Wealth Inequality in America

Lol, that’s @countingbeans territory. I work in corporate finance. Our “busy season” is August - October (budgeting and allocations).

2 Likes

This is a solid point. We have self defeating ideas about relationships, jobs, job interviews, our bodies, how our clothes fit…I mean the list could go on forever.

The “chicken or the egg arguement,” these two are having is great…but it’s likely a combination of both sides.

Until you break the scarcity mindset paradigm you will likely remain poor.

However, It is fair to say that being poor is more likely to reinforce self-defeating ideas like a scarcity mindset, at a higher rate, than someone who is not poor.

Conservatives will say “they need to just do it, and pull themselves up.” Liberals will say “if we just give them everything they need they will do it, and pull themselves up.”

Ultimately, we have to be motivated to get the knowledge we need and make changes, but we all get help from someone, somewhere along the way as well.

1 Like

I’m not sure how that advances the argument that intergenerational poverty is a function of self-defeating ideas (as opposed to the reverse).

From your comment, I’m going to infer that you were not raised in a situation of intergenerational poverty. Thus, the fact that you have responded in a non-self-defeating manner (which I assume you have/are) to your hardship tells us nothing about how you would have responded had you lived the sort of tenuous, deprived upbringing that typifies families enduring intergenerational poverty.

Yes, we are all victims of something. But with respect to interfering with an individual’s socioeconomic potential, all forms of victimhood are not equal.

1 Like

I was living in my mom’s self-made cousin’s guest house. Not reflective of my upbringing. Actually, my uncle (let’s call him uncle; I do) was a physically abused army brat’s son, who was an abused army brat’s son. He just happened to do exceptionally well for himself.

While we disagree on which causes which, I do not disregard the effects that being brought up in poverty has. Further, there are mindsets/tendencies that silver spoon-fed children have, which can be just as limiting.

I think the answer lies in the middle. I think that being raised in poverty provides you with a certain mindset, just as being born to overweight parents provides you with a specific mindset. I do not believe that people are ever powerless to that mindset.

Possibly a horrible example:

A individual born in poverty may be inclined to commit theft, but he is aware that this is not a condoned behavior, and, if caught, he will pay for his crimes.

Individuals know they should eat better, read more, not snort speed balls, but they do. Because the price of achieving what they want, does not outweigh the immediate desire to do “____”.

EDITS

I have been away from the boards for a while and am just seeing this thread, so I have no knowledge of how the subsequent posts have turned out and whether it was productive or a train wreck, but from my standpoint I will say the following:

I think there is a real problem. I also think a lot of this real problem is caused by natural differences in people–while we are all equal under law, not all of us are equally talented or smart, and there simply isn’t a perfect solution. In my opinion there could be “better” solutions, but no perfect solution exists as long as humans are humans.

I believe that along with problems in the market two other problems contribute to this inequality phenomenon: spending, and cost of living increases.

Spending is obvious, because people can’t keep their wallets put away. Cost of living is a problem in my opinion more so than wages (although I am not strictly opposed to minimum wage increases in principle). When cost of living rises it rises primarily due to increased overhead for products and services that is passed on to the consumer–whether the overhead is a result of more regulations, increases in fuel prices, or whatever.

Just as with healthcare–cost is more of an issue than wages. Don’t get me wrong, we could improve things there as well.

The best accountants don’t necessarily make the best accounting managers (replace accounting with any job title). I read alot about leadership vs management before I took this. I spent alot of time thinking about every boss I’ve ever had. I tried to keep the best attributes and the behaviors I won’t copy. Accounting is just math with extra rules. Getting everyone on the boat and rowing in the same direction is tough.

Getting the job was tough. Even though I ran large departments I never got the manager titles. I’m < 30 and I have a certain youthful exuberance about me. So I grew a beard and toned it down a bit.

2 Likes

(Hi Guys, new guy here :smiley: )

While in general from the lurking I’ve done, I tend to agree with a decent chunk of EyeDentist’s views, I wanted to chime in here. I wholeheartedly agree that there is very little you can be born into that CAN’T be overcome with hard work. That being said I’ve always been more along the side that whether or not you can “grow” out of poverty is less based on your families income, but rather the mindset of your peers.

Personally I was born in backwater WV (hometown population ~10k), and I believe wholeheartedly that if my family hadn’t moved due to my father getting a different job, I would have had a stupidly lower likelihood of getting out of the economic condition I was born into. The mindset of my peers back in WV is basically pulled from a right leaning opinion peice about how poor people will blame anyone but themselves for the condition they’re in.

As an aside, I really like the community I see here (for the most part), and look forward to getting more involved :slight_smile:

edit: jesus those smileys are huge

1 Like

haha! I grew a beard too, albeit patchy, for the same reason. I’m a 26 y/o who tries desperately hard to look older so superintendents and school boards will feel confident trusting me with their $150+million general obligation bond. :flushed:

Best compliment I got, was two days ago a well known, and distinguished (re: old) architect stated I must be 38.

1 Like

The ultimate twist: we discover that rajraj and EyeDentist are actually the same person with two different accounts…and we have all been played.

5 Likes

So it seems this thread derailed a bit. I contributed to that by talking about helping the poor with ideas instead of raining benjamins on them. My bad.

So the original premise:

  1. Is income/wealth inequality a problem in and of itself? Righties and lefties will never agree on this so maybe drop it for the sake of moving on.

New question:
What is the solution proposed to income inequality proposed by Piketty and other left leaning econimists? @EyeDentist @jasmincar @Aero51 @Zeppelin795

Taking all the cash and assets of the top 5/10/25 percent of the population, throwing them in a big pile and setting them on fire would reduce wealth inequality instantly. But would that lead to growth, better wages and reduce the plight of the poor? This is reducto ad absurdum but I don’t know how addressing the problem of excess wealth makes the poor better off.

1 Like

I think the first question is:

Is this a problem?

If yes, how did this become a problem?

Globalization played a tremendous role. National companies that went international 10x’d their value, which in turn 10x’d founders and VC’s stake in said company.

Another possible question to be asked, should the likes of Google and Microsoft be broken apart? (think Standard Oil)

This is a very simple template for a really good life.

The power of each of those simple things can not be overstated.

1 Like

While I completely agree with this and the power of these simple things, I feel like it’s worth noting an argument can be made for the inherent risk factors of these simple things. I would argue that while these things are “simple enough” to achieve, the inherent risk is much much higher for those in the lower echelon of society.

Depending on where on the food chain an individual falls, the fallout from not holding to any of these things can change quite a bit. Ex: the negative side effects of doing drugs is statistically not the same (on average) for wealthy people as it is for poor people. Another big example would be when people accidentally have a child before they’re ready.

If a high teen low 20something has a child/does drugs/etc, the overall impact of their lives can/is greatly changed based on where they fall on the totem poll.

2 Likes

The only problem is I have student loan debt, I’m 30lbs overweight and the assets I have aren’t making me much income (I have some storage units on my property that if all rented could pay half my mortgage and then pay the property taxes once the house is paid off) and I bought a business and failed… so setbacks.

Coincidentally this is the life Christianity recommends. I didn’t want to throw “love your neighbor” or “love god” in there because that would cloud the discussion on economics. There’s even a parable where Jesus discusses the virtue of deploying cash and earning a return vs burrying it in the back yard.

If you look at the lives of early protestant settlers in the US, or the amish, or Mormons. They are very industrious people who take care of their poor. I’m not saying “follow Jesus and life will be easy”. Just that Christians have a marketing problem. Instead of the “On top of saving your soul we can help you lead a fulfilling life through Christ’s teachings.” The message that reaches the public are the Wetboro jagoffs with “God hates fags” signs. God doesn’t hate…so. Also don’t interpret my behavior as representing Christians, I’m rather rough around the edges. Sorry for the derail, done preaching.

3 Likes

Exactly! If a poor person has a kid at 15, they are basically screwed for life. Whereas mom and dad can help a more affluent teen finish school.

If a poor person gets arested with a bag of marajuana in texas, felony record. Future screwed. Rich kid gets busted in Connecticut, lawyers swoop in “boys will be boys” defense and… no problem.

Ironically moral relativism is championed by the left. “Who are you to judge? Who’s it hurting?” It hurts the poor the most. You can say “don’t do that it’s a bad idea”, without judging someone but I digress.

I feel like it’s something that is more or less “known” by most people, but the true significance is rarely acknowledged. If i’m being totally honest, I chalk it up to human nature. DaddyRich and DaddyPoor (please excuse the overgeneralizations) are both going to do EVERYTHING in their power to help KidRich and KidPoor when something goes wrong. I don’t blame DaddyRich for having and using his influence/power to help his child (because one day if my children fuck up I’ll gladly use and abuse any influence I have on their behalf), but we shouldn’t pretend like they don’t have an inherent advantage either.

Imo this speaks to the general issue of “Wealth Inequality” but I don’t believe a fix exists for this, as you can’t beat human nature.

1 Like

Is the goal to have complete equality (re: starting point), or is the goal to provide equal opportunities?

I believe the government’s role is equal opportunities,

1 Like

I don’t believe the goal is to have COMPLETE equality. I think, as with anything, the goal is to make the best of what we’re given (I know that sounds like stupid semantics). I think the goal (in the examples I gave) is for DaddyRich to not have the ability to pay for a fancy lawyer to get his kid out of trouble. You can’t legislate away DaddyRich’s ability to help his kid more if he has a baby, or his ability to send his kid to a better school to emerge with less debt, etcetcetc.

While I agree that the goal from the govt is equal opportunities, that’s never going to be realistic, because you can’t fight/beat/stop human nature. That being said equal opportunities isn’t what we’ve ever got, nor will we ever get from the govt, but progress is made by fighting the good fight regardless of the odds.

if the disparity between income taxes paid by gender and government services used by gender were closed that would probably lead to more women getting married.

As it stands right now married women are generally more conservative than unmarried ones for the simple fact taxes lower their husband’s wages. A single woman relies more on taxpayer funded services because she doesn’t have the same luxury of someone in her life to directly support her and her children financially.

If the cost of being a single woman goes up, marriage becomes more attractive by extension.

What right does poor kid have that rich kid doesn’t?

The government affords both the same rights, the rich kid just has a financial safety net. Neither kid is better off, except in comparison of physical items. Happiness is an inside job. I grew up a poor kid, my youngest brother grew up a middle class kid. If you compare our social capabilities and skill set, I would score much higher, because I was forced to face the tougher side of life.