Utopia Talk / Politics / Who Owns America’s Wealth

murder Member	Tue Mar 04 12:51:31 http://www...n-of-who-owns-americas-wealth/ Top 50% own 98% of US wealth Bottom 50% own 2% of US wealth
Sam Adams Member	Tue Mar 04 13:29:18 Thats reasonable. Top 1% is a bit too heavily weighted.
Habebe Member	Tue Mar 04 17:02:36 I do
murder Member	Tue Mar 04 17:20:57 "Thats reasonable." That's funny.
Sam Adams Member	Tue Mar 04 17:34:06 Bottom 50% shouldnt own much. In no society ever has the bottom 50% controlled much. Doubt it would be stable.
Rugian Member	Tue Mar 04 17:47:37 ^ correct. After a certain point, wealth in the hands of ditch diggers is a misallocation of capital.
jergul large member	Tue Mar 04 17:49:23 In Norway, the numbers are 50% bottom has 3,6% and the 1% top has 21,8%. Top 1% in the US has 31%
murder Member	Tue Mar 04 17:49:59 You two must have purchased tickets to the communist revolution.
murder Member	Tue Mar 04 17:53:30 "In Norway, the ... 50% bottom has 3,6%" Yeah, but over there people don't have the same need for wealth because some big ticket items are covered by the state.
jergul large member	Tue Mar 04 17:56:00 The big deal in the US is that the top 0,1% have 15% of the wealth. That is deep into oligarchy territory potential.
murder Member	Tue Mar 04 17:57:29 "The big deal in the US is that the top 0,1% have 15% of the wealth." No, that's not the big deal. I could give a rats ass how much the people at the top have. I only care that the people at the bottom have enough.
Rugian Member	Tue Mar 04 18:11:12 Murder Norway has historically underfunded its military to pay for social programs. Add to that the fact that it's essentially a petrostate and you have a unique model not readily repeated elsewhere. It's a fair point to argue that the specific percentages could use some tweaking. The problem with the lower classes accumulating wealth is that they generally suck at deploying it. More money in their pockets either leads to excess consumption and ultimately inflation (a $500 TV in a market where the average consumer is able to afford a $1,000 TV will eventually be re-priced as a $1,000 TV), or to excessive savings which are only useful on a macro level insamuch as banks at least are able to redirect that capital through lending. The individuals and companies that truly drive society forward are a relatively small portion of the pyramid. That's why wealth inevitably accumulates to them, because they're the ones who know how to best use it.
jergul large member	Tue Mar 04 18:20:42 Murder I perhaps see causation where you see correlation? I dunno, perhaps we should ask Amazon workers on foodstamps what they think about Bezos' revenue sharing model.
jergul large member	Tue Mar 04 18:23:31 Ruggy Norway has historically funded its military. Nice stab in the dark there though. What we also have done is tax the rich. Which paid for both the welfare state and the military.
jergul large member	Tue Mar 04 18:29:15 Historical average 1960-223 is 2,46%.
Rugian Member	Tue Mar 04 18:40:59 Oh jergul. http://www...es-meet-natos-spending-target/
murder Member	Tue Mar 04 19:06:08 The top 10 states by average net worth: Connecticut $919,784 California $854,715 Washington $842,139 New Jersey $840,178 Massachusetts $798,064 Vermont $792,981 New Hampshire $735,986 Illinois $701,465 Virginia $698,783 New York $691,127 http://www.visualcapitalist.com/sp/emp01-average-net-worth/
murder Member	Tue Mar 04 19:06:36 I wonder what the bottom 10 are.
jergul large member	Tue Mar 04 23:54:34 What, dear ruggy? The average from 1960 to 2023 is 2,46 of gdp. Right now we are pouring tons of money into Ukraine that we are, for outlandish reasons I do not understand, not allowed to include in defence spending. Feel free to tack that on for another 1% buff to our defence spending if you want to. With that said, of course Norway will push beyond 3,5% now that Trump has bailed from Europe. The problem now is not willingness to spend, it is more that there is nothing to buy.
Cherub Cow Member	Wed Mar 05 01:17:44 [murder (left-wing dogma bot)]: "That's funny." Leftists are incapable of understanding the Pareto Principle (80/20 Rule). It occurs in simple formulas: • 20% of people will always be better than 80% of people, • 20% of people will always out-perform 80% of people (e.g., do more work, do higher quality work), • 20% of people will always manage 80% of people (be better managers, be better organizers) Leftists do not want to understand principles such as this because they typically fall in the bottom of the 80% category, being the weakest people, the least effective people, the least visionary, the least capable — yet they still want the powers of the 20% of people who are consistently better than them. Hence we see leftists as bureaucrats complaining that they do not get the pay of actual workers while not wanting to do the workers' work (i.e., they want the prestige of the bureaucrat but not the hard work of the worker) and workers who complain the most, want higher pay, but work the least. Leftists always try to enslave the 20% or steal the power of the 20% without meeting the qualities that gave that 20% its powers. What leftists cannot face is whether or not those 20% powers are indeed rightful. You'll see them make pathetic memes about how billionaires should not exist **at all** ( http://imgur.com/gallery/i-like-lHCaoKZ ), which merely shows that they are too stupid or myopic to escape their enslaving principles, since a world that places caps on excellence will necessarily stunt its virtues. So the real question is only whether or not a people's *own* *best* people are represented in that 20%. The leftist — were he capable of understanding Pareto — subsequently would want the left's anti-virtues represented in that 20% (i.e., *not* its best people), but that merely results in the enslavement of all, since those having anti-virtues (slave morality) have zero concept of «noblesse oblige» and merely wait for their turn to enslave others. Worse, where leftists among their own people corrupt entry into the 20% with lies such as "equity" and "welfare" and "representation [without virtue]", they make way for the international rootless cosmopolitan foreigner to enter the 20% and enslave *all* of their people — and they blame this rootless foreigner's further acceleration left-ward on the *right* (for opposing the suicide!) rather than looking at the degenerate depths of their own reflections! The leftist simultaneously does not want this 20% power to even exist, but he wants it not to exist because his own corruption of it reflects his own sick vices; he again admits that he wishes that he himself not exist, as is his suicidal nature. TLDR: The issue is not that power is consolidated, as that necessarily happens. The issue is only whether or not sick people (leftists) have occupied that power. Traitors such as the puppet Biden ensured that their sick billionaires and sick trillionaire destroyers such as Larry Fink occupied those higher percentages and subsequently empowered the slave revolt (leftism), but now it is time to rip the parasites from their host.
murder Member	Wed Mar 05 05:14:39 "It's a fair point to argue that the specific percentages could use some tweaking. The problem with the lower classes accumulating wealth is that they generally suck at deploying it." A problem that could be avoided by taking bills off their table. If Americans didn't have to worry about medical bankruptcy or indebting themselves for decades to get an education, they wouldn't need a great share of national wealth pie. If you make sure that everyone has a roof over their heads and food, then it's not an issue what the people at the top have. You don't need to drag people down to raise the floor. -
murder Member	Wed Mar 05 05:16:28 "Traitors such as the puppet Biden ensured that their sick billionaires and sick trillionaire destroyers such as Larry Fink occupied those higher percentages and subsequently empowered the slave revolt (leftism), but now it is time to rip the parasites from their host." How much did you enjoy Trump securing those ports in Panama for BlackRock? lol :o) -
Cherub Cow Member	Wed Mar 05 05:24:36 [murder (left-wing dogma bot)]: "How much did you enjoy Trump securing those ports in Panama for BlackRock? lol :o)" You say that as though I approve of BlackRock or am some mindless Trump supporter — the same pathetic delusion that has afflicted tumblefaggot, who continually put forth that delusion despite me correcting him dozens of times over the years. In reality, for *years* I have warned of Trump's connections to Israel and his potential courting of the asset managers who have been sabotaging these United States. For *years* I have been saying that if Trump wants to step into his role as God Emperor that he must break the will of the asset managers, subjugate Israel, and break the slave revolt. *Years* — yet somehow you think you've found some clever loophole, whereas you have again illustrated your terminal illiteracy and ignorance. The biggest measure of Trump's first two years will be whether or not he can break BlackRock and get them to totally divest from ESG projects. Some of the signs of that will be getting Larry Fink to resign, halting "green" subsidies, fixing the DoL ERISA rule, and fully purging DEI (this last thing has already begun). The current SEC chair that Trump has appointed is a slight gamble, but ESG organizations are already shitting their diapers over his previous politics. If the SEC chair begins prosecuting asset managers, the lawyer wars will begin — a Holy War of Unquenchable Fire.
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: