Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"Millionaire" is a dime a dozen now. I work with a guy whose mom died a millionaire. She bought a house in Bergen Co NJ in the 1960s and lived there until she died. 900K ugly house in the right town. That and her checking account made her a millionaire. This is entirely different than the true elite. The guy I work with would be a millionaire now too if he didn't have 2 siblings.
The true elite are a mix of self made and not self made but at the true top, it is not even close to 88% self made. The true elite are the ones that buy congress to manipulate the market for them. True elite are a different breed.
1% is a misnomer. More like .01%
Exactly.
Go to opensecrets.com and you have the same players like Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, The Pharma and Insurance Industry, The Military Defense Companies, The Koch Brothers and so on all go back years and years and years.
The Data is there for anyone to see it is the same wealthy elite going back years.
According to the article this can be chalked up to multimillionaires and billionaires putting their funds into the stock market rapidly appreciating its value, then qualifying for investments in private equity funds which grow based on interest in debt/loans.
That means the more money they have, the more opportunity they have to invest in collective funds like PEF. Its all a feedback loop as more investment in the stock market increases the overall value. Since this is great for tax revenue, both republicans and democrats consider this progress.
Are you Ok with this? I'm guessing most of you are because of the wide spread belief that the rich 'earn' their money.
Lets put it to a Poll and find out.
I'm not sure it's just a matter of our opinions. There is a vast - and growing - amount of data that it's bad, for a range of reasons, including that it tends to undermine democracy.
So for the first time in the poll massive inequality being bad is now tied with good/doesn't matter.
I think the trend will continue to favor it being bad as the thread has revealed new information but how this is about much more than just jealousy.
No it hasn't. It's still jealousy and wanting other people's money. The fact that people don't understand the basic laws of economics doesn't make jealousy more acceptable.
No it hasn't. It's still jealousy and wanting other people's money. The fact that people don't understand the basic laws of economics doesn't make jealousy more acceptable.
There is a fine line between jealousy and ambition though.
Both involve wanting what someone else has.
The former is more inclined toward taking what they have without just cause.
The latter is more inclined toward organically doing what is legal and ethical to acquire what you want.
Most people aren't willing to substantially improve their station in life because it is hard, but virtually everyone has the power to do so.
No it hasn't. It's still jealousy and wanting other people's money. The fact that people don't understand the basic laws of economics doesn't make jealousy more acceptable.
It’s not about understanding the economics.
It is about lack of basic human decency in those people who covet other people’s money.
Exactly.
Go to opensecrets.com and you have the same players like Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, The Pharma and Insurance Industry, The Military Defense Companies, The Koch Brothers and so on all go back years and years and years.
The Data is there for anyone to see it is the same wealthy elite going back years.
And yet, you can’t provide one evidence to support your warped view.
So for the first time in the poll massive inequality being bad is now tied with good/doesn't matter.
I think the trend will continue to favor it being bad as the thread has revealed new information but how this is about much more than just jealousy.
Pretty disgusting, isn’t it? Half of the people here believe other people owning more money is somehow a problem that needs to be corrected. By correction, it means slaughtering those rich people or at least threatening to murder them.
With what moral authority are you saying other people owning more money legally is a problem?
No it hasn't. It's still jealousy and wanting other people's money. The fact that people don't understand the basic laws of economics doesn't make jealousy more acceptable.
The basic laws of economics? Can you please elaborate on this? The problem with some of the market conditions that we are seeing with the further stratification on wealth is that it's creating a monopsony market in certain sectors. You see this with the big tech companies that have been accused of monopsonistic behavior due to colluding to not compete on wages, perks, etc. A monopsony can drive down labor rates in areas where this market condition exists. However, in this market condition if we decide to raise the minimum wage even further it could expand employment and lead to no material job losses.
Also we may want to look into why our expansionary policy is still playing out in the form of tax cuts and large deficit spending. I know large deficit spending typically coincides with a recession (for those who are keen to Keynesian policy), however once you reach certain economic and gdp growth, these tax cuts and deficit spending aren't going to cut it in preparing for another period of slowed economic growth (recession).
The basic laws of economics? Can you please elaborate on this? The problem with some of the market conditions that we are seeing with the further stratification on wealth is that it's creating a monopsony market in certain sectors. You see this with the big tech companies that have been accused of monopsonistic behavior due to colluding to not compete on wages, perks, etc. A monopsony can drive down labor rates in areas where this market condition exists. However, in this market condition if we decide to raise the minimum wage even further it could expand employment and lead to no material job losses.
Also we may want to look into why our expansionary policy is still playing out in the form of tax cuts and large deficit spending. I know large deficit spending typically coincides with a recession (for those who are keen to Keynesian policy), however once you reach certain economic and gdp growth, these tax cuts and deficit spending aren't going to cut it in preparing for another period of slowed economic growth (recession).
It is their lawfully owned money. How is that in anyway your damn business?
Don’t like any of those companies? Don’t buy their products.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
