The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists - Page 70 - Fuel Economy, Hypermiling, EcoModding News and Forum

sendler · 01-02-2018, 04:39 PM

GDP per capita takes no consideration to wealth distribution which has been shifting further to the top 10% since 2002. The bottom 90 % get a smaller cut every year even if the total grows slightly.
edit.
Since 1973 actually.

redpoint5 · 01-02-2018, 05:25 PM

Sure, the bottom gets a smaller overall cut of an ever increasing pie, but their incomes have still increased over time.

Only an evil person would perceive well-being to be dependent on what others have in relation to themselves, beyond having basic needs met. Someone owning a private jet, for instance, has no bearing on my enjoyment of owning a $7 RC quad-copter.

I challenge you to find the person who would prefer to be in their income bracket for 1973, or prefer 1973 levels of medical/mental care.

It's an inevitable consequence that those with more means are able to grow their assets at a faster rate. Just like compounding interest, wealth begets wealth.

I'm not sure what an equitable way to address income inequality is, or even convinced it's a problem. The people who are wealthy change over time, just as those who are poor change over time.

How is fantastic personal wealth a bad thing? Elon Musk put the majority of his own money into financing his various ventures, and I would say his businesses are fostering innovation and creating wealth for many. Wealthy people don't just spend their days Scrooge McDucking in their money; instead they spend and invest it.

Finally, people who are poor at managing money are likely to always be poor at managing money, regardless of the amount. Their personal behavior is the likely reason they will remain poor (for the 2% of those in poverty that never get out). People who are bad with money that win the lottery still go bankrupt. Spending problems cannot be remedied with income solutions.

redpoint5 · 01-02-2018, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Old Tele man

Uh, 2014 dollars are so-o-o-o-o FOUR years ago!

Difficult to find the most up to date info, especially when the census is only performed once per decade, but the trend holds today. It seems tax code has become more progressive over time as well.

sendler · 01-02-2018, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redpoint5

Sure, the bottom gets a smaller overall cut of an ever increasing pie, but their incomes have still increased over time.

It is right there in your own chart. from 2000 from to 2014 lower AND middle class percentiles made less of an ever increasing GDP. Go back to 1900 and the bottom 90% had a share of growth which began to change around 1973. there was still growth for the middle class from 73 to 99 but had begun to diminish and shift as globalization separated the workers from the owners profits. In 1940 the CEO's made 40X the average worker. Today it is 380X. Not the janitor. 380X the average worker. 20 Million/ year is common for CEO's of government funded organizations like Freddie Mac. It is madness. You are happy with a $70 drone to play with. They are buying $7 Million jets and homes. We are totally getting screwed and you don't even know it. 118% of the recovery since 2008 has gone to the top 1%. The bottom 60% got 87%. They are making 13% less now than in 2006.

sendler · 01-02-2018, 06:44 PM

Wealth inequality in America. I posted this before. Time to look at it again. Easy 6 minute watch.
.
https://youtu.be/QPKKQnijnsM
.

redpoint5 · 01-02-2018, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sendler

It is right there in your own chart. from 2000 from to 2014 lower AND middle class percentiles made less of an ever increasing GDP. Go back to 1900 and the bottom 90% had a share of growth which began to change around 1973. there was still growth for the middle class from 73 to 99 but had begun to diminish and shift as globalization separated the workers from the owners profits. In 1940 the CEO's made 40X the average worker. Today it is 380X. Not the janitor. 380X the average worker. 20 Million/ year is common for CEO's of government funded organizations like Freddie Mac. It is madness. You are happy with a $70 drone to play with. They are buying $7 Million jets and homes. We are totally getting screwed and you don't even know it. 118% of the recovery since 2008 has gone to the top 1%. The bottom 60% got 87%. They are making 13% less now than in 2006.

What is the purpose of persuading me to be dissatisfied with my income? The quad-copter I bought cost $7, which is testament to the power of technology and the global economy. My enjoyment of it remains, independent of the fact that there are millions of people who make hundreds of times more than I do.

There have been income declines in the lower income brackets periodically, but the overall trend over time is increasing. The only problem I can identify is abject poverty, which has trended downwards since recorded history. What is an equitable way to remedy wealth inequality then? That solution would have to preserve the trend of well-being improving for the majority of people.

I'm with you on the belief that many CEOs are vastly over-compensated. Unfortunately I'm not on any board of directors or have a controlling share in any business, so there isn't anything for me to do about it.

What I can do is take a personal and active role in helping individuals. It's individualized assistance that makes a real difference, not some bloated, inefficient, and impersonal government program.

I just got a call today from someone with 4 children and a wife who is in financial hardship, largely due to medical problems. It's my responsibility to respond, not the government.

The video you provided was interesting and enlightening. I then watched this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jtxuy-GJwCo

sendler · 01-02-2018, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redpoint5

There have been income declines in the lower income brackets periodically, but the overall trend over time is increasing.

It WAS increasing. Up until 1973. Then ever more and more slowly until 2002. At which point growth stopped and reversed for those USA citizens who make about the 70- 75th percentile or below. The poorer, the more extreme the de-growth. This situation is now entrenched to perpetuate whereby USA working classes will expect to generally drift down to the global average while they drift up. But cost of living is obviously much higher here. The free market only works for the lower percentiles when there is a shortage of labor and hope for the future from strong perpetual growth. Perpetual growth on a finite planet is obviously impossible and globalization has spread the unskilled labor jobs to the cheapest market. What we have achieved in the last 150 years is a direct result of accessing huge amounts of stored fossil energy which will be nearing it's end soon and there is no similar replacement at even a fraction of the scale. GDP, and population are tied to energy almost 1:1. We must start thinking about a totally new economic system which will tollerate de-growth of GDP without obliterating the poor. We have about 35 years of affordable crude oil left to come up with a totally different way.