Income Distribution
Amusing!
Friday, September 01, 2006 | 05:45 PM | Permalink
| Comments (40)
| TrackBack (0)
add to de.li.cious | 
digg this! | 
add to technorati | 
email this post
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c52a953ef00d834e5e33569e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Income Distribution:
Comments
In the US there's also considerable vertical mobility so I guess you should paint a toe instead of the nose and the nose in the place of the toe. ;-)
Posted by: Gabriel M. | Sep 1, 2006 6:22:15 PM
---
considerable vertical mobility
---
Which is why we need to have a highly progressive tax system; that way we give you low tax rates when you're trying to accumulate capital early in life and you pay more when you enter your billionaire phase later in life.
Posted by: eightnine2718281828mu5 | Sep 1, 2006 6:32:29 PM
Actually, Gabe and 89..., vertical US income mobility is a myth. It's easier for a poor man to become a top-quintile earner in Germany than in the US.
We are better than Mexico, though.
And that's just sad.
Posted by: wcw | Sep 1, 2006 7:15:26 PM
wcw, been reading "how to lie with statistics" lately? compare Germany's "top quintile" to the US'-
Posted by: phil | Sep 1, 2006 7:48:07 PM
Phil, does that chest and do those biceps look normal or fake to you? Looks like silicone implants in both, but ya can't deny that they're there.
Posted by: teddy | Sep 1, 2006 8:20:50 PM
If that were drawn to scale, all we could see is the top rim of the hat.
Posted by: ndk | Sep 1, 2006 8:59:39 PM
we need a consumption tax system
Posted by: peanut | Sep 1, 2006 9:02:24 PM
per teddy:
"Phil, does that chest and do those biceps look normal or fake to you? Looks like silicone implants in both, but ya can't deny that they're there."
Of course they are there, that was the whole point of passing an income tax instead of a wealth tax in 1913. Contrary to MSM myth, most wealth is old wealth and taxes were/are designed to keep that intact. The middle class had a run of 50 years or so and now it is effectively just the debtor class.
For every Paris Hilton, there are 10,000 intelligent, educated people who are wondering how they will ever get beyond where they are right now? The answer is that they will not, it costs less to fire them and get somebody in India to fake his way thru whatever the task is than it would to reward competence.
That's pretty much where we are now, globalized serfdom.
Posted by: whipsaw | Sep 1, 2006 9:06:21 PM
I am amused at the fact that those who have become rich and moved up the income ladder under the old rules want to change them now to benefit their new position in life. It is not fair game for those who follow to have the same chance. Greed wins in the new USA and the office it buys with it. All for one and one for all, a fairy tale. Enjoy labor day, all.
Posted by: bob | Sep 1, 2006 9:16:44 PM
Brazil!!!!!! the new economic role model for the US.
Posted by: rick | Sep 1, 2006 9:20:05 PM
sheesh, more class warfare. Anyone can be rich if only they'd take risk and try. Since the masses are usually too lazy and fearful to take the plunge and go for it (this includes white collars too) what you get instead is blamemongering, griping, excuses, and stupid cartoons. The US has the best environment for getting rich on the planet. If we don't then why do we have so many more billionaires than the rest of the world?
Barry, this site has definitely become a pessimist bear cave. My suggestion is to stop focusing on everything that's wrong out there and how bad people think things are, and instead start focusing on opportunities to make money and get rich. Even if bad news comes out I think one needs to discuss it from the point of view of "how do I get rich using this info?".
Thanks and have a great labor day.
Posted by: Johnny V. | Sep 1, 2006 9:36:11 PM
per Johnny V. Troll:
"Sheesh, more class warfare. Anyone can be rich if only they'd take risk and try. Since the masses are usually too lazy and fearful to take the plunge and go for it (this includes white collars too) what you get instead is blamemongering, griping, excuses, and stupid cartoons. The US has the best environment for getting rich on the planet. If we don't then why do we have so many more billionaires than the rest of the world?"
s
Class warfare began on the day that Raygun was sworn in, so it is not a new issue. If you believe that you only have to roll the dice and "try," that just tells me that you are either some radio call-in loudmouth who has never had a penny at risk or some trustfund baby who never understood how anything works to begin with.
Why don't you tell me how you how you have your balls out in the market, boy? Tell me about some specific trades and how you have pocketed the spoils. My guess is that you are just spouting the wisdom of ignorance.
Posted by: whipsaw | Sep 1, 2006 10:16:56 PM
>> I am amused at the fact that those who have become rich and moved up the income ladder under the old rules want to change them now to benefit their new position in life. It is not fair game for those who follow to have the same chance.
This is an attack that can be -- and is -- levelled at anyone who (a) ended up at the top of the heap and (b) is smart and honest enough to understand "the role of chance in markets and in life" and say "hey, although I succeeded, the system would be fairer if we changed "X", "Y", and "Z"'.
It's powerful rhetoric, very persuasive to about half the population. It helps the listener tune out any recommendations for change on the basis of some suggested "motive". ("They" have "an agenda", so I'm not going to listen.)
>>Anyone can be rich if only they'd take risk and try.
Do risks always play out in the risk taker's favor? If so, then your statement would be correct. But, they don't. If it were that easy, everyone would be rich. (I've taken a LOT of risk, work my ass off, and I'm not rich.)
Take 1,000 monkey stock pickers and some will do much (much) better than others. That's natural. So, when you see someone who attained "financial success", how do you know how much merit, risk, hard-work, etc. the person put into achieving that success? You don't. (Not without really getting to know the person. Most times that's happened but not always, I've been less than impressed.)
We work in a system where there is SIGNIFICANT misalignment between contribution and reward. Highly progressive taxation starting at the top 1% redistributes the wealth the economic system really generates and which is effectively "captured" by people who have tremendous personal leverage by virtue of their position.
For example, right now, we are witnessing a tremendous growth in corporate profits thanks to stagnant American wages, which are kept down thanks to globalization. The execs and top 1% (who own 50% of the shares) did not invent globalization. Yet, they're getting the windfall. You have to ask yourself whether it's fair and appropriate for the windfall to go to them rather than be shared with the rest of us.
Anecdotally, the Walton family heirs' rewards have zero to do with their contributions. And their heirs in turn will live off interest and dividends from your children's work at the companies whose stock they own.
Only a highly progressive tax on the top 1% redistributes the income which top earners "captured" on account of the unique, tremendous leverage they already possess.
Other tidbits:
- As it turns out, wealth is distributed according to the power law; not according to the bell curve of people's abilities and work ethic. You have to ask yourself "what factors contribute to this distribution?"
- Hint: there is truth to the statement that "To turn $100 into $110 is work; To turn $100 million into $110 million is inevitable." It's the simple principle that "success begets success" and "wealth begets wealth".
You CAN introduce more fairness WITHOUT choosing a different economic system: you just have to re-introduce higher progressive taxation.
Pardon some of the non sequitors. I'm hungry and want to eat.
-wunsacon
Posted by: wunsacon | Sep 1, 2006 10:29:48 PM
For a video flow-chart look at the distribution of income, see the first part of "Social Security" at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tts2uTWt6e8
and see Chap. 2 of "Tax Cuts" at:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=SA1f2MefsMM
Posted by: Lee A. Arnold | Sep 2, 2006 12:10:26 AM
All of this is fun but of course the Big Picture is about facts and those are: The income disparity is between those with college educations and those without. No ha-ha's here.
Posted by: Norman | Sep 2, 2006 12:31:38 AM
Great youtube videos
Johnny V. - The United States ITSELF has become a "pessimist bear cave". Consumer sentiment numbers are low, The bond market is increasingly inverting the curve... For whos sake should Barry be blindly bullish about money making opportunities? Where is the wisdom in assuming risks at this point?
Posted by: Steven | Sep 2, 2006 1:39:01 AM
"Anyone can be rich if only they'd take risk and try. Since the masses are usually too lazy and fearful to take the plunge..."
enrichez vous?
Don't forget Porn Johnny V....and drugs; legal, but especially illegal drug sales yeah that's the ticket (no taxes=genius!).
What could be more noble than INHERITING wealth? Not much unless it's cooking up a really neat Ponzi scheme....
Military contractors? Now THERE are some folks we can all look up to with immense patriotic pride. I'll bet the richly rewarded folks working on that Missile Shield thingy are bootstrappers all.....
It's risky to cut the pension and health benefits of your company's emplyees as your own vast stock options vest but this GREAT system of ours wasn't built by fearful men......
I could go on and on about the abundant and virtuous wealthy of Amerika....
(...now where's my Mother#&$@ing pitchfork)
Posted by: brion | Sep 2, 2006 4:00:19 AM
The poor will attack the rich if they don't pay the entitlement fee. The problem is that productivity is rapidly increasing the ranks of the poor so progressive taxes may be the only way to keep them at bay, even though it corrupts the original intent of law. The coming recession will be a nerve racking time for those with money.
Posted by: KirkH | Sep 2, 2006 4:02:56 AM
My suggestion is to stop focusing on everything that's wrong out there and how bad people think things are, and instead start focusing on opportunities to make money and get rich.
My Dear
Greetings,I know this mail may come to you as a surprise,I am Barrister Mussa Issah the solicitor/counsel to the late Sanni Abacha who was then before his death, the President/Head of State of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
Just yesterday his widow wife Mrs. Mariam Abacha called to intimate me of the condition of her family over the pursuance of fund by the Government over the husbands alleged loot.
In fact, She conferred in me that her son was working with a German National only for the German to take advantage of the situation, there by setting her son up in Germany where he went to claim his father deposit. You can verify this fact your self through the German Embassy over an alleged Abacha's Son, Mr. Abba Abacha trying to pull out the sum of (US$40 M) Forty Million Dollars from the Bank.
At this point in time, She solicited my humble self to look for a reputable gentleman who will be of great assistance to the family and somebody who can take over the sum of $27M (Twenty Seven Million United States Dollars Only)which is presently deposited in a Security Company, for investment. I will later on the course of this transaction disclosed to you the Security Company accordingly.
If you will be interested to act upon on receipt of this mail, please do contact me on the enlisted contact adress and more so be kind to issue me with your current Telephone Number for prompt conversation.
Thanks for your sincere understanding while looking forward to your positive response/cooperation.
Regards,
Barrister Musa Issah
Posted by: Barrister Musa Issah | Sep 2, 2006 5:38:36 AM
The poor will attack the rich if they don't pay the entitlement fee. The problem is that productivity is rapidly increasing the ranks of the poor so progressive taxes may be the only way to keep them at bay, even though it corrupts the original intent of law. The coming recession will be a nerve racking time for those with money.
Posted by: KirkH | Sep 2, 2006 4:02:56 AM
................................................................................
Maybe there will be more kidnappings like in Brazil,,,
of rich folks like Johny V.
Extremes of capitalism does not work.
Posted by: rick | Sep 2, 2006 6:21:45 AM
Reg. getting rich, Of course there is always the old fashion way. The way my parents did it starting with nothing. Living below your means (forgoing the latest anything) Not being self indulgent. Tithing to the church. Tithing to your savings account. Buying CD's(certificates of deposit) and bonds. Living in the same house and community for decades. Paying off your fixed rate mortgate. Holding a couple (3) conservative stocks for decades. Having a job you love and working until you are 70. Taking vacations all over the world on the cheap. My mom and dad lived this way, raised 5 kids (who all are successful professionals) and are living out their last few years together(they are both 90) in the nicest assisted living joint in Indy eating gourmet meals sitting on a pile of cash. Don't tell times have changed. That is just a losers excuse. It takes self discipline and faith to accomplish what they did. The most important points are 1-4 above. Tom in Indy
Posted by: Tom in Indy | Sep 2, 2006 8:02:05 AM
Tom
I am happy that your parents and you are all doing well. I think that many people feel that our social fabric is being stretched in ways that might make it harder to do what your parents have done. People who have worked hard and then suffer dislocation due to foreign workers taking their jobs might find themselves in very hard times and not know where to turn. While your parents were growing and working America was a net exporter, the county's wealth was increasing. Now we export our wealth. So if less is coming in it is a problem. With America's growing population, a financial situation where there is less to go around for a greater percentage of the people means that the quality of life (in the material sense) is likely to diminish for many. We have seen many cases throughout history where one group so totally dominates another that eventually the goup that is getting shafted looks to change the situation. Revolution after revolution.
On a micro scale the possiblities for those who are gifted with talents that are appropriate for their time and place are still present but the quality of life as evidenced by a diminishing earnings level for those not on the top and a worsening health care crisis points to a bad turn for America. I hope things will soon turn for the better.
Posted by: alexd | Sep 2, 2006 8:48:42 AM
hey TOM, what you said about your parents and
mine are true, in their time.
Today, things are different.
Don't tell me the middle class is more healthy
today than in your parents time ??
Posted by: rick | Sep 2, 2006 9:23:19 AM
reading the comments from the last few days, people seem to be getting a little worked up. good thing we have a 3 day wknd...
good cartoon, barry.
Posted by: emd | Sep 2, 2006 9:26:53 AM
Johnny V., Tom in Indy, and Norman, tell all those just announced laid off workers at world class Intel that they're not smart, well educated, and hard working, after all they made Intel world class. Intel's stock went up .31 on this deflationary news, which along with the other coming layoffs, will lead to lower interest rates here in the US, expansion of stock P/E's, and a softer landing for the housing market with consequent, of course, more debt creation to inflate the worldwide financial bubble. Can you guess where those jobs went. Most of the US productivity gains recently were made in China and India. It's not a question of education anymore, but wages. Soon you will see the export of medical surgical procedures to Bangalore, India because the results are just as good, but mainly because it's cost basis is 5% of that here in the US.
Posted by: teddy | Sep 2, 2006 10:16:55 AM
