Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Americans are still #1 at something: creating super-wealthy people. USA USA USA   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 22
    More: Sad, United States, company, Americans, H.J. Heinz Co., aging-associated diseases, Hawaiian Airlines, LVMH, Daniel Ortega  
•       •       •

2542 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Oct 2013 at 8:51 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-10-18 09:05:15 AM  
5 votes:
Which is better for society- one person with 2 billion in wealth, or 100 people with 20 million each? Which scenario puts more money into society? Which is better? One person making $200 million a year, or 100 people making $2 million a year? Which scenario helps grow the economy better? And if spreading he wealth around is beneficial for society, then logically concentrating wealth in the hands of fewer people is detrimental to society.

And finally for all those that think limiting incomes is a bad thing- Is there any person on the planet that could not live a life of incredible luxury on $2 million a year? What can't-live-without necessity would a person making $2 million a year have to do without?

We are become France of the 18 century. not a good thing.
2013-10-18 09:15:28 AM  
3 votes:

MycroftHolmes: In other words, would our incomes be that different if the US economy had the same amount of capital, but it was just distributed differently?


yes, because when you have the concentration of wealth to one subset of society, you lose the transfer of wealth within the economy and that subset of society starts hording the wealth. Without movement, you have a stagnant economy and nothing improves for anyone. The rich just keep acruing more wealth, the poor living paycheck by paycheck
2013-10-18 11:18:44 AM  
2 votes:

MonoChango: I would bet that this is the lowest present of any culture in the history of man kind.


1940-1979 called to tell you to pay up.

MonoChango: It is no wonder as the democrats and more specifically Obama has gained in power the divide between the wealth and poor has widened.


I'd blame asinine tax policies, but only because you've already brought the poeslaw to the Fark picnic.
2013-10-18 09:44:51 AM  
2 votes:

RightToWork: In the United States, it is entirely commonplace for your average middle-class family to have a house with a big yard, multiple cars, air conditioning, and all the latest gadgets like iPhones and gaming consoles for the kids. But because a CEO somewhere is making XX times the median income, our rage should burn with the fire of a thousand suns, and the progressive crusaders would have us scrap the American experiment to become another Europe with high taxes and high regulations. Then we can all enjoy our 3-euro bottled water from our tiny apartments and ride our vespas to work every day, but at least we'll have had the satisfaction of exacting vengeance upon those damn rich people who ran the companies that provided us with our unmatched purchasing power and services.


two things, bottled water is unnecessary in most parts of this country, as tap water is as clean if not cleaner than bottled.

and secondly, it's not that progressives hate wealthy, they hate inherited wealth. There's nothing to applaud when you inherit millions because your parents knew how to be business people. If you work your ass off to get where you are, progressives will hold you up as an example of what we can all be. Name 1 rich person that progressives hate that didn't work for their wealth and hasn't tried to rig the system to maintain their wealth without doing any actual work.
2013-10-18 09:39:46 AM  
2 votes:
In the United States, it is entirely commonplace for your average middle-class family to have a house with a big yard, multiple cars, air conditioning, and all the latest gadgets like iPhones and gaming consoles for the kids. But because a CEO somewhere is making XX times the median income, our rage should burn with the fire of a thousand suns, and the progressive crusaders would have us scrap the American experiment to become another Europe with high taxes and high regulations. Then we can all enjoy our 3-euro bottled water from our tiny apartments and ride our vespas to work every day, but at least we'll have had the satisfaction of exacting vengeance upon those damn rich people who ran the companies that provided us with our unmatched purchasing power and services.
2013-10-18 09:38:18 AM  
2 votes:

Amish Tech Support: Every millionaire I have know in my life started out with a large inheritance.
I've never personally meet one that started out from humble beginnings. I'm
not sure if that was just a fluke in my social circle.
I wish I could see statistics regarding this.


It's old data but your wish is granted.
Each year, Forbes Magazine releases its round-up of the four hundred wealthiest individuals and families in the United States...

We examined both 1995 and recently released information about the 1996 Forbes list. The average of 1995 and 1996 results indicate that:
30.1% Started in the Batters Box -- includes individuals and families whose parents did not have great wealth or own a business with more than a few employees.
13.9% Born on First Base -- includes individuals whose biographies showed signs of a wealthy or upper class background, but did not apparently have assets of more than $1 million.
5.75% Born on Second Base -- members inherited a small company or wealth worth more than $1 million, but less than $50 million.
6.85% Born on Third Base -- includes people who inherited substantial wealth, in excess of $50 million, but not enough to qualify for membership in the Forbes 400.
43.35% Born on Home Plate -- includes those who inherited sufficient wealth to rank among Forbes 400.
2013-10-18 09:20:15 AM  
2 votes:
We should all move to Liberia, there's hardly any rich people there!
2013-10-18 09:06:52 AM  
2 votes:

Yogimus: socoloco: And equally good at creating the poor.

Our poor is rich.


This is the correct response.  We eliminated poverty without eliminating the word, creating the rather bizarre paradigm that the people we call "poor" are not just among the richest people who have ever lived, they are among the richest people alive right now.  The constant agitation for yet more government goodies is the global equivalent of millionaires whining that they're not billionaires and the historical equivalent of billionaires whining that they're not Bill Gates.  Wanting more no matter how rich you are seems to be hard-wired into the human condition, hence the horror if even the rate of increase of a government entitled is reduced.
2013-10-18 09:04:11 AM  
2 votes:
Should I feel bad?  Really, should I feel bad?  No snark intended.
2013-10-18 11:23:39 AM  
1 votes:
This is not possible. I have been told countless times by Fox News and Republicans that the U.S. is not only bad for the wealthy, but it's also so bad that wealthy people might leave the U.S. for better rich people utopias around the world.

It's a hard life for the rich, or so I hear.
2013-10-18 09:26:17 AM  
1 votes:

vpb: Nuc_E: Should I feel bad?  Really, should I feel bad?  No snark intended.

Yes, because the wealthy tend to get that way at the expense of the poor and middle class.  mainy by using their influence to pass laws that favor them to the disadvantage of ordinary people.



This.

It's one thing to get rich through hard work and innovation. That is worthy of applause.  It's an entirely different thing to  get or remain rich by gaming or rigging the system.
2013-10-18 09:24:10 AM  
1 votes:
Productivity has surged, but income and wages have stagnated for most Americans. If the median household income had kept pace with the economy since 1970, it would now be nearly $92,000, not $50,000. If the median household income had kept pace with the economy since 1970, it would now be nearly $92,000,

i.imgur.com

i.imgur.com
2013-10-18 09:20:09 AM  
1 votes:
Nope, still don't feel bad.
2013-10-18 09:17:59 AM  
1 votes:

vpb: Except that their immigration policies are much laxer than ours? Where did you even get that?


you have no idea what "draconian" or "homogenous" means, do you?
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-10-18 09:17:00 AM  
1 votes:

RightToWork: We're also better at providing the vast majority of our population with a standard of living and purchasing power unseen in the rest of the world, with the exception of a few tiny homogenous European countries with draconian immigration policies that make them essentially gated communities for wealthy white people.


Except that their immigration policies are much laxer than ours?  Where did you even get that?


Not to mention that we are moving in the direction of the third world.
2013-10-18 09:08:07 AM  
1 votes:
We're also better at providing the vast majority of our population with a standard of living and purchasing power unseen in the rest of the world, with the exception of a few tiny homogenous European countries with draconian immigration policies that make them essentially gated communities for wealthy white people.
2013-10-18 09:04:44 AM  
1 votes:

Carn: way south: The US holds most of the wealth so its not unusual that it creates most of the wealthy people.
The problem is that our Pyramid is rather pointy at the top with a massive base at the bottom.

/but even then, our poor aren't as poor as most other nations poor.

Yeah, people even have refrigerators if you can imagine, the leeches.  What else do they want?  Some food to go in them?  HA!


First world problems.
The fact that ours have a place to put a fridge means they live like kings, compared.
2013-10-18 09:02:00 AM  
1 votes:

socoloco: And equally good at creating the poor.


Our poor is rich.
2013-10-18 09:01:57 AM  
1 votes:

way south: The US holds most of the wealth so its not unusual that it creates most of the wealthy people.
The problem is that our Pyramid is rather pointy at the top with a massive base at the bottom.

/but even then, our poor aren't as poor as most other nations poor.


Yeah, people even have refrigerators if you can imagine, the leeches.  What else do they want?  Some food to go in them?  HA!
2013-10-18 08:55:39 AM  
1 votes:

Valiente: Not all pyramids are pointy at the top.


Not all pyramids have a solid base.
2013-10-18 08:55:38 AM  
1 votes:
"But they're boot strappy!"
"I want their heads on pikes!"
Did I forget anything?
2013-10-18 08:53:34 AM  
1 votes:
Not all pyramids are pointy at the top.
 
Displayed 22 of 22 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report