% are self-made billionaires, versus 31% who inherited their wealth.

Furthermore, of the percentage living in the Middle East, 58% are self-made, versus 42% who inherited.

Continuing, we see that 100% of Russia's billionaires are self-made, and 71% of Hong Kong's are. Now, my math tells me that this would all mean that . . . Ta Da!!! Most billionaires are also self-made, just like millionaires.

Thanks for asking.

Uhhh Yes, considering there were only 13 Billionaires as of 1982, it would make sense that most of today's billionaires did not descend from other billionaires.

Out of curiosity I did peruse the list awhile, and, not saying they don't exist, but I've not found one that did not come from privilege.

Most people wind up in the class into which they're born, because the corresponding obstacles and advantages reproduce themselves. People in the upper-upper echelons almost never fall from their position because they have too many safety nets. Why do you guys try so hard to say it ain't so?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Run the same study on Billionaires, with a "B."

Okey dokey.

Self-Made VS Inherited Billionaire Fortunes | Money Tip Central

This shows us, first of all, that of the 60 richest people in the world, 53% live in the United States, 29% live in Europe, 5% live in the Middle East, India, and Hong Kong each, and 3% live in Russia.

Second, it shows us that, of the 53% living in the United States, 69% are self-made billionaires, versus 31% who inherited their wealth.

Furthermore, of the percentage living in the Middle East, 58% are self-made, versus 42% who inherited.

Continuing, we see that 100% of Russia's billionaires are self-made, and 71% of Hong Kong's are. Now, my math tells me that this would all mean that . . . Ta Da!!! Most billionaires are also self-made, just like millionaires.

Thanks for asking.

Uhhh Yes, considering there were only 13 Billionaires as of 1982, it would make sense that most of today's billionaires did not descend from other billionaires.

Out of curiosity I did peruse the list awhile, and, not saying they don't exist, but I've not found one that did not come from privilege.

Most people wind up in the class into which they're born, because the corresponding obstacles and advantages reproduce themselves. People in the upper-upper echelons almost never fall from their position because they have too many safety nets. Why do you guys try so hard to say it ain't so?

Ahhh. So now we're moving the goalposts. First, it was "they all inherited their wealth". NOW, it's "well, they made themselves wealthy, but they weren't dirt-poor to start with, so it doesn't count".

You've just proven yourself utterly unworthy of responding to, but I'll throw just one more pearl before the swine: most people do NOT wind up in the class in which they're born. Statistics show us that only a tiny percentage of the population doesn't move from one quintile to others - both up and down - in their lifetime.

Income Mobility and Economic Opportunity

How Much Do Americans Move Up and Down the Economic Ladder?

We try so hard to say it ain't so because your envy-warped view of the world AIN'T so.

 

[snjmom]

Yet true. Great concentrations of wealth in non-electable, therefore unaccountable, hands destabilizes economies and governments.

That is an opinion.
It is only when great concentrations of wealth are used for harmful purposes.
As opposed to say, Venezuela, where the wealthy elite are able to use their fortunes to keep people in poverty and insure they have no freedoms, no voice and no right of public discourse.
We have no such issues here in the US.
Clearly there are advantages to wealth. That is why we as Americans strive to do the best we can at our careers to assist us in advancing financially.

Quite obviously, we do have problems with the way concentrated wealth distorts markets, creates unsustainable bubbles and holds our countries economy hostage. We have problems with the wealthy elite drowning out the voice of the common man with it's endless barrage of emotional button pushing. A large number of the people have been convinced that the risk/benefit analysis of unfettered profit pursuit without any ethical fiduciary standards produces enough growth to make the collapses acceptable. Governmental policy should always be focussed on flattening the cycle while maintaining an upward trend. Part of that flattening is skimming off some of that wealth that accumulates in times of growth in order to buffer the effects when the growth inevitably decline.

You know, the old Bible story, when Joseph interprets the Pharoahs dream about the cows?

 

[snjmom]

From your link.

it is somewhat disturbing to learn that the seemingly relentless growth in the inequality of economic rewards has been unmitigated by any increase in access to those rewards, especially for those with the fewest skills.

What your article is stating, is that while the amount of churn remains, the potential losses and gains are increasing. Whether it's the prison rat that gets a jail-house education or the Ivy League MD that murders his mistress in a pique of entitlement, the rewards and punishments in a society with a growing income equity issue become ever greater.

 

[The Rabbi]

Yet true. Great concentrations of wealth in non-electable, therefore unaccountable, hands destabilizes economies and governments.

That is an opinion.
It is only when great concentrations of wealth are used for harmful purposes.
As opposed to say, Venezuela, where the wealthy elite are able to use their fortunes to keep people in poverty and insure they have no freedoms, no voice and no right of public discourse.
We have no such issues here in the US.
Clearly there are advantages to wealth. That is why we as Americans strive to do the best we can at our careers to assist us in advancing financially.

Quite obviously, we do have problems with the way concentrated wealth distorts markets, creates unsustainable bubbles and holds our countries economy hostage. We have problems with the wealthy elite drowning out the voice of the common man with it's endless barrage of emotional button pushing. A large number of the people have been convinced that the risk/benefit analysis of unfettered profit pursuit without any ethical fiduciary standards produces enough growth to make the collapses acceptable. Governmental policy should always be focussed on flattening the cycle while maintaining an upward trend. Part of that flattening is skimming off some of that wealth that accumulates in times of growth in order to buffer the effects when the growth inevitably decline.

You know, the old Bible story, when Joseph interprets the Pharoahs dream about the cows?

When someone says "quite obviously" usually it isn't. That's the case here. It is not "concentrated wealth" (whatever that means) that distorts markets. It is Fed policy. If you want to say the Fed has concentrated wealth I won't disagree.
Government should have no business dictatig the business cycle. This was tried in Russia. Guess what, they didnt have any depressions. Because their whole economy was depression.

 

[mdn2000]

That is an opinion.
It is only when great concentrations of wealth are used for harmful purposes.
As opposed to say, Venezuela, where the wealthy elite are able to use their fortunes to keep people in poverty and insure they have no freedoms, no voice and no right of public discourse.
We have no such issues here in the US.
Clearly there are advantages to wealth. That is why we as Americans strive to do the best we can at our careers to assist us in advancing financially.

Quite obviously, we do have problems with the way concentrated wealth distorts markets, creates unsustainable bubbles and holds our countries economy hostage. We have problems with the wealthy elite drowning out the voice of the common man with it's endless barrage of emotional button pushing. A large number of the people have been convinced that the risk/benefit analysis of unfettered profit pursuit without any ethical fiduciary standards produces enough growth to make the collapses acceptable. Governmental policy should always be focussed on flattening the cycle while maintaining an upward trend. Part of that flattening is skimming off some of that wealth that accumulates in times of growth in order to buffer the effects when the growth inevitably decline.

You know, the old Bible story, when Joseph interprets the Pharoahs dream about the cows?

When someone says "quite obviously" usually it isn't. That's the case here. It is not "concentrated wealth" (whatever that means) that distorts markets. It is Fed policy. If you want to say the Fed has concentrated wealth I won't disagree.
Government should have no business dictatig the business cycle. This was tried in Russia. Guess what, they didnt have any depressions. Because their whole economy was depression.

Your post gave me an epiphany, it is the concentration of wealth that is the problem, the concentration of my wealth collected in taxes and spent by the government.

Stop the government from collecting taxes and fees in any form. 10% sales tax should be the only tax in the USA.

That redistributes the wealth, it keeps my money that I worked for in my pocket.

 

[topspin]

cuyo should be thanked for the comedy. After being slamed dunked on being wrong on the inherited. He/she say's most people don't change classes.
Nice trying but no cigar.
Most people start out at min wage or near it, and then the fun begins.

 

[Gadawg73]

I strive to be the world's first TRIILLIONAIRE.
First Bank of Dawgville Account # 73

Gadawg
73 Hicksville Dr.
Hahira, Ga.

CURRENT BALANCE: $1,007,023,000,000.00

I plan on gving most of it away to charities, youth groups and causes. In doing so, I plan on employing teams of lobbyists to fight the government in their continued attempts to take any, or all of it, oter than the normal tax rate.
I, not the goverment, knows what is best to do with MY $$. I, not the government, earned all of it and I intend to keep what I earn.
If I can give it away to anyone tax free I should be able to pass it on to Dawg Jr., his brother and sister tax free.

 

[Claudette]

Ditto.

You go Dawg.

 

[8537]

When someone says "quite obviously" usually it isn't. That's the case here. It is not "concentrated wealth" (whatever that means) that distorts markets. It is Fed policy. If you want to say the Fed has concentrated wealth I won't disagree.
Government should have no business dictatig the business cycle. This was tried in Russia. Guess what, they didnt have any depressions. Because their whole economy was depression.

The Soviet Union and its satellites had recessions and depressions like every other economy. The US had recessions and depressions - and quite severe ones - before the Fed was created and long before its dual mandate was established, before the "government dictating the business cycle".

The government can't dictate the business cycle.

 

[editec]

This graph pretty much says it all

and this pretty much shows us WHY we're in an economic disaster right now, too.

DEMAND is out of balance with supply because SUPPLY has most of the wealth and most of the income, too.

Fourty years of supply side stupidity will have that effect on a society, ya know?

No, apparently many of you do not know.

And no amount of evidence to support that fact seems enough to wake you up.

Your conservative superpower is the fact that you guys are impervious to facts or logic.