If the economy is so great, why don't more people feel better off?

[ZiprHead]

World's richest 500 people saw their wealth jump 25 percent in 2019

In 2019, the world's richest 500 people saw their collective net worth jump by 25 percent or $1.2 trillion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index published Friday.

Combined, the collective net worth of the world's 500 wealthiest individuals totaled $5.9 trillion. American billionaires alone added $500 billion to their wealth, with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg gaining $27.3 billion and Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates adding $22.7 billion.

According to Bloomberg, just 52 people on the list saw their fortunes decline in 2019. One of those billionaires is Amazon's Jeff Bezos, whose worth dropped by $9 billion, though Bloomberg notes the decline is largely due to his divorce settlement, and Bezos still ends 2019 as the world's richest person.

The new report comes as wealth disparity remains a hot topic in the election and a growing source of frustration for many.

A report earlier this year found that income inequality in the United States is at its highest point since data started being collected more than 50 years ago. Another report from this year found that the poorest Americans saw their income decline 7 percent over the past 15 years, while everyone else gained financially.

 

[Derec]

World's richest 500 people saw their wealth jump 25 percent in 2019

I wonder how these statistics deal with billionaires dying. Most billionaires (especially on the upper end of the list) are older, and thus the death rate among that cohort is high.
There are estate taxes to pay, and usually wealth gets distributed among multiple heirs. So there is quite a bit of diffusion.

 

[DBT]

Whatever diffusion happens largely remains within the strata of the very rich. Minimum wage earners don't benefit from a rich guys inheritance. Meanwhile the situation of gross inequality not only remains, but given the figures, grows wider and deeper.

A situation that is indefensible. Unethical and immoral.

 

[Derec]

Plus some jobs, however menial, are necessary and essential yet poorly paid.

Less and less as the share of the labor force.

 

[DBT]

Plus some jobs, however menial, are necessary and essential yet poorly paid.

Less and less as the share of the labor force.

More detail and citation needed.

 

[Derec]

Whatever diffusion happens largely remains within the strata of the very rich. Minimum wage earners don't benefit from a rich guys inheritance.

True. Billionaire's heirs are going to end up very wealthy themselves even if they do not themselves crack the billionaire mark. But the "minimum wage earners" do benefit from the estate tax.

Meanwhile the situation of gross inequality not only remains, but grows.

Tax systems could change to address that, but care must be taken not to discourage innovation at the same time.

 

[Derec]

Plus some jobs, however menial, are necessary and essential yet poorly paid.

Less and less as the share of the labor force.

More detail and citation needed.

Do you really doubt that increasing automation reduces menial labor force or are you just arguing for arguing's sake?

 

[DBT]

More detail and citation needed.

Do you really doubt that increasing automation reduces menial labor force or are you just arguing for arguing's sake?

I asked what you meant. Mechanization is a different issue, though it is also something that needs to be addressed. You diverted from the topic of excessive wealth accumulation in the hands of a few at the expense of society as a whole.

 

[DBT]

Whatever diffusion happens largely remains within the strata of the very rich. Minimum wage earners don't benefit from a rich guys inheritance.

True. Billionaire's heirs are going to end up very wealthy themselves even if they do not themselves crack the billionaire mark. But the "minimum wage earners" do benefit from the estate tax.

Meanwhile the situation of gross inequality not only remains, but grows.

Tax systems could change to address that, but care must be taken not to discourage innovation at the same time.

The tax system could be changed in order to benefit society....but will it be changed? Can you see it happening?

 

[Derec]

I asked what you meant. Mechanization is a different issue, though it is also something that needs to be addressed. You diverted from the topic of excessive wealth accumulation in the hands of a few at the expense of society as a whole.

I didn't mean to divert, I was just saying that the number of menial jobs in today's economy is far less than it was in the past.

 

[Derec]

The tax system could be changed in order to benefit society....but will it be changed? Can you see it happening?

I definitely can, depending on who wins the 2020 elections. Both as president, as well as Congress.

I think care must be avoided not to overdo it. Parties in power tend to get a big head and try to change the system too much.
Take the wealth tax. Probably unconstitutional and, judging from European experience with it, raises far less than expected.

Money begets more money. That's as natural as accretion of matter due to gravity. To counteract the damaging aspects of that law of economics without negatively disrupting the whole economy is not an easy feat.

I would say the best way to reform the tax system would be to greatly simplify it, and remove most of the deductions that can be abused as tax loopholes at worst and needlessly complicate the tax system at best.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

World's richest 500 people saw their wealth jump 25 percent in 2019

In 2019, the world's richest 500 people saw their collective net worth jump by 25 percent or $1.2 trillion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index published Friday.

Combined, the collective net worth of the world's 500 wealthiest individuals totaled $5.9 trillion. American billionaires alone added $500 billion to their wealth, with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg gaining $27.3 billion and Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates adding $22.7 billion.

According to Bloomberg, just 52 people on the list saw their fortunes decline in 2019. One of those billionaires is Amazon's Jeff Bezos, whose worth dropped by $9 billion, though Bloomberg notes the decline is largely due to his divorce settlement, and Bezos still ends 2019 as the world's richest person.

The new report comes as wealth disparity remains a hot topic in the election and a growing source of frustration for many.

A report earlier this year found that income inequality in the United States is at its highest point since data started being collected more than 50 years ago. Another report from this year found that the poorest Americans saw their income decline 7 percent over the past 15 years, while everyone else gained financially.

In other words, the stock market went up. It's not a matter of taking money from anyone.

 

[DBT]

World's richest 500 people saw their wealth jump 25 percent in 2019

In 2019, the world's richest 500 people saw their collective net worth jump by 25 percent or $1.2 trillion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index published Friday.

Combined, the collective net worth of the world's 500 wealthiest individuals totaled $5.9 trillion. American billionaires alone added $500 billion to their wealth, with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg gaining $27.3 billion and Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates adding $22.7 billion.

According to Bloomberg, just 52 people on the list saw their fortunes decline in 2019. One of those billionaires is Amazon's Jeff Bezos, whose worth dropped by $9 billion, though Bloomberg notes the decline is largely due to his divorce settlement, and Bezos still ends 2019 as the world's richest person.

The new report comes as wealth disparity remains a hot topic in the election and a growing source of frustration for many.

A report earlier this year found that income inequality in the United States is at its highest point since data started being collected more than 50 years ago. Another report from this year found that the poorest Americans saw their income decline 7 percent over the past 15 years, while everyone else gained financially.

In other words, the stock market went up. It's not a matter of taking money from anyone.

Where does the article say that?

 

[ZiprHead]

New Report: 53 Million Americans Hold Low-Wage Jobs

The Brookings Institution's Metropolitan Policy Program just released a study that casts serious doubt on President Trump's insistence that the economy is improving, and that the employment market is strong.

Brookings' findings confirm that working doesn't necessarily translate into earning a decent wage. Despite record low 3.6 percent unemployment, the Brookings' report, "Meet the Low-Wage Workforce," shows that 53 million Americans – 44 percent of all workers age 18 to 64 – hold low-wage jobs, earn median hourly wages of $10.22 and have a $17,950 median annual income.

Brookings' research revealed that low-wage workers are racially diverse: Fifty-two percent are white; 25 percent, Latino or Hispanic; 15 percent, African-American, and 5 percent, Asian American. Both Latino and black workers are overrepresented relative to their share of the total workforce, as are women who account for 54 percent of low-wage workers, higher than their 48 percent total workforce share.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

In other words, the stock market went up. It's not a matter of taking money from anyone.

Where does the article say that?

I'm simply pointing out what happened.

 

[DBT]

In other words, the stock market went up. It's not a matter of taking money from anyone.

Where does the article say that?

I'm simply pointing out what happened.

You said it, but you haven't shown that that is what happened. I was asking for evidence.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I'm simply pointing out what happened.

You said it, but you haven't shown that that is what happened. I was asking for evidence.

The top 500's wealth went up because their stock holdings increased. Jeff Bezos is worth a billion trillion, but a lot of that is tied to the value of Amazon stock.

And of course, stocks continue to go up because the interest rate is too darn low to save money in a savings account.

 

[DBT]

I'm simply pointing out what happened.

You said it, but you haven't shown that that is what happened. I was asking for evidence.

The top 500's wealth went up because their stock holdings increased. Jeff Bezos is worth a billion trillion, but a lot of that is tied to the value of Amazon stock.

And of course, stocks continue to go up because the interest rate is too darn low to save money in a savings account.

Plus a company needs to appear to be a good investment, which comes down to business plan and how well the company appears to be doing....

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I'm simply pointing out what happened.

You said it, but you haven't shown that that is what happened. I was asking for evidence.

Look around!

The stock market has gone up a lot.

The ultra-wealthy almost always have most of their wealth in the stock market. On average their wealth will move with the market.

Ignoring this shows it's just political garbage, not a serious argument.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I'm simply pointing out what happened.

You said it, but you haven't shown that that is what happened. I was asking for evidence.

The top 500's wealth went up because their stock holdings increased. Jeff Bezos is worth a billion trillion, but a lot of that is tied to the value of Amazon stock.

And of course, stocks continue to go up because the interest rate is too darn low to save money in a savings account.

Disagree. Savings accounts are never a good place for keeping money in the long term, no matter what the interest rates.

The low interest rate is relevant, though--in a perfect world the price of a company's stock is the net present value of the future earnings of the stock. In the real world, of course, we don't have a perfect read on this and emotional things can cause the stock to vary from this also, but it's still a reasonable approximation.

Net present value is the sum of future returns discounted for inflation. When inflation is low the earnings don't get discounted as much as when they are high. Thus you expect stock prices to rise in times of low inflation and drop in times of high inflation.