4 ms·

> So the group of people who leverage capital to sustain themselves and don't have to work have lower net income than the group of people who have to work to ha

> So the group of people who leverage capital to sustain themselves and don't have to work have lower net income than the group of people who have to work to have a roof over their head? He’s talking about the aggregate income earned by the group. So the delta in individual incomes is offset by the massive delta in group sizes.

ianleeclark 7y ago
Huh, this is interesting. I completely missed the fact that these two groups are massively differently sized. So his 8 trillion vs 130 billion is laughable. If you define the "middle class" as roughly 50 percent of the population (this is pretty low considering how this word is actually used), then the billionaires 130 billion greatly outstrips the 8 trillion per person. There's just shy of 600 billionaires in the US vs roughly 160 million "middle class" then the per individual income is 50k vs 222k. Pretty Stark even when you completely disregard the wealth elephant in the room
- rayiner 7y ago
  Whether you look at things per-person or per-group is a matter of adopting a punitive outlook versus a practical outlook. If your goal is punitive, sure, it's relevant that the average billionaire makes hundreds of millions of dollars per year, while the average middle class person might make $80,000. But I don't think Americans are punitive. They're not deeply troubled by the mere fact that there is someone out there with $8 billion. To the extent they care about billionaires, they're concerned about whether they're paying a fair amount to support the county that gave them so much. And from that perspective, what matters is the aggregate income of the group. And $130-150 billion just isn't much compared to the $6-7 trillion in annual government spending in the U.S. Politicians thrive by disguising the punitive outlook as a practical outlook. They point to how much money Zuckerberg or Bezos have, and quickly pivot to how they could pay for universal healthcare, universal education, etc. A necessary aspect of that strategy is keeping people ignorant of the fact that even confiscating the total income of every billionaire would only pay for say 25% of U.S. higher education spending, or 4% of U.S. health spending.
  - ianleeclark 7y ago
    > But I don't think Americans are punitive. I don't think this is a remotely justifiable belief. We have the highest prisoner rate per capita, we sanction anyone the second they step out of line, and the entire two prior decades have been shaped by a collective trauma that pushed us into seeking retributive justice against anyone--regardless of their actual role. I fail to remember which Puerto Rican uprising this was during, but there was a mother who was jailed for the crime of making her husband and children breakfast. When slavery was finally ended, the 10 years of reconstruction was met immediately with horrific acts of terrorism and reactionary violence to reassert white supremacy. Punitive Justice is a core tenet of the American civil religion.

ianleeclark 7y ago

Huh, this is interesting. I completely missed the fact that these two groups are massively differently sized. So his 8 trillion vs 130 billion is laughable. If you define the "middle class" as roughly 50 percent of the population (this is pretty low considering how this word is actually used), then the billionaires 130 billion greatly outstrips the 8 trillion per person. There's just shy of 600 billionaires in the US vs roughly 160 million "middle class" then the per individual income is 50k vs 222k. Pretty Stark even when you completely disregard the wealth elephant in the room

rayiner 7y ago
Whether you look at things per-person or per-group is a matter of adopting a punitive outlook versus a practical outlook. If your goal is punitive, sure, it's relevant that the average billionaire makes hundreds of millions of dollars per year, while the average middle class person might make $80,000. But I don't think Americans are punitive. They're not deeply troubled by the mere fact that there is someone out there with $8 billion. To the extent they care about billionaires, they're concerned about whether they're paying a fair amount to support the county that gave them so much. And from that perspective, what matters is the aggregate income of the group. And $130-150 billion just isn't much compared to the $6-7 trillion in annual government spending in the U.S. Politicians thrive by disguising the punitive outlook as a practical outlook. They point to how much money Zuckerberg or Bezos have, and quickly pivot to how they could pay for universal healthcare, universal education, etc. A necessary aspect of that strategy is keeping people ignorant of the fact that even confiscating the total income of every billionaire would only pay for say 25% of U.S. higher education spending, or 4% of U.S. health spending.
- ianleeclark 7y ago
  > But I don't think Americans are punitive. I don't think this is a remotely justifiable belief. We have the highest prisoner rate per capita, we sanction anyone the second they step out of line, and the entire two prior decades have been shaped by a collective trauma that pushed us into seeking retributive justice against anyone--regardless of their actual role. I fail to remember which Puerto Rican uprising this was during, but there was a mother who was jailed for the crime of making her husband and children breakfast. When slavery was finally ended, the 10 years of reconstruction was met immediately with horrific acts of terrorism and reactionary violence to reassert white supremacy. Punitive Justice is a core tenet of the American civil religion.