

Viral Video Shows the Extent of U.S. Wealth Inequality - electic
http://mashable.com/2013/03/02/wealth-inequality/

======
Xcelerate
Meh.. what is this "wealth"?

At a certain point, (unless you're just stupid), you don't buy "stuff" with
your money. When you have > $100 million, I prefer to think that you instead
have the capability to direct the flow of cash in the economy. Yes, some
people buy yachts and other nonsense, but really, what are you going to do
with that much money?

There's a chart somewhere out there on the internet detailing exactly what
Bill Gate's money is going into. And it's interesting, because a lot of it is
going into things that help people. Now consider, what if Microsoft never
existed; where would this money be? It would mean the average person would
have a little more probably. But Gates is directing it toward people that have
the _least of all_ (among some university donations, etc.)

I've always told myself that if I somehow ever came across a lot of wealth, I
wouldn't live any differently. I wouldn't own a car > $30,000. I wouldn't buy
an extravagant house or a nice piano, because personally, I would feel guilty
about having luxury items like this when other people have so little. I'm not
judging people that do; I'm just saying that for me personally, it wouldn't
work. So I would put my wealth into 1) disease research 2) education 3) 3rd
world support. Maybe some other things; I'd have to think more about it.

And I'd hate someone to say "Oh, look at how rich that person is. It's not
fair."

EDIT: Nothing's worse on HN than writing a long response and having the
article jump from the 1st page to the 3rd. I may as well be writing to nobody.

~~~
pyalot2
I was gonna write a lengthy response to your comment, but then, I don't need
to, a rich person already held a TED talk exactly why gross inequality is
problematic: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIhOXCgSunc>

------
rogueSkib
This is pretty frightening.

Banks are too big to fail and now too big to jail; it follows that the top 1%
also has these attributes. Does that mean the American government is powerless
to affect change?

What's more likely to win their vote? A pile of money, or lots of phone calls?
I hope we figure something out before it's too late ... this trend is only
going to get worse.

------
tzs
Unless everyone has exactly the same amount, it is mathematically necessary
that the top N% percent will have more than N% of the wealth. The same
reasoning can be applied iteratively within each wealth group.

Most people who write about wealth distribution on blogs or popular political
sites and forums, or make videos about it, don't seem to understand this, and
so fail to start with a reasonable model of what a fair wealth distribution
would be.

~~~
cawel
While this is mathematically true, I don't think it is necessary to
acknowledge it in order to suggest/discuss a reasonable model for wealth
distribution. I would even say that it is beside the point. The OP is trying
to show that the order of magnitude of US wealth (or income) inequality is
shocking. Moreover, most of us vastly underestimate the magnitude of US wealth
inequality. And I would add as an example that many still believe in the
American Dream, even if the US is one of the worst OECD countries when it
comes to social mobility [1]. As George Carlin was saying, "You have to be
asleep to believe it."

Back to the OP, when the top 1% has 24% of income (and 40% of wealth), that
means there's a lot of luxury in the US which could instead be used to improve
the life of some other less fortunate citizens. The economics rhetoric is
clearly failing: the current wealth distribution is certainly not the most
efficient distribution of resources if one is to include "quality of life" in
the equation.

[1]
[http://www.oecd.org/eco/growth/economicpolicyreformsgoingfor...](http://www.oecd.org/eco/growth/economicpolicyreformsgoingforgrowth2010.htm)

------
mikebracco
Two observations:

1\. Working hard doesn't entitle you to anything. Tired of politicians making
this claim.

2\. Part of rise in inequality is powered by technology. I'm sure in 1970 you
couldn't have created a billion dollar company with 12 people in 2 years
(Instagram).

~~~
opinali
"Working hard doesn't entitle you to anything." -- well said. I am a software
engineer, I always worked hard and I have a good income; but I'm by no means
rich and most likely will never be, mostly because I've got no entrepreneurial
genes. But that's alright, I think people who (besides the hard work) take
high risks by creating new companies or even working their asses off in a
startup that may or may not succeed, deserve an extra reward.

OTOH, the poor schmucks who work in the car wash a few blocks of my house, so
I can have my car cleaned for $9 even in the winter with temperature below
freezing? I would say they work much harder than me. And very likely they
always did, they were already sweating over some soul-crushing job when they
were teenagers (or even earlier), while at that age I had the privilege of
being fully dedicated to my education. Not to mention always having a good and
stable life -- food, healthcare, parents who had the means to care for me,
etc.

Simple truth is that inequality of opportunities is huge. Another poster
mentioned Bill Gates, well I don't take his merit away but Gates was the son
of a wealthy attorney and a wealthier banker. Even Bill's entrepreneurship is
something that can be attributed at least in part to the fact that he had a
very good safety net to fall -- if he failed, he wouldn't exactly be screwed
for a decade with debt.

------
xk_id
How is this kind of data acquired? I suppose we don't know precisely who the
1% guy is, right?

------
ams6110
This is pretty disingenuous. The creator of this video would have you believe
that the wealthy 1% are like Scrooge McDuck sitting on vaults full of cash
amounting to tens of trillions of dollars, and this is why some people are
poor.

------
tunesmith
So, I wonder what a tax policy would actually look like that would revert us
to "what we think it is". What would the marginal brackets be? Seems like it
would have to require a heck of an estate tax, too.

------
gmays
I'd like to see a wealth data compared to data on how people spent their free
time over their lifetimes.

The only thing to get upset about is wasted potential.

~~~
xk_id
You reminded me of Bill Gates, who said that in his youth, he never took a day
off, ever.

------
afsina
The historgram seemingly fits Zipf's law. I am not shocked. That is a law
after all.

