4 ms·

> Richest 1% amassed almost two-thirds of new wealth created since 2020 Is that claim still valid when the current #2 richest person lost $200B?

anm89 4y ago
200B is a drop in the bucket at these levels of figures. We are talking about total wealth amassed in a year. The number they cite is 42 trillion
fakedang 4y ago
Yes because the collective 99% lost a lot more to other factors such as inflation and wage stagnation.
- SideQuark 4y ago
  Inflation and wage stagnation is not loss of wealth. Wealth is an amount. Income is a flow. These have different units. Most people have debt - inflation transfers value from lenders to borrowers, so tons of people with car loans and college loans and mortgages are better off as inflation lowers the effective amount they owe. Wages have increased significantly as inflation rose. And no matter how you slice it real incomes have increased vastly over the past 40 years, e.g., https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N
  - hgsgm 4y ago
    Household income is not wages per person. Getting married doubles average household income for those people. Getting a job and hiring a nanny, maid, and gardener creates fictional household income, because homemaking is assigned $0 value by the Fed.
    - SideQuark 4y ago
      >Household income is not wages per person. True. But it increased because personal income increased: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N Furthermore, two income households have decreased as less people get married, so the personal income is even greater than that graph. >Getting a job and hiring a nanny, maid, and gardener creates fictional household income, because homemaking is assigned $0 value by the Fed. That's just nonsense. First, very few households have any of those, and certainly not the median house. And, as the graph above shows, median personal income has vastly increased over the same time. If you want to make stuff up, try looking up the data before making false claims.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

anm89 4y ago

200B is a drop in the bucket at these levels of figures. We are talking about total wealth amassed in a year. The number they cite is 42 trillion

fakedang 4y ago

Yes because the collective 99% lost a lot more to other factors such as inflation and wage stagnation.

SideQuark 4y ago
Inflation and wage stagnation is not loss of wealth. Wealth is an amount. Income is a flow. These have different units. Most people have debt - inflation transfers value from lenders to borrowers, so tons of people with car loans and college loans and mortgages are better off as inflation lowers the effective amount they owe. Wages have increased significantly as inflation rose. And no matter how you slice it real incomes have increased vastly over the past 40 years, e.g., https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N
- hgsgm 4y ago
  Household income is not wages per person. Getting married doubles average household income for those people. Getting a job and hiring a nanny, maid, and gardener creates fictional household income, because homemaking is assigned $0 value by the Fed.
  - SideQuark 4y ago
    >Household income is not wages per person. True. But it increased because personal income increased: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N Furthermore, two income households have decreased as less people get married, so the personal income is even greater than that graph. >Getting a job and hiring a nanny, maid, and gardener creates fictional household income, because homemaking is assigned $0 value by the Fed. That's just nonsense. First, very few households have any of those, and certainly not the median house. And, as the graph above shows, median personal income has vastly increased over the same time. If you want to make stuff up, try looking up the data before making false claims.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]