Millionaires, Billionaires Own 79% of America's Wealth

When did that happen? The OP didn't mention "billionaires". In fact, nobody mentioned "billionaires" until you did in post #22.

The top 1% (and perhaps the top 10%), that the OP's chart seems to be lamenting, are mostly millionaires.

 

It is literally the second word in the title.

 

And the very first word in the title is "Millionaires", so how did you conclude "This thread is not talking about millionaires"?!?

 

So which is it? Your two statements seem to contradict:
“The OP didn't mention "billionaires". In fact, nobody mentioned "billionaires" until you did in post #22.”
The second word is Billionaires...

So how did you conclude the thread wasn’t talking about billionaires?!?

 

I need to get my glasses checked then because I thought the word "millionaires" was in the thread title

 

It was, apologies.
The fact remains that this level of wealth inequality will eventually come to a head and it will not do so in a good way.
Millionaires are not rich, multi-millionaires and billionaires are.
And billionaires have actually been shown to contribute less than other groups via tax avoidance.

 

Yet there are still plenty of people gaining in financial security every year. People moving from poverty to working class, from working class to middle class, from middle class to wealthy. As long as people are still doing that (and they are), the conditions exist for it to happen. Whether it's 'harder' for some people is not relevant.

 

Twelve months, for many people ... tops.

Would reveal exactly who's genuine and who isn't, though - which would be an interesting thing to watch. I kinda hope it happens in my lifetime, just to watch the mental collapse of those who've spent their lives believing the startlingly infantile fantasy that all poor people are just waiting for a lucky break.

 

It isn't a function of intelligence. It's a function of will. Self-discipline.

 

EXACTLY. That's the real reason people are getting poorer. Loss of motivation, because the Welfare State convinced them they didn't have to strive to survive.

 

"Perceived" being the operative word!

Furthermore, those who "perceive" unfairness sure as heck best not be spending a dime on cheap imported goods.

 

This is the part more and more people disagree with you on.

 

Everyones wealth is their own. So the wealthy don't own a percentage of anything. What's theirs is theirs. What's yours is yours. etc. America is not a cult or religion with the law of consecration.

 

You mean the people with Buyer's Remorse? People who regret the bad decisions they made over the past decade or so, when they could have been adapting and planning ahead?

 

All of this commie talk about "share of the wealth" is BS based on the flawed idea that the economy is a zero sum game. It is not.

https://www.fulltimefinance.com/the-economy-is-not-a-zero-sum-game/

 

Sure you can group those in with the people that have a good paying job but are still lacking reliable and affordable healthcare, the children born to people that have made bad decisions, the people that see unnecessary suffering, the families that are food insecure and the people that have simply had bad luck (ie death, health, loss).

I guess it is easier to condemn people when you can twist their misfortune into an at-fault event.

 

Interesting that your opinion piece ends with “So what is my point? Well, the comparison is still impossible to avoid. It is inevitable wealth inequality will cause strife. Also, it is obvious those that are well to do are subsidized by the poor. The world is designed to allow people in power to stay there.”

Wealth is directly linked to property (real and digital) and and monetary supply — all are, to an extent, limited. And we are seeing an increasing concentration of extreme wealth.

 

In the US how are the well to do subsidized by the poor?

People in the US that are poor are subsidized by the Government, which gets their money from the rich and middle class. If someone works for a rich person they receive compensation based on market economics. Certainly factory workers, coal miners, etc. were exploited at one time but now we have unions and labors laws.

 

Please do not edit down my posts because you are unable to debate what is said. Thanks in advance

As to your question, ask the author of the opinion piece you sourced — it was a quote from him.

 

Full as requestedz

 

Your first sentence may be accurate, but I'm skeptical.

From my perspective, the numbers of homeless in my county has grown very much in the last 10 years or so. I guess it's not as bad as California, but seeing people sleeping on sidewalks wasn't seen before about 10 years ago.

 

It's more difficult to get a solution given that people have been brainwashed to blame themselves if things do not work and things which used to be considered essential for democracy and capitalism to work like Unions have in the main been destroyed making it very diffficult for people to stand together to get necessary changes made.

Unless or until people move together change is unlikely. I am not American but I hear you are all brainwashed from the moment you are born to identify neo liberalism with freedom. Given that it is a system which creates ever increasing inequality and gives massively more to those who make their money from capital rather than working it looks like you will just continue on a race to the bottom.

 

American Unions destroyed themselves by the one thing they used to stand against, greed. We live in a global economy now, no way to self isolate and get out of it, the solutions are simple yet complicated, for one the USA could have a tier minimum wage like other countries one minimum wage for teenagers and a second one for adults but the left is against it. We also could have a left wing idea law that says no CEO can make more then 50 times the wage of the lowest employee, but the right wing won't go for that either.

 

Classic! someone here is brainwashed, but probably not who you think.

 

Ah! Are you one of those descended from the business people at the time who were upset that their profits while continuing to increase were not increasing as much as they were in the 20's 30's - a situation which is given a great deal of credit for WW2 and for the introduction in most places including the US I think of mixed exonomies. Prior to WW2 the US was on the brink of revolution. That is why Roosevelt brought in the New Deal. He did not bring it in because he was a socialist. He brought it in to protect Capital.

Now about the 70's when the economic system was changed. It was around '73 that changes started to happen but it was nearer the end of the 70's that certainly in the UK workers were on strike all the time but they were not on strike because they were greedy as you put it. They were on strike because inflation was so high that they were finding it difficult to put food on the table. That is one of the nice little untruths people both in the US and UK are taught to believe.

The old idea of having the workers live in poverty in an unequal society managed to creep back in. Those who fought and died in WW2 were well aware of how this system ****ed up every part of life. It was not workers that people were screaming about in my childhood ruining the world. It was Monopolies and Corporate Power - exactly what happens when you take away financial restraints and what was seen by WW2 to be what led to fascism. Those who brought in Neo Liberalism also did not like Democracy. By again letting go of all restraint so that the wealthy elite were the people the Government served rather than the people and having little focused goups to play lip service to a democratic election, they quietly got rid of Democracy. There have been plenty of studies done which show the US is now an Oligarchy which has does not follow the interest of its citizens. It isn't just the US, the UK is no better. One of the absolute necessities of a Democracy is a Free Press. The US had about 50 people who had the money to be contributing to this in the 60's 70's, now it has only 5. With that it has been able to create the thinking of much of the population and it is by no way a surprise that in the time when money is scarce, the Far right is again being encouraged.

Neo Liberalism and its Global economy died in 2008. Instead of accepting that and working out where we could go from here and trying to get a policy which allows for more equality which we know leads to less crime and less mental illness, those in charge made we the people, pay to keep those billionaires in their place. This has led to them completely giving up on the other side of capitalism - the fact that if you are a capitalist you risk losing your gamble as ever since they are always wanting reassurances that they will not be allowed to fail. All these Trade Treaties had lines concerning that in them.

In the 70's top Managers rarely received more than 7-10 times more than their workers. This neo liberalism has just been creating a new aristocracy from Corporate Power who will work well with fascism when the people start rebelling and need to be subdued.