4 ms·
Seems like this would be a natural consequence of the increasing concentration of wealth. The top 1% of the population control 43% of the wealth in the US. But
by vannevar 12y ago
Seems like this would be a natural consequence of the increasing concentration of wealth. The top 1% of the population control 43% of the wealth in the US. But for the 99%, much of that wealth is illiquid and not readily available for investment (particularly speculative investment). So I wouldn't be surprised if the 1% controlled as much as 90% of the liquid wealth available to invest in young companies, making it unnecessary to go to the public markets.
- throwaway7808 12y agoBy the way, what's the minimum income, to be in top 1% of incomes in the US?
- idlewords 12y agoAround half a million dollars. Source: http://www.brookings.edu/research/essays/2014/saving-horatio-alger http://www.brookings.edu/research/essays/2014/saving-horatio...