5 ms·
People who work hard and contribute to the economy but still live paycheck to paycheck due to stagnant wages care. It's an extraordinary proposition that sifti
by tveita 11y ago
People who work hard and contribute to the economy but still live paycheck to paycheck due to stagnant wages care.
It's an extraordinary proposition that sifting more money to the top instead of paying people fair wages would somehow help the economy.
Turning your example on the head: what if making the distribution more equal would in the long term give all brackets more money, even the very rich ones? Would you then support distributing the wealth for the common good?
- prostoalex 11y agoWell, according to this report, if you have two families both earning exactly the same (by contributing to the economy in the same manner), but one has $50,000 in the bank, while another has used that $50,000 to put a down payment on a house (perhaps by assuming a $200,000 mortgage), the wealth disparity between the two is enormous. Debt (when used prudently) is a useful financial instrument and an enabler. In low-rate environment are we really that surprised it's being used extensively?
- toomuchtodo 11y ago> Debt (when used prudently) is a useful financial instrument and an enabler. In low-rate environment are we really that surprised it's being used extensively? Not surprising, of course. I think the difference is, central banks expected the ZIRP to be a chainsaw used to clear enough space for a village, not tear down the entire forest.
- jacalata 11y agoWhat gives you that impression? The second family now has a $250k asset and a $200k debt, so they're worth the same. If you wait ten years and one of them collects 1% interest and the other gets their house value doubled then there's a difference.
- prostoalex 11y agoThis specific report doesn't count that $200k debt.
- jacalata 11y agoYes it does. The article has some poor wording but the report itself is clear and plenty of people in the thread clarified that: >The original report states: Once debts have been subtracted, a person needs only USD 3,210 to be among the wealthiest half of world citizens in mid-2015. However, USD 68,800 is required to be a member of the top 10% of global wealth holders, and USD 759,900 to belong to the top 1%. Which is more clearly stated and uses the same numbers as the Guardian article. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10493143 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10493143
- specialist 11y agoPeople who work hard and contribute to the economy "Economy" is the measurement of the movement of money. Rich people hoarding money slows the movement, thereby slows the economy. Any one wanting to help the economy would logically oppose the ever growing inequity.
- lsniddy 11y agoI know zero rich people who "hoard" money, and the ones who become richer tend to be the best at redistributing their cash faster.
- nommm-nommm 11y agoThis is from the Nick Hanauer article I posted above: "We rich people have been falsely persuaded by our schooling and the affirmation of society, and have convinced ourselves, that we are the main job creators. It’s simply not true. There can never be enough super-rich Americans to power a great economy. I earn about 1,000 times the median American annually, but I don’t buy thousands of times more stuff. My family purchased three cars over the past few years, not 3,000. I buy a few pairs of pants and a few shirts a year, just like most American men. I bought two pairs of the fancy wool pants I am wearing as I write, what my partner Mike calls my “manager pants.” I guess I could have bought 1,000 pairs. But why would I? Instead, I sock my extra money away in savings, where it doesn’t do the country much good."