Posted on 12/22/2011 5:46:00 AM PST by 1010RD
How much total wealth does the society have? Are the lower 10% in the current US better off than the upper 10% of Rome?
Right. Imagine a society made up of grasshoppers and ants. The ants invest and work hard and the grasshoppers don’t. When bad times show up who’s more likely to be without or to see their income plummet?
The trouble with measuring this way is that during a debt deflation you have very high and pervasive job loss. That drags down the bottom earners and overinflates the top earners. Who’s more likely to be out of a job - a janitor or a brain surgeon?
Worse, income isn’t a measure of wealth or even happiness. Marx was trapped in 18th century aristocratic Britain. The world moved, but the Marxists keep trying to fit their formula despite reality.
IF this is indeed true, think about it this way. When the Federal Reserve generates seven trillion in "temporary overnight near-zero interest 'loans,'" 65% to 6 banks, who were the beneficiaries? Was it you? It certainly wasn't me. When the Treasury buys $700 Billion in "bad assets" from banks, who is the beneficiary?
Suppose you were allowed to take all your money an put it in the stock market. Anything that lost, the government bought back at its original price. Anything that went up you get to sell and keep. How would you do with such government guaranteed success compared to the random Joe with his 401K?
One of the phenomena of Rome was the increasing concentration of land in Italy in the hands of the patricians as the government continually increased debt beyond reasonable levels. So Rome continually debased its currency.
I really fail to see what is so different. it was the same in many Greek city states as well, where those who got marginalized out left and formed colonies elsewhere in the Mediterranean world.
"There is nothing new under the sun." Even democracy and it's corruption. I have hope that sooner or later the electorate won't tolerate it any more and make changes.
P.S. I have no issue with folks who work hard making all the money they can honestly providing goods and services, inventing stuff, founding companies and so on. But the Gates and the Wozniaks and Jobs's are not the rule in this story. A large fraction of folks are just ripping off the country with the assistance of the federal government and the FED. The Fannies and Freddies should have gone bankrupt. So should AIG, and a lot of other banks. Or, if you have no taste for wholesale bankruptcy, when the government bails them out put them on federal salaries without bonuses. After all, why should someone who damn near tanked the economy of the whole world (and it isn't over yet by any means) get a multi-million dollar bonus.
That depends, do you benefit from a functioning banking system?
When the Treasury buys $700 Billion in "bad assets" from banks, who is the beneficiary?
The Treasury never did that.
Suppose you were allowed to take all your money an put it in the stock market. Anything that lost, the government bought back at its original price.
When did that happen?
You’re onto something.
It’s not because the very wealthy have monopolized more of the wealth it’s because 50% of the population is non-productive and is sucking resources out of us.
What civilization can survive with half of its citizens sitting around demanding money from the other half.
the real question to be asked is. So what? The distribution of wealth or products and services tells us nothing of the prosperity of a society or the standard of living. Could it be that a prosperous society with a higher standard of living could also have an unequal distribution of wealth? What good is equality when all are peasants and starving?
Exactly correct. Income doesn’t measure happiness or wealth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.