Wealth Should Trickle Up, Not Down

[dozu888]

@Stockolio yeah good discussion, but how does this help you with your puts?

@Stockolio are you really still holding puts lol.... no wonder all the doom posts lol.

gotta ride the Trump train - you will have then have the correct bias.

 

[jys78]

inequality is never a problem.... using Ben Shapiro's argument, there is a lot of inequality between me and Bill Gates and I have no problem with that.

poverty is the problem... and the Dem elites policies have always been - tell them they are victims, keep them poor, keep them on the plantation, so they will vote for me again to keep the food stamps going.

others have said it right - lowest unemployment we've seen in decades... nobody is stopping nobody from making money.

but about the trickling up or down - the past couple of decades, most of the income growth have been among the high-skill workers... the low skill folks basically have seen them flat, barely keeping up with inflation - but that is mostly due to technology and out-sourcing.

Some truth here.

The problem is that fundamental human nature is to judge yourself in comparison to others. So long as there is ANY inequality, there will be a spectrum which will cause problems.

Consider: the "poor" today (say bottom 20%) live a far better life by almost any measure - health, travel, entertainment options, etc. - than royalty of just a couple hundred years ago. Short of severe mental illness/addiction, what does being poor in North America actually mean? Having only 1 flat screen TV? Your smart phone is more than a year old? lol.

However the social issues will persist regardless of absolute reality.

 

[bone]

Most Economists I’ve read seem to ignore the law of unintended consequences - Pettis included.

 

[nooby_mcnoob]

OP sounds like the type who crosses his legs like a woman, lies about his college entrance exam scores, sips "fair trade" tea while munching on vegan frankenfood and listening to NPR, and highly overrates his intelligence while debating online all day at his gummint job.

is it necessary to make caricatures...

 

[ironchef]

It is the disparity between the savers ( the rich ) and the consumers ( working class ),

Your problem sir is you equate savers with rich. In reality, as individuals, it is not how much you make but how much you save that matters in the long run. Many immigrants who came from other countries amassed a small fortune because they had been through hardships at their homeland and knew how to spend less than they made. He might not be an immigrant but the story is the same:

https://www.fool.com/investing/gene...janitor-amass-8-million-the-same-way-you.aspx

 

[MKTrader]

is it necessary to make caricatures...

In some cases....absolutely.

 

[henry76]

Some truth here.

The problem is that fundamental human nature is to judge yourself in comparison to others. So long as there is ANY inequality, there will be a spectrum which will cause problems.

Consider: the "poor" today (say bottom 20%) live a far better life by almost any measure - health, travel, entertainment options, etc. - than royalty of just a couple hundred years ago. Short of severe mental illness/addiction, what does being poor in North America actually mean? Having only 1 flat screen TV? Your smart phone is more than a year old? lol.

However the social issues will persist regardless of absolute reality.

Often made the same argument myself , paraphrasing Marks , whichever way you make the cake being on the bottom is shit.

 

[SunTrader]

Some truth here.

The problem is that fundamental human nature is to judge yourself in comparison to others. So long as there is ANY inequality, there will be a spectrum which will cause problems.

Consider: the "poor" today (say bottom 20%) live a far better life by almost any measure - health, travel, entertainment options, etc. - than royalty of just a couple hundred years ago. Short of severe mental illness/addiction, what does being poor in North America actually mean? Having only 1 flat screen TV? Your smart phone is more than a year old? lol.

However the social issues will persist regardless of absolute reality.

Not sure I follow you when you say "fundamental human nature is to judge yourself in comparison to others" and then do just that, comparing the poor of today with royalty of the past?

I'm pretty sure most people understand income level, not incidentals, is proper gauge.
And unlike The Fed and their nonsense 2% inflation rate, declining purchasing power and pitiful wage growth has meant more falling into the poor category.

 

[henry76]

You missed the point , have a think .

 

[tommcginnis]

as long as growth keeps up deficit is no issue, and also he's pressing the Fed to cut rates, so the borrowing cost will be lower.

Wrong on both counts.
1) Normalized U.S. debt-to-GDP has grown from 100% post-Crisis (which means deficit=GDPgrowth) to 105% since 2016 (which means deficit < GDPgrowth).
2) The FED is independent and does not take its marching orders from Treasury or the White House. As well, current rates are *carry* costs, and do not portend well to Payoff. Should a global crisis hit, and the U.S. dollar skyrocket through no action of the FED, our payoff costs would come at a huge cost of goods and services, which would either be given away for lower nominal-dollar values, or be idled entirely, dragging the U.S. into the fray more than we already are.

Borrowing is a use of credit. Credit = Debt + time. Credit *eventually* must be repayed. "MMT" be damned.