The rich get richer and the poor get screwed - again

Apr 2013
37,515
25,574
La La Land North
#1
From a detailed NYT analysis of the current S&P bull market that just hit its 10th anniversary.

More than $30 trillion: That's the amount of wealth generated by stocks' 10-year bull run, per the N.Y. Times' Matt Phillips.

  • "Adjusted for inflation, that is the most created during any bull run on record, edging out the $25 trillion in gains during the epic streak from December 1987 to March 2000, which ended with the bursting of the dot-com bubble."
The fruits went mostly to the rich, per The Times:

  • The net worth of the wealthiest 10% of American families grew by double-digit %s.
  • Median American family wealth dropped 34%.
In particular, look at that last sentence.

This is from the Axios AM newsletter but the links are in the quote above.
 
Dec 2014
26,760
14,633
Memphis, Tn.
#2
From a detailed NYT analysis of the current S&P bull market that just hit its 10th anniversary.

More than $30 trillion: That's the amount of wealth generated by stocks' 10-year bull run, per the N.Y. Times' Matt Phillips.

  • "Adjusted for inflation, that is the most created during any bull run on record, edging out the $25 trillion in gains during the epic streak from December 1987 to March 2000, which ended with the bursting of the dot-com bubble."
The fruits went mostly to the rich, per The Times:

  • The net worth of the wealthiest 10% of American families grew by double-digit %s.
  • Median American family wealth dropped 34%.
In particular, look at that last sentence.

This is from the Axios AM newsletter but the links are in the quote above.
And this should surprise exactly no one with an IQ larger than their shoe size.
 
Likes: Lyzza
Nov 2012
10,654
8,832
nirvana
#3
From a detailed NYT analysis of the current S&P bull market that just hit its 10th anniversary.

More than $30 trillion: That's the amount of wealth generated by stocks' 10-year bull run, per the N.Y. Times' Matt Phillips.

  • "Adjusted for inflation, that is the most created during any bull run on record, edging out the $25 trillion in gains during the epic streak from December 1987 to March 2000, which ended with the bursting of the dot-com bubble."
The fruits went mostly to the rich, per The Times:

  • The net worth of the wealthiest 10% of American families grew by double-digit %s.
  • Median American family wealth dropped 34%.
In particular, look at that last sentence.

This is from the Axios AM newsletter but the links are in the quote above.
Yeah but that’s not enough. They deserve another tax cut on top of that.
 
Dec 2015
16,429
15,265
Arizona
#4
From a detailed NYT analysis of the current S&P bull market that just hit its 10th anniversary.

More than $30 trillion: That's the amount of wealth generated by stocks' 10-year bull run, per the N.Y. Times' Matt Phillips.

  • "Adjusted for inflation, that is the most created during any bull run on record, edging out the $25 trillion in gains during the epic streak from December 1987 to March 2000, which ended with the bursting of the dot-com bubble."
The fruits went mostly to the rich, per The Times:

  • The net worth of the wealthiest 10% of American families grew by double-digit %s.
  • Median American family wealth dropped 34%.
In particular, look at that last sentence.

This is from the Axios AM newsletter but the links are in the quote above.

But...but...the wealthiest 10% deserve that double-digit increase because 1) They really really want to be wealthy. 2) They are "GOOD" people. 3) They are smarter than the average bear. 4) They work harder too....and 5) They know the right people so they SHOULD be rich.
This 10% owns their entitlement--their privilege. Their right. I mean, look at Kylie Jenner--the youngest "self-made" billionaire. Look at how hard she worked. Look at how much smarter she is....AND she DOES know the right people.
So there you have it, R.
If that Median American Family had just worked harder or tried to be smarter or really really really wanted to be wealthy, THEY COULD BE just like Kylie. :cool:
 
Jun 2013
5,662
1,730
Katmandu
#5
From a detailed NYT analysis of the current S&P bull market that just hit its 10th anniversary.

More than $30 trillion: That's the amount of wealth generated by stocks' 10-year bull run, per the N.Y. Times' Matt Phillips.

  • "Adjusted for inflation, that is the most created during any bull run on record, edging out the $25 trillion in gains during the epic streak from December 1987 to March 2000, which ended with the bursting of the dot-com bubble."
The fruits went mostly to the rich, per The Times:

  • The net worth of the wealthiest 10% of American families grew by double-digit %s.
  • Median American family wealth dropped 34%.
In particular, look at that last sentence.

This is from the Axios AM newsletter but the links are in the quote above.
What are you bitching about, aren't you living on stock market investments?
 
Feb 2019
1,452
334
here and there
#6
From a detailed NYT analysis of the current S&P bull market that just hit its 10th anniversary.

More than $30 trillion: That's the amount of wealth generated by stocks' 10-year bull run, per the N.Y. Times' Matt Phillips.

  • "Adjusted for inflation, that is the most created during any bull run on record, edging out the $25 trillion in gains during the epic streak from December 1987 to March 2000, which ended with the bursting of the dot-com bubble."
The fruits went mostly to the rich, per The Times:

  • The net worth of the wealthiest 10% of American families grew by double-digit %s.
  • Median American family wealth dropped 34%.
In particular, look at that last sentence.

This is from the Axios AM newsletter but the links are in the quote above.
Why should you care? I mean, is wealth one big pie that we all divvy up or is wealth created? If it is one big pie, then why has the GDP grown so much over the years? Why does the pie grow?

The idea that wealth is one big pie that needs to be divided equally is a misnomer

Also puzzling to me is the notion that if we take more money from rich folk and give it to the government that somehow we will all get some of their loot.

Again, if government was restricted to redistributing only the tax money they took in, I could understand why you would think that. However, that is not how things work. Government plans on spending "X" amount of money no matter how much they take in or don't take in. In fact, they routinely run massive deficits and don't blink an eye. It's all monopoly money really.

If you destroy wealth, you destroy the economy. After all, the government does not produce anything as they simply leach off the wealthy.

I would love to hear from any of you how the wealthy are restricting your economic freedom. I can give you a myriad of examples on how the government restricts your economic freedom.
 
Apr 2013
37,515
25,574
La La Land North
#8
Economists, like real economists who went to school for years and who do studies and write papers tell me that wealth inequality hurts the middle class which then hurts the overall economy.

That the average Trump loving RW cheers screwing themselves is just a great mystery of life, that's all.
 
Feb 2019
1,452
334
here and there
#9
Economists, like real economists who went to school for years and who do studies and write papers tell me that wealth inequality hurts the middle class which then hurts the overall economy.

That the average Trump loving RW cheers screwing themselves is just a great mystery of life, that's all.
I see, so these "economists" have no bias or political leanings and are nameless.

Also, you don't seem to be able to articulate any of their reasoning.

Very informative, thanks.
 
Likes: Sabcat
Feb 2019
1,452
334
here and there
#10
Reminds me of a joke.

So three men apply for a job, a mathematician, an accountant, and an economist.

The interviewer's first question to the mathematician was, what is 2 + 2? The mathematician then pulls out a slide ruler and a chalk board and shows proof that it is equal to 4.

The accountant was next and asked the same question. He whips out a calculator and show the man that it is equal to 4. Easy peasy!

Then the economist enters and is asked the same question. The economist then looks around the room, under the desk, and draws the curtain and closes the window. He cozies up to the interviewer and whispers in his ear, "What would you like it to equal?"
 

Similar Discussions