4 ms·

"Every piece of the pie picked up by the 0.1 percent, in relative terms, had to come from the people below" The economy is not a zero sum game. Even though ine

"Every piece of the pie picked up by the 0.1 percent, in relative terms, had to come from the people below" The economy is not a zero sum game. Even though inequality is counter-productive and undesirable, it does not mean that wealth has been "transferred" to the top 1%/10%. The poorest quantiles have become more wealthy over time as well, just at a slower rate. Here is some data on this: https://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/2017/09/19/u-s-household-incomes-a-50-year-perspective https://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/2017/09/1...

tedeh 8y ago
They key term is of course "at a slower rate" which implies more and more of the total wealth of society is accumulated at the top.
dahauns 8y ago
"The poorest quantiles have become more wealthy over time as well, just at a slower rate." For the last two decades, your source actually says the opposite. The lowest three quintiles peaked in the dot-com bubble, with the bottom quintile losing the most (almost 10%) and only the middle quintile just recently reaching those levels again.
- Areading314 8y ago
  Agreed, I meant over time as in over the last century. Interesting that the 90s was this much of a peak though!
imbokodo 8y ago
As all wealth that can be created comes from work, and as the heirs who mostly make up the 0.1% do not work, it follows that the wealth comes from those below. Actually the article has a fairly conservative vantage. As the pie is not what is significant. The wealth and money and pie have little significance. What matters is the expropriation of surplus labor time, by the heir, from the one who works. It is a social relationship, expropriating the worker's time. The pie, the wealth, the product is not what has significance here.
- Areading314 8y ago
  Wealth does not come from work alone. It's possible to work very hard in ways that create no wealth or vice versa. It's just one component in addition to multipliers like knowledge, tools and capital.

tedeh 8y ago

They key term is of course "at a slower rate" which implies more and more of the total wealth of society is accumulated at the top.

dahauns 8y ago

"The poorest quantiles have become more wealthy over time as well, just at a slower rate." For the last two decades, your source actually says the opposite. The lowest three quintiles peaked in the dot-com bubble, with the bottom quintile losing the most (almost 10%) and only the middle quintile just recently reaching those levels again.

Areading314 8y ago
Agreed, I meant over time as in over the last century. Interesting that the 90s was this much of a peak though!

imbokodo 8y ago

As all wealth that can be created comes from work, and as the heirs who mostly make up the 0.1% do not work, it follows that the wealth comes from those below. Actually the article has a fairly conservative vantage. As the pie is not what is significant. The wealth and money and pie have little significance. What matters is the expropriation of surplus labor time, by the heir, from the one who works. It is a social relationship, expropriating the worker's time. The pie, the wealth, the product is not what has significance here.

Areading314 8y ago
Wealth does not come from work alone. It's possible to work very hard in ways that create no wealth or vice versa. It's just one component in addition to multipliers like knowledge, tools and capital.