The elite are scared

[RandomGuy]

Pretty shocking video. The UK is in a similar situation unfortunately. However I do dislike how the guy says at 2:23 "Here's socialism, all the wealth of the country distributed equally". That's not socialism. That's communism. Why do Americans insist on lumping communism and socialism all into one big political pot? Extremely naive.

Because most people who about "socialism" can't really define it in any meaningful sense. S'all good. Someone using the term generally saves me the time for having to figure out how much credibility to assign them, and figure out how skeptical to be when it comes to their policy solutions.

[Nero5]

It's a nice graphic presentation, but is it true and who is the author? This is the problem with information on the web and our dear ol MS demonstrates it regularly, minimal use of facts and downright lies are the fodder for conspiracy theorists and worse. However having said that, if this is true then what is the difference between 1976 and now - I would suggest tracking the change in law and taxation law in particular. Also consider the change in debt to equity ratio for americans during this period, or better still debt to GDP. The USA has been living beyond it's means for decades and borrowing to do so. Running the small government - low tax model has maldistribution of wealth as its logical outcome. The stark alternative is the scandinavian model: does this 'work' - for them yes. Look at their crime rates, educational outcomes, heath systems etc. Would it work in the USA - no it would not.
At least this one has credits:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxvVZe2fnvI

[TeyshaBlue]

Pretty shocking video. The UK is in a similar situation unfortunately. However I do dislike how the guy says at 2:23 "Here's socialism, all the wealth of the country distributed equally". That's not socialism. That's communism. Why do Americans insist on lumping communism and socialism all into one big political pot? Extremely naive.

There's a ton of crap in That video....based upon a poll. What's the population? Self-selecting? Is there any attempt at cross sectioning? You buy the conclusions without even answering these 2 basic questions? That's pretty naive imo.

[TeyshaBlue]

You ain't elite either.

[Blizzardwizard]

There's a ton of crap in That video....based upon a poll. What's the population? Self-selecting? Is there any attempt at cross sectioning? You buy the conclusions without even answering these 2 basic questions? That's pretty naive imo.

I already knew about the huge wealth gap before watching the video. So do you believe that the video is false and that wealth inequality isn't as prevalent in America as the video would suggest?

[TeyshaBlue]

Anyone with a room temperature IQ understands that wealth concentrates. Inequality suggests that there should be a condition of "equality" which is fools gold.
Equitable is a better descriptor but its a dynamic descriptor. Peeps haz problems with dynamics.

[Th'Pusher]

State-by-state breakdown of inequality in America. A little more meat on the bones for you TB:

http://www.epi.org/publication/incom...-1917-to-2012/

Full disclosure the epi is a left leaning think tank, but the data is what it is...

[Th'Pusher]

Most shocking - average annual income of the top .01% $34M

[ElNono]

Anyone with a room temperature IQ understands that wealth concentrates. Inequality suggests that there should be a condition of "equality" which is fools gold.
Equitable is a better descriptor but its a dynamic descriptor. Peeps haz problems with dynamics.

It is a dynamic with hard edge cases. If there's "equality" (and no possibility of wealth ac ulation) then there's no incentive to work harder than the next guy. But if we understand there's wealth ac ulation, then you can also reach the other end of the spectrum, and have a case where too few people have too much wealth ac ulated. At that point, economically speaking, you end up with people that extract more than then put into the economy, and the economy eventually gets to a standstill (ie: somebody owns all properties in monopoly and has all the funny money). That's one reason taxes exist (especially in their progressive form). One of it's primary functions is to take wealth and put it back into the economy.

[TeyshaBlue]

State-by-state breakdown of inequality in America. A little more meat on the bones for you TB:

http://www.epi.org/publication/incom...-1917-to-2012/

Full disclosure the epi is a left leaning think tank, but the data is what it is...

That is a meaty study, Push. Good find. Im pretty surprised by the state breakout as well....Utah at 56%. Wtf?
Gives me something good to dig into this weekend. Thx

[TeyshaBlue]

It is a dynamic with hard edge cases. If there's "equality" (and no possibility of wealth ac ulation) then there's no incentive to work harder than the next guy. But if we understand there's wealth ac ulation, then you can also reach the other end of the spectrum, and have a case where too few people have too much wealth ac ulated. At that point, economically speaking, you end up with people that extract more than then put into the economy, and the economy eventually gets to a standstill (ie: somebody owns all properties in monopoly and has all the funny money). That's one reason taxes exist (especially in their progressive form). One of it's primary functions is to take wealth and put it back into the economy.

Exactly....now youre talking equitability. A much better approach than equality.

[RandomGuy]

There's a ton of crap in That video....based upon a poll. What's the population? Self-selecting? Is there any attempt at cross sectioning? You buy the conclusions without even answering these 2 basic questions? That's pretty naive imo.

... and that means what exactly?

That a few hundred people controlling more wealth than hundreds of millions is better somehow?

Seems to me that worrying about the poll being "self-selecting" is missing the ing point. I can't think of many people who would find the reality anything close to their ideal.

Who gives a if the "ideal" looks a bit different than in the video, if everyone agrees that the reality is not anywhere close to anything ANYONE would consider ideal, outside the ers wiping their asses with hundred dollar bills?

[TeyshaBlue]

You were hot on naive statements. Just thought I'd throw or your enthusiastic embrace of a substantless youtube video, cosmored.

. Okay. Sorry. That was below the belt.
Btw, did I make any statement about "better"?

No.

[TeyshaBlue]

substantless is a word. I just invented it so back off grammar Nazis.

[TeyshaBlue]

Substantialessness?

My head asplode.

[spurraider21]

substanceless

[pgardn]

Lacking substance


I take the long road home.