Current Events > 82 percent of all wealth generated in 2017 went to the 1 percent

(+) Yeah! (+)

http://time.com/5111971/billionaires-global-inequality-income-oxfam-wealth/

But don't worry guys, it will totally trickle down guys
---

Minor detail.
---

Meanwhile poverty and homelessness still rage on and millions struggle living paycheck to paycheck praying that one unplanned and severe medical emergency doesn't bankrupt them.
---

I don't see the problem. Are you suggesting people shouldn't be allowed to profit off that which they own?
---

And yet there are more new millionaires than ever before.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/24/a-record-number-of-americans-are-now-millionaires-new-study-shows.html

The total amount of wealth increases each year. So while 82 percent went to the richest people and corporations, an 18% that is bigger each year can go to the rest. The beauty of economics is that new wealth can be created all the time, so there is no reason to think that it is a zero sum game.
---

Southernfatman posted...

Meanwhile poverty and homelessness still rage on and millions struggle living paycheck to paycheck praying that one unplanned and severe medical emergency doesn't bankrupt them.

Poverty is being eradicated at an extremely fast rate.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/mar/17/aid-trade-reduce-acute-poverty

https://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21578665-nearly-1-billion-people-have-been-taken-out-extreme-poverty-20-years-world-should-aim

http://www.aei.org/publication/take-a-bow-capitalism-nearly-1-billion-people-have-been-taken-out-of-extreme-poverty-in-20-years-thanks-to-markets/
---

If it pisses you off that much, just join the 1%. Problem solved.
---

lilORANG posted...

If it pisses you off that much, just join the 1%. Problem solved.

absolutely correct and I agree 100% with the very logical advice of the handful of users itt:

just stop being poor guys
---

FLUFFYGERM posted...

And yet there are more new millionaires than ever before.

Why do you parrot this when it's a terrible thing?
---

SatanicHalibut posted...

FLUFFYGERM posted...

And yet there are more new millionaires than ever before.

Why do you parrot this when it's a terrible thing?

Why is it terrible that there are more new millionaires than ever before? Your topic title made it seem like the odds are against the average person, yet we see that there are now more new self-made millionaires than ever before. So clearly the system enables people to succeed.
---

SatanicHalibut posted...

FLUFFYGERM posted...

And yet there are more new millionaires than ever before.

Why do you parrot this when it's a terrible thing?

Hes a troll

SatanicHalibut posted...

FLUFFYGERM posted...

And yet there are more new millionaires than ever before.

Why do you parrot this when it's a terrible thing?

Why is it a terrible thing? Why is SUCCESS a terrible thing?
---

FLUFFYGERM posted...

And yet there are more new millionaires than ever before.

Yes, the 1 percent

FLUFFYGERM posted...

Why is it terrible that there are more new millionaires than ever before?

Because basic math says so, there's only a finite amount of currency in our economy and when most of it is hoarded in a few places there's very little left for everyone else
---

SatanicHalibut posted...

FLUFFYGERM posted...

Why is it terrible that there are more new millionaires than ever before?

Because basic math says so, there's only a finite amount of currency in our economy and when most of it is hoarded in a few places there's very little left for everyone else

these people don't become millionaires due to hoarding currency

they become millionaires by owning shares of companies

and those companies then becoming more valuable to the global economy, as in people become willing to pay more for shares of their stock

the only real concern is when the principal driver of corporate value addition is increased output from workers without increasing compensation for workers
---

SatanicHalibut posted...

FLUFFYGERM posted...

And yet there are more new millionaires than ever before.

Why do you parrot this when it's a terrible thing?

Is it just resentment?...

I don't know why you'd' be unhappy that more and more people are successful other than the fact that you yourself have not been.

Create goals, make a plan. What do you want to get out of life? Go do it. What do you do for a living? Can you improve it? How? Execute.

Get busy livin or get busy dyin

SatanicHalibut posted...

FLUFFYGERM posted...

Why is it terrible that there are more new millionaires than ever before?

Because basic math says so, there's only a finite amount of currency in our economy and when most of it is hoarded in a few places there's very little left for everyone else

There is literally infinite currency, thanks to the US debt.

Wealth is not a finite resource, and procuring it is not a zero-sum game.
---

darkjedilink posted...

There is literally infinite currency, thanks to the US debt.

not

how

it

works
---

Darkman124 posted...

SatanicHalibut posted...

FLUFFYGERM posted...

Why is it terrible that there are more new millionaires than ever before?

Because basic math says so, there's only a finite amount of currency in our economy and when most of it is hoarded in a few places there's very little left for everyone else

these people don't become millionaires due to hoarding currency

they become millionaires by owning shares of companies

and those companies then becoming more valuable to the global economy, as in people become willing to pay more for shares of their stock

the only real concern is when the principal driver of corporate value addition is increased output from workers without increasing compensation for workers

It doesn't matter HOW they became millionaires, they became millionaires sucking more money out of the regular economy and putting it in the economy exclusive to 1 percentages. That's terrible for working class people no matter what propaganda you spew
---

Darkman124 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

There is literally infinite currency, thanks to the US debt.

not

how

it

works

Actually, yeah - it's not like our currency is backed by anything. It's literally just paper that the government says has worth. They could print $20 Trillion tomorrow and pay off the debt they incurred.

Hell, they wouldn't have to even PRINT it, thanks to electronic banking.
---

SatanicHalibut posted...

FLUFFYGERM posted...

Why is it terrible that there are more new millionaires than ever before?

Because basic math says so, there's only a finite amount of currency in our economy and when most of it is hoarded in a few places there's very little left for everyone else

So then how do you explain the global economy being worth more now than it was 20 years ago? Or 50 years ago? Or 500 years ago? In terms of circulating currency and also resource wealth.
---

darkjedilink posted...

Actually, yeah - it's not like our currency is backed by anything. It's literally just paper that the government says has worth. They could print $20 Trillion tomorrow and pay off the debt they incurred.

Hell, they wouldn't have to even PRINT it, thanks to electronic banking.

actually, no

our currency doesn't need to have a gold standard to have a finite quantity. mass printing is controlled by the reaction debt holders would have to a sudden devaluing of the currency--this would destroy the value of the bond and force it to pay a much higher dividend, something undesirable to our government. so they keep printing rates under control.

what makes wealth potentially infinite is you don't have to buy $10 million of a stock to make it worth $10 million more

you just have to be willing to pay $10 million more for the stock. stock rises are based on when bid/ask rates rise, not based on someone buying a bunch of stock at a higher value. psychology is what drives wealth up and down. equities are the foundation of nearly every millionaire's wealth today.

you don't know what you're talking about

at all
---

Technically you're both missing the real key behind finite/infinite wealth, imo. What makes wealth potentially infinite is the amount of physical resources we can leverage to expand our economies and increase our standard of living.

We haven't scraped the surface of what we can do with just earth's resources, let alone the moon's or asteroids or etc.
---

FLUFFYGERM posted...

Technically you're both missing the real key behind finite/infinite wealth, imo. What makes wealth potentially infinite is the amount of physical resources we can leverage to expand our economies and increase our standard of living.

We haven't scraped the surface of what we can do with just earth's resources, let alone the moon's or asteroids or etc.

the appreciation of that value is psychology and the resultant equity valuation of the company that exploits these resources
---

Darkman124 posted...

FLUFFYGERM posted...

Technically you're both missing the real key behind finite/infinite wealth, imo. What makes wealth potentially infinite is the amount of physical resources we can leverage to expand our economies and increase our standard of living.

We haven't scraped the surface of what we can do with just earth's resources, let alone the moon's or asteroids or etc.

the appreciation of that value is psychology and the resultant equity valuation of the company that exploits these resources

it is in no way driven by quantity of fiat currency. resource exploitation is only one kind of business; facebook/google/etc don't really do much with physical resources but rather with services. service has innate value but it is not a resource to extract from the ground.

there is a way in which the quantity of fiat currency can drive appreciation of value. IE you can print a lot of fiat and avoid the real bad inflation...by exporting your currency/inflation to other countries

*mindblown*
---

FLUFFYGERM posted...

SatanicHalibut posted...

FLUFFYGERM posted...

Why is it terrible that there are more new millionaires than ever before?

Because basic math says so, there's only a finite amount of currency in our economy and when most of it is hoarded in a few places there's very little left for everyone else

So then how do you explain the global economy being worth more now than it was 20 years ago? Or 50 years ago? Or 500 years ago? In terms of circulating currency and also resource wealth.

You realize people are buying more on credit than ever before right? That's why corporations keep having record profits but the economy is still in the shitter
---

it can drive or support it, yes: we saw how the fed's bond buying programs buoyed the stock market.

it is not the foundational driver of wealth. QE1-3 served to make bonds a non-viable asset class for other investors, who were forced to come to grips with their fear of the volatility of stocks and buy them anyway because they were the only available place to put their money.

an infinite currency supply would not create infinite wealth. it would create hyperinflation. which is why we do not have an infinite currency supply.

big numbers are not infinity.
---

how much wealth is actually generated by the 1%?

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/paretoprinciple.asp
---

SatanicHalibut posted...

FLUFFYGERM posted...

SatanicHalibut posted...

FLUFFYGERM posted...

Why is it terrible that there are more new millionaires than ever before?

Because basic math says so, there's only a finite amount of currency in our economy and when most of it is hoarded in a few places there's very little left for everyone else

So then how do you explain the global economy being worth more now than it was 20 years ago? Or 50 years ago? Or 500 years ago? In terms of circulating currency and also resource wealth.

You realize people are buying more on credit than ever before right? That's why corporations keep having record profits but the economy is still in the shitter

That doesn't necessarily mean it's because they're poor. The average car payment is around $550 a month before insurance, gas, maintenance, etc. So people are overextending themselves and spending a lot, but that has nothing to do with what we were talking about.
---

What really gives money value isn't gold. It is the ability to turn that into food.

This is because without food you will die.

So to say:
FLUFFYGERM posted...

So then how do you explain the global economy being worth more now than it was 20 years ago? Or 50 years ago? Or 500 years ago? In terms of circulating currency and also resource wealth.

Are you considering how different the buying power of the money back then in relation to being able to eat was?

At the end of the day, the person working a 9-5 job is doing so to eat and feed their family and give a roof and comfort from the weather. The price of this changes around drastically and is different depending where you are.

For instance, you could say a person making 60k in Cali is making a huge percentage more than people made in Cali during the 80s. But are they really wealthier? Actually, I believe they would barely be not poor and can barely afford a place to live?
---

if your point is the working and middle class is no wealther today than 30 years ago i agree, and that would support the point that increasing the currency supply has little to no effect on wealth

what has created wealth is how much more people are willing to pay for shares of companies that operated in the 80s vs those same companies (+ new ones) now

you seem to be rambling though. the infinite potential of wealth is totally divorced from currency and driven by human psychology and the nature of power not being shared/sold in large quantities all at once (after all...when it is, it's lost!)
---

Darkman124 posted...

if your point is the working and middle class is no wealther today than 30 years ago i agree, and that would support the point that increasing the currency supply has little to no effect on wealth

what has created wealth is how much more people are willing to pay for shares of companies that operated in the 80s vs those same companies (+ new ones) now

Are you going to suggest we aren't wealthier now than we were in the '80's? Standard of living is off the charts compared to back then, dude! THAT IS WEALTH.
---

darkjedilink posted...

Are you going to suggest we aren't wealthier now than we were in the '80's? Standard of living is off the charts compared to back then, dude! THAT IS WEALTH.

i literally said the opposite

Darkman124 posted...

what has created wealth is how much more people are willing to pay for shares of companies that operated in the 80s vs those same companies (+ new ones) now

you tried to claim it was because there's more currency in circulation which makes no fucking sense

now you seem to be contradicting yourself and seem to have no idea what your original point was
---

Darkman124 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Are you going to suggest we aren't wealthier now than we were in the '80's? Standard of living is off the charts compared to back then, dude! THAT IS WEALTH.

i literally said the opposite

you tried to claim it was because there's more currency in circulation which makes no fucking sense

now you seem to be contradicting yourself and seem to have no idea what your original point was

if your point is the working and middle class is no wealther today than 30 years ago i agree

No, you didn't "literally say the opposite." You literally said we're no wealthier now than 30 years ago.
---

Darkman124 posted...

now you seem to be contradicting yourself and seem to have no idea what your original point was

That's his MO.
---

darkjedilink posted...

No, you didn't "literally say the opposite." You literally said we're no wealthier now than 30 years ago.

i said the middle class is no wealthier today

because they're not



overall there is much more wealth, but it hasn't gone to the middle class
---

darkjedilink posted...

Standard of living is off the charts compared to back then, dude! THAT IS WEALTH.

Care to explain in depth how this is so?
---

Darkman124 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

No, you didn't "literally say the opposite." You literally said we're no wealthier now than 30 years ago.

i said the middle class is no wealthier today

because they're not



overall there is much more wealth, but it hasn't gone to the middle class

due to the Great Recession

we were clearly on a trend upwards until then. i bet that the trend is recovering. and the overwhelming trend over a much longer period of time shows household net worth increasing
---

FLUFFYGERM posted...

due to the Great Recession

we were clearly on a trend upwards until then. i bet that the trend is recovering.

only half of americans own stocks

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-americans-dow-22000-investing-20170803-story.html

as this is a plot of median wealth it's unlikely to have changed significantly

AVERAGE wealth is way up, because you and i stayed invested/bought hard from 2008 onward and those investments have gained in value several times over.
---

Darkman124 posted...

i said the middle class is no wealthier today

because they're not

The problem for me is this chart is meaningless unless it is accompanied by how far the dollar at the time vs. today can go to buy food and a place to live. And even that is relative to region.

Or do we define wealth as everything else but the needs?
---

darkphoenix181 posted...

The problem for me is this chart is meaningless unless it is accompanied by how far the dollar at the time vs. today can go to buy food and a place to live. And even that is relative to region.

you do realize that the real (inflation-adjusted) cost of housing, healthcare, education, and food has risen significantly since the 1980s, right?

what has gotten cheaper is luxuries which you seem to be confusing with 'standard of living'
---

Darkman124 posted...

you do realize that the real (inflation-adjusted) cost of housing, healthcare, education, and food has risen significantly since the 1980s, right?

what has gotten cheaper is luxuries which you seem to be confusing with 'standard of living'

We all have dark in our name. I am not darkjedi.

If you didn't confuse us, I am not sure how I am confusing luxuries with standard of living? Unless as I asked above wealth refers only to luxury?

My point like in post 30 was that I don't buy that wealth went up because as you said, buying into the standard of living rose dramatically.
---

supporting info:

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/23/how-much-housing-prices-have-risen-since-1940.html

https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2015/july/growth-in-inflation-adjusted-food-prices-varies-by-food-category/

https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/paying-for-college/articles/2017-09-20/see-20-years-of-tuition-growth-at-national-universities

https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/NationalHealthExpendData/Downloads/HistoricalNHEPaper.pdf

darkphoenix181 posted...

We all have dark in our name. I am not darkjedi.

sorry my b, it was darkjedi who was prattling about standard of living.

the above links should give some perception as to how much necessities grew in real cost

what's neat is that certain kinds of food DID get cheaper.

the shit kind.
---

FLUFFYGERM posted...

Darkman124 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

No, you didn't "literally say the opposite." You literally said we're no wealthier now than 30 years ago.

i said the middle class is no wealthier today

because they're not



overall there is much more wealth, but it hasn't gone to the middle class

due to the Great Recession

we were clearly on a trend upwards until then. i bet that the trend is recovering. and the overwhelming trend over a much longer period of time shows household net worth increasing

You know we're due for another recession right? By both the regular cycle period (~8 years) and the incredible debt bubbles of student loans, cars, and mortgages (again).

clearaflagrantj posted...

You know we're due for another recession right? By both the regular cycle period (~8 years) and the incredible debt bubbles of student loans, cars, and mortgages (again).

modern cycle period timing is pretty meaningless and there's nothing structurally dooming us
---

Darkman124 posted...

sorry my b, it was darkjedi who was prattling about standard of living.

Why do people always confuse me with him, but not me with you? (actually that might have happened once)

Guess cause the lower case d
---

darkjedilink posted...

Darkman124 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

There is literally infinite currency, thanks to the US debt.

not

how

it

works

Actually, yeah - it's not like our currency is backed by anything. It's literally just paper that the government says has worth. They could print $20 Trillion tomorrow and pay off the debt they incurred.

Hell, they wouldn't have to even PRINT it, thanks to electronic banking.

Do you even understand the consequences of what you're suggesting?
---

Inb4 everyone saying "muh bootstraps" and "muh trickle down"
---