3 ms·
It's not enough to just have the direction be right. The markets are up, sure, so yes all my STEM friends are also "up" in a strictly directional sense with res
by atomicnumber3 6y ago
It's not enough to just have the direction be right. The markets are up, sure, so yes all my STEM friends are also "up" in a strictly directional sense with respect specifically to their bank/brokerage assets.
The gist of it is that if the stock market goes up X% and generates a billion dollars of capital gains, the percentage of that billion that Joe Schmoe gets is vanishingly small compared to Buffet or Bezos or Gates. Sure everyone is up, but most of the gains went to those that already have the most (by definition, since that's how capital gains works, yknow).
- war1025 6y agoThis worldview seems like a great way to end up very bitter about life.
- gred 6y agoAnd vice versa.
- nopriorarrests 6y agoWhat worldview? This is purely objective point. If you have 5% of AMZN, Besos has 95%, I have none and AMZN stock doubles in value, you can easily calculate the outcome in terms of dollar gains and how much inequality had risen.
- gred 6y ago> It's not enough to just have the direction be right. That's a subjective value statement, not an objective fact.
- atomicnumber3 6y agoAre you suggesting that that one should be OK with this kind of world, or simply observing that a world like this ought to make one bitter? To be clear, I'm not condemning this system. Just explaining that this is what a K-shaped recovery might mean. That those with very little are left out when most of the "recovery" comes from the Fed propping up asset prices while everything that isn't sufficiently similar to a security crumbles.