6 ms·

A major difference now is the majority of those with vast wealth earned it themselves through creating new enterprises. The aristocrats of old received it throu

A major difference now is the majority of those with vast wealth earned it themselves through creating new enterprises. The aristocrats of old received it through birth or politicking. The rich today are far more effective and organizationally superior considering it was those exact skills that made them their wealth.

fumar 5y ago
Are you arguing that the wealth class today isn’t politicking to maintain power and wealth either to a corporation or themselves?
- Jensson 5y ago
  They do, but as we have seen in the past 30 years they often still fail to do that.
  - fumar 5y ago
    Given the rise of lobbyist spending, I am not convinced they failed. https://www.statista.com/statistics/257337/total-lobbying-spending-in-the-us/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/257337/total-lobbying-sp...
- fitchjo 5y ago
  I think he is arguing the exact opposite.
sveme 5y ago
Most, if not all of the rich entrepreneurs come from wealthy families. If you start rich it is so much easier to spend time on founding companies.
- sokoloff 5y ago
  If you are surrounded by entrepreneurs, you’re also more likely to contemplate doing that yourself. I suspect there’s an inherent positive correlation here.
hiptobecubic 5y ago
No? There are more wealthy people today who earned it without being bootstrapped by an insanely good starting position than ever before, but to suggest that it's the _majority_ is to ignore everything people have been complaining about in the streets for the last two years. A huge predictor, if not the single biggest predictor, of wealth is still just whether or not your parents are wealthy, especially at the top. E.g. https://cew.georgetown.edu/cew-reports/schooled2lose/ https://cew.georgetown.edu/cew-reports/schooled2lose/. Even the wealth-x report that I assume you are thinking of points to people like besoz and buffet and zuck, all of whom argue a very clear "wow I got super lucky to be born when and where I did and to whom," message. Buffet literally calls it "winning the ovarian lottery." Do some people overcome their initial bad luck and generate wealth for themselves? Of course there are some. But it is not "the majority of those with vast wealth." That's head-in-sand silicon valley tech utopia wankery. I thought the movie Knives Out did a great job of parodying this "Rich people are ENTREPRENEURS that EARNED IT!" idea.
- Jensson 5y ago
  > huge predictor, if not the single biggest predictor, of wealth is still just whether or not your parents are wealthy, especially at the top. If you count top 10% as wealthy, sure then you need to be wealthy to make it big. A kid with top 10% parents has everything they need to succeed and create a top company. A poor kid doesn't, true, but a poor kid in USA still has everything they need to get to top 10%, and then their kids has everything they need to become top 0.1%. So you are right, this process isn't perfect, but it works in 2 generations, which is still really good compared to historically.
  - jdgoesmarching 5y ago
    > a poor kid in USA still has everything they need to get to top 10% As a poor kid who did this, this is an incredibly ignorant and out-of-touch statement. This is like the socioeconomic equivalent of that Verge PC build.
  - rrrrrrrrrrrryan 5y ago
    > a poor kid in USA still has everything they need to get to top 10% Generally, after a lifetime of honest, hard work, you'll make it 1, maybe 2 tax brackets higher than your parents. To make it further than that you have to be especially talented, lucky, or both. I just looked it up: as of 2016, 7.5% of kids born in the bottom quintile make it to the top quintile, so it is indeed possible, though quite rare. [1] I think your basic sentiment is right, though you'd probably need to insert one more generation: a poor kid has everything they need to make it to the middle class and live a not-poor life, a middle class kid has everything they need to make it to the top 10%, and a top 10% kid has everything they need to become fabulously wealthy. The poor -> middle class leap is probably more difficult than any of the others. [1] https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2018/02/14/americans-overestimate-social-mobility-in-their-country https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2018/02/14/american...

fumar 5y ago

Are you arguing that the wealth class today isn’t politicking to maintain power and wealth either to a corporation or themselves?

Jensson 5y ago
They do, but as we have seen in the past 30 years they often still fail to do that.
- fumar 5y ago
  Given the rise of lobbyist spending, I am not convinced they failed. https://www.statista.com/statistics/257337/total-lobbying-spending-in-the-us/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/257337/total-lobbying-sp...
fitchjo 5y ago
I think he is arguing the exact opposite.

sveme 5y ago

Most, if not all of the rich entrepreneurs come from wealthy families. If you start rich it is so much easier to spend time on founding companies.

sokoloff 5y ago
If you are surrounded by entrepreneurs, you’re also more likely to contemplate doing that yourself. I suspect there’s an inherent positive correlation here.

hiptobecubic 5y ago

No? There are more wealthy people today who earned it without being bootstrapped by an insanely good starting position than ever before, but to suggest that it's the _majority_ is to ignore everything people have been complaining about in the streets for the last two years. A huge predictor, if not the single biggest predictor, of wealth is still just whether or not your parents are wealthy, especially at the top. E.g. https://cew.georgetown.edu/cew-reports/schooled2lose/ https://cew.georgetown.edu/cew-reports/schooled2lose/. Even the wealth-x report that I assume you are thinking of points to people like besoz and buffet and zuck, all of whom argue a very clear "wow I got super lucky to be born when and where I did and to whom," message. Buffet literally calls it "winning the ovarian lottery." Do some people overcome their initial bad luck and generate wealth for themselves? Of course there are some. But it is not "the majority of those with vast wealth." That's head-in-sand silicon valley tech utopia wankery. I thought the movie Knives Out did a great job of parodying this "Rich people are ENTREPRENEURS that EARNED IT!" idea.

Jensson 5y ago
> huge predictor, if not the single biggest predictor, of wealth is still just whether or not your parents are wealthy, especially at the top. If you count top 10% as wealthy, sure then you need to be wealthy to make it big. A kid with top 10% parents has everything they need to succeed and create a top company. A poor kid doesn't, true, but a poor kid in USA still has everything they need to get to top 10%, and then their kids has everything they need to become top 0.1%. So you are right, this process isn't perfect, but it works in 2 generations, which is still really good compared to historically.
- jdgoesmarching 5y ago
  > a poor kid in USA still has everything they need to get to top 10% As a poor kid who did this, this is an incredibly ignorant and out-of-touch statement. This is like the socioeconomic equivalent of that Verge PC build.
- rrrrrrrrrrrryan 5y ago
  > a poor kid in USA still has everything they need to get to top 10% Generally, after a lifetime of honest, hard work, you'll make it 1, maybe 2 tax brackets higher than your parents. To make it further than that you have to be especially talented, lucky, or both. I just looked it up: as of 2016, 7.5% of kids born in the bottom quintile make it to the top quintile, so it is indeed possible, though quite rare. [1] I think your basic sentiment is right, though you'd probably need to insert one more generation: a poor kid has everything they need to make it to the middle class and live a not-poor life, a middle class kid has everything they need to make it to the top 10%, and a top 10% kid has everything they need to become fabulously wealthy. The poor -> middle class leap is probably more difficult than any of the others. [1] https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2018/02/14/americans-overestimate-social-mobility-in-their-country https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2018/02/14/american...