| |
There isn't a finite amount of "wealth" in the world. You can go out and make wealth every single day. The rich obtaining more of it doesn't mean there's less left over for you and I.People need to be able to cover their needs. Food, housing, healthcare, and I'd be open to arguments in favor of education. But I don't see income inequality as bad necessarily. I see massive amounts of people unable to cover those needs as bad. Fix the problem that people can't cover their needs--not that fact that some fortunate entrepreneur got richer faster than me. |  | |
> There isn't a finite amount of "wealth" in the world. You can go out and make wealth every single day. The rich obtaining more of it doesn't mean there's less left over for you and I.There is an essence of truth to that, but it certainly does not tell the whole story. Consider what happens with Amazon. When they put a family-owned store out of business, those people need to work somewhere. They then turn to the only place left that has any jobs in their area: the Amazon fulfilment center. They then get a minimum wage job there. It is clear those people have directly lost wealth as a result of Amazon. In some cases the "creating wealth" argument holds up, but in reality what is mostly happening in the age of globalism is wealth consolidation, not wealth creation. Amazon is not creating new wealth, they are simply taking all of the customers and wealth away from all of the smaller businesses and consolidating it into a single huge entity. This obviously has strong negative consequences for the people who are losing wealth. There is a reason wages have remained stagnant for over 50 years while corporate profits keep on growing to record highs. | | | |
> In some cases the "creating wealth" argument holds up, but in reality what is mostly happening in the age of globalism is wealth consolidation, not wealth creation. Amazon is not creating new wealth, they are simply taking all of the customers and wealth away from all of the smaller businesses and consolidating it into a single huge entity.I get where you're going with this... and I'm not in favor of monopolies and anti-competitive behavior... but Amazon is a hugely innovative company, and I do not believe that they've merely consolidated wealth without creating any. Think of just AWS as an example and all of the companies (and their employees) who've created more wealth as a result of it. | | | |
Amazon has no doubt created wealth as well. However, they have also consolidated wealth and put many small companies out of business. The extent to which they have created new wealth and the extent to which they have taken existing wealth can be argued over, but they have certainly done both. This is not exclusive to Amazon either. The same is done by all huge multinationals, and this has been happening for decades.It is important to realize the effects that this consolidation has in terms of wage stagnation [1]. This is a very real effect that is felt by a very large percentage of the workforce. By consolidating wealth (and power) in the hands of few large companies those companies are able to pay a lot lower salaries to their employees. If your options are (1) work for Walmart for a low wage, (2) work for Amazon for a low wage, or (3) starve, you will accept whatever wage Amazon or Walmart will offer you. In other words, as a direct consequence of these multinationals and their mode of operation, millions of people are getting lower salaries today than they would have gotten 50 years ago (adjusted for inflation) whereas overall productivity has gone up significantly. The difference is pocketed by executives and wealthy shareholders of these companies. As a result of those lower salaries, those people are now having trouble paying for core necessities (health care, education, housing). This is the rising wealth inequality that people are talking about, and the rising wealth inequality that people want to fix. [1] https://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/wage-stagna... | | | |
> Amazon [...] simply taking all of the customers and wealth away from all of the smaller businessesAmazon doesn't "simply" take others wealth. It wins by providing a better service | | | | |
Sure, Amazon wins by providing lower prices through economies of scale. The details of how they acquire customers of small businesses are not relevant because it does not influence the end result. Wealth is moved from one party (a small business) to another (a large multinational). There is a clear loser. | | | |
> There isn't a finite amount of "wealth" in the world.Yes, there is. It is not limited, we can do more of it, but of course it is finite. It is also important that, the more wealth you have, the easier it becomes to make more of it. So, indeed, the rich obtaining more of it does mean there's less for you and me. | | | |
I can go outside and carve a wooden spoon out of a piece of fallen wood. I've just created wealth without taking it from anyone.Even if I had to buy the wood from someone else, I took a $1 piece of wood and turned it into a $20 spoon. Wealth was just created without anyone loosing it. Wealth is infinite. Sure the amount of currency in circulation is finite, but currency isn't wealth. > It is also important that, the more wealth you have, the easier it becomes to make more of it. I agree--once you get to the point that you can make your wealth make more wealth for you, you've hit the point that you can scale beyond your time. Generally speaking having your wealth make more wealth requires investing your wealth, which is a good thing. > So, indeed, the rich obtaining more of it does mean there's less for you and me. This simply isn't true. See wooden spoon example above. | | | |
> Wealth was just created without anyone loosing it.If you use the wood for the spoon, it means someone else cannot use that wood for making a ship or heating their house. You cannot go and make a million spoons to get rich without either having money to invest or breaking a few laws. And this happens because the amount of wood (or resources, in general) is not only finite but relatively scarce. | | | |
As long as time doesn't cease to exist wealth is infinite. Someone can always choose to make wealth with their time. | | | |
More fossil fuels can be done with enough time, so fossil fuels are infinite too as long as time doesn't cease to exist, right? Sorry, but I don't understand where you want to get. If we take that point of view, then everything is infinite, and it is impossible to have a discussion about economy in that context. | | | |
Not every wealth creation activity requires the consumption of wood. Some require nothing but time. The wooden spoon was merely a simple example of how someone can make wealth. Time is a resource that appears to be infinite--at least until an extinction level event that wipes all humans off the face of the planet (time would still exist, but our time to make wealth would be gone).We have gone down a rabbit hole, and it sounds like you (and I too) no longer wish to dig any deeper. The point is when the rich get wealthy it doesn't demand the non-rich to get more poor. | | | |
> Sure the amount of currency in circulation is finiteNot strictly true with fractional reserve banking | | | |
The proportion is zero-sum by definition, and that's what's important.Even if the pie keeps growing for everyone, the rich are taking a bigger and bigger proportion of the pie, and proportion is what makes you poor. If I have 10% of a $10M the pie today and you have 90%, and tomorrow I have 5% of a $20M pie and you have 95%, then you have proportionally taken from me, and I am worse off, despite having the same absolute dollars "pie equity". | | | |
Until roughly 1800, per capita wealth was roughly stagnant. Since then, it's increased roughly 50 times. Maybe more controversially, I'd say we're nowhere near the limits of further development to even greater wealth: technology is a long way from physical limits (e.g. compare biology to human tech), our access to resources has barely begun (e.g. solar power and resources from space).How do you look at this history and think the right way to approach it is as a fight over who gets what part of an existing pie? That was the standard conceptualization in the beginning! It can't be the key to the 50x change. The recent headwinds against equality have also been a period of relative stagnation in productivity growth. Shouldn't we look really earnestly into how the hell progress happened in the first place? Yes, we also have a big problem in that poverty should not exist in a society this rich. But this is genuinely a first-world problem. Job 1 is to not screw up what got us here in the first place. | | | |
The amount of the pie you have doesn't matter. How could it?What matters is purchasing power. | | | |
>There isn't a finite amount of "wealth" in the world. You can go out and make wealth every single day. The rich obtaining more of it doesn't mean there's less left over for you and I.Non invested savings are zero sum. This is just macro economics. If one person has a savings surplus, the other person has a savings deficit (unemployment). Buying existing housing isn't an investment. Building new housing is. Buying an existing company isn't an investment. Starting new companies or growing old companies is. Non invested savings are growing, just look at treasury bond yields and interest rates. If you buy $100 worth of treasury bonds the government has to issue $100 in debt, otherwise yields drop. If the government doesn't issue additional debt it cannot invest the additional money on behalf of buyers of the treasury bonds. Conventionally, inflation would rise immediately because more money is circulating in the economy but it doesn't, implying excess savings that are not being invested. | | | |
> Buying existing housing isn't an investment....Buying an existing company isn't an investment.yes it is - because the person you're buying it from now can invest the proceeds of that sale (to something else). Buying shares off the sharemarket is investing - not because you're directly giving the company your money, but because your buying is the end of a chain of investment that directly leads to the IPO at the other end. Same with housing. Your way of seeing only direct investment as "true" investment is too shallow, and lacks the actual nuance of how the financial markets operate. If you sell your shares to somebody else after an IPO, the IPO might not ever have happened, or that the raising of money costs more (to account for the risk of having to hold the bag till the company profits). By strata-ing the risk out to different people, the financial market allows all levels of risk to be bought, by all manner of different people. The direct "investment only" method is as primitive as bartering for goods/services. | | | |
Would equality be better than the bare necessities? | | | |
Assuming by "equality" you mean everyone is given the same amount of money regardless of what they do or achieve, then no it's not better than bare necessities.A degree of struggle is good for us. It pushes us to become more than we could without it. Don't take this to mean I want everyone in poverty--that's not what I'm saying. But being motivated to work towards a financial goal is a good thing. I do not believe a life without struggle is a good life. There are struggles outside of financial struggles too. So I understand that even if you remove the financial struggle by giving everyone the same amount of money some struggle will remain from other factors in life. But in general I've found I grow the most in difficult times. It's painful. But it's richly rewarding when you come out the other side of the struggle. Robbing life of struggle will rob you of a rich life. | | | FAQs
There isn't a finite amount of "wealth" in the world. You can go out and make wealth every single day. The rich obtaining more of it doesn't mean there's less left over for you and I. People need to be able to cover their needs.
Is there a finite amount of wealth in the world? ›
Real, inflation-adjusted GDP, didn't increased much for hundreds of years. Then the industrial revolution happened and the rest is history: So, no, the money in the world isn't finite.
Why is wealth not finite? ›
At any moment in time, total global wealth has a finite value. But over time, total global wealth can increase without limits, so wealth is therefore an infinite concept. The idea that wealth is zero-sum is incorrect.
Is there a fixed amount of wealth? ›
At the most general level, economists may define wealth as "the total of anything of value" that captures both the subjective nature of the idea and the idea that it is not a fixed or static concept.
Who owns 80% of world's wealth? ›
The pyramid shows that: half of the world's net wealth belongs to the top 1%, top 10% of adults hold 85%, while the bottom 90% hold the remaining 15% of the world's total wealth, top 30% of adults hold 97% of the total wealth.
Does the richest 1% own half the world's wealth? ›
The richest 1 percent grabbed nearly two-thirds of all new wealth worth $42 trillion created since 2020, almost twice as much money as the bottom 99 percent of the world's population, reveals a new Oxfam report today. During the past decade, the richest 1 percent had captured around half of all new wealth.
Why most people will never be rich? ›
Many people will never be rich because they are simply not willing to. They feel that it is easier to complain and assume that they will never be able to do it than to do the homework of researching how to achieve it. You have the choice to do something today to change your condition.
What is the paradox of being wealthy? ›
The greatest risk of becoming wealthy, is that you no longer need those relationships the way you did when you were struggling for survival. If you devalue those relationships, and define happiness in terms of acquiring even greater wealth, that is a recipe for misery.
What is the infinite money theory? ›
The theory, in brief, argues that countries that issue their own currencies can never “run out of money” the way people or businesses can.
Is it true that 90% of millionaires make over $100000 a year? ›
Choose the right career
And one crucial detail to note: Millionaire status doesn't equal a sky-high salary. “Only 31% averaged $100,000 a year over the course of their career,” the study found, “and one-third never made six figures in any single working year of their career.”
Studies indicate that millionaires may have, on average, as much as 25% of their money in cash. This is to offset any market downturns and to have cash available as insurance for their portfolios. Cash equivalents are financial instruments that are almost as liquid as cash and are popular investments for millionaires.
How much money is considered wealthy? ›
According to those surveyed, it would take an average net worth of approximately $2.2 million to be considered “wealthy” in 2022. In 2021, survey respondents indicated it would take a net worth of $1.9 million. More interestingly, when asked in 2020 what wealth looked like, people said $2.6 million.
Who owns 50% of the world's wealth? ›
The richest 1% own almost half of the world's wealth, while the poorest half of the world own just 0.75% In fact, they have acquired nearly twice as much wealth in new money as the bottom 99% of the world's population.
What race holds the most wealth in the world? ›
Wealth inequality across race: what does the data show? While white households make 64% of the population, they held more than 80% of all wealth measured in assets in 2022.
Who owns the most cash in the world? ›
Luxury Mogul Takes Top Spot
| Rank | Name | Net Worth Feb 2023 |
|---|
| 1 | Bernard Arnault & family | $202B |
| 2 | Elon Musk | $191B |
| 3 | Jeff Bezos | $117B |
| 4 | Larry Ellison | $113B |
6 more rowsMar 16, 2023
Key Takeaways
- As of 2019, the top 1% of household net worth in the U.S. starts at $11,099,166. ...
- An individual would need to earn an average of $401,622 per year in order to join the top 1%, and a household would need an income of $570,00. ...
- The median household income was $70,784 in 2021, and $45,470 for individuals.
The top 10 richest families in 2022 by estimated wealth are:
- The Walton family with $224.5 billion.
- The Mars family with $160 billion.
- The Koch family with $128.8 billion.
- The Al Saud family with $105 billion.
- The Hermès family with $94.6 billion.
- The Ambani family with $84.6 billion.
- The Wertheimer family with $79 billion.
A September 2017 study by the Federal Reserve reported that the top 1% owned 38.5% of the country's wealth in 2016. According to a June 2017 report by the Boston Consulting Group, around 70% of the nation's wealth will be in the hands of millionaires and billionaires by 2021.
Are most millionaires unhappy? ›
It might seem ludicrous to hear that anyone from this pool of millionaires responded as lower than a “10 out of 10” on happiness. But the results showed that millionaires were around an 8 out of 10 on their self-reported happiness.
Why do rich people not retire? ›
If they retire, the business fails—so they have little choice but to keep working until they have a succession plan or buyer. But he said the main reason is that entrepreneurs love their work and can't imagine life without it. "Most of these people enjoy working and are very involved in their businesses," Walper said.
According to the OCED research, 90 per cent of the wealthy believe that their health is more important than their bank account. And that means that they spend a fair chunk of their money on potentially life-extending activities like exercise, diet and health care.
Do the rich have depression? ›
You can have depression regardless of how much money you have or make. Although money makes some aspects of life easier, there are other factors that play into mental health and well-being. The wealthy can get depressed the same way people living in poverty can experience depression.
Can you be rich but not wealthy? ›
It comes down to how much cash you have in your bank account. But just because you're rich, doesn't mean you are wealthy. In fact, being rich can often mean that you are spending a lot of money. It can also mean that you have a lot of debt.
Can the US print infinite money? ›
The Federal Reserve says it can print an unlimited amount of cash. However the Fed tries to influence the supply of money in the economy to promote noninflationary growth. Bottom line is, no government can print money to get out of a recession or downturn.
Why can't the government print an infinite amount of money? ›
“The answer, in one word, is inflation,” says Alan Cole, senior economic policy analyst at The Conference Board, a business-focused think tank. “[That's] the binding constraint on governments, in the end, that keeps them from issuing gobs of currency and buying whatever they want with it.”
Does universal money exist? ›
There is no world currency, but there are reserve currencies that are used in transactions by central banks, corporations, and governments. The U.S. dollar is the world's most widely used reserve currency since the U.S. economy, and its financial system is stable.
Where do 90% of millionaires come from? ›
Ninety percent of all millionaires become so through owning real estate. More money has been made in real estate than in all industrial investments combined. The wise young man or wage earner of today invests his money in real estate.
What percentage of Americans have a net worth of $1000000? ›
The nearly 22 million millionaires in the U.S. account for 8.8% of the country's adult population and over 39% of millionaires worldwide.
What percent of Americans make $100000? ›
18% of individual Americans make over $100k per year. 34.4% of US households make over $100k per year. 37% of White Households make over $100k, compared to only 22% of Black households. 9% more men earn $100k per year than women in the US.
Can you retire $1.5 million comfortably? ›
Yes, you can retire at 60 with $1.5 million. At age 60, an annuity will provide a guaranteed income of $91,500 annually, starting immediately for the rest of the insured's lifetime.
Citi Private Bank is the private banking department of Citibank. Their services are reserved for worldly and wealthy individuals as well as their families. While eligible clients can get deposit accounts and retirement accounts as you'd find at any other bank, there are also many specialized products and services.
Do billionaires use credit cards? ›
Wealthy Americans generally use credit cards the same way that everyone else does. They opt for cash back and no annual fee cards, and generally trust the big issuers. But they have some bad habits, too -- about half had an automatic payment set up, and only a third pay their statement or full balance every month.
Is $5 million enough to retire at 50? ›
Is $5 Million Enough to Retire at 50? A $5 million nest egg can provide $200,000 of annual income when the principal gives a return of 4%. This estimate is on the conservative side, making $200,000 a solid benchmark for calculating your retirement income versus expenses.
What percentage of US population has $2 million dollars? ›
Additionally, statistics show that the top 2% of the United States population has a net worth of about $2.4 million. On the other hand, the top 5% wealthiest Americans have a net worth of just over $1 million. Therefore, about 2% of the population possesses enough wealth to meet the current definition of being rich.
Is a $5 million dollar net worth good? ›
Investors with less than $1 million but more than $100,000 liquid assets are considered sub-HNWIs. Very-high-net-worth individuals have investable assets of at least $5 million, while ultra-high-net-worth individuals have at least $30 million.
How much wealth is hidden in the world? ›
This hidden wealth accounts for at least $7.6 trillion, equivalent to 8% of the global financial assets of households. But tax evasion and tax avoidance have solutions: they involve changing the incentives of tax havens, and creating financial transparency through a world financial registry.
Is infinite economic growth possible? ›
Despite their close connection in the past, it is theoretically possible to have limitless economic growth on a finite planet. What is needed, however, is to turn theory into actuality by decoupling, or separating, economic growth from unsustainable resource consumption and harmful pollution.
How big is the wealth gap in the world? ›
In 2018, the 26 richest people in the world held as much wealth as half of the global population (the 3.8 billion poorest people), down from 43 people the year before. This matters because rapid rises in incomes at the top are driving and exacerbating within country income inequality.
How much money does it take to be in the top 1 percent of the world? ›
According to the 2018 Global Wealth Report from Credit Suisse Research Institute, you need a net worth of $871,320 U.S. Credit Suisse defines net worth, or “wealth,” as “the value of financial assets plus real assets (principally housing) owned by households, minus their debts.”
What is the biggest secret to wealth? ›
25 Secrets Every Rich Person Knows
- Spending Must Align With Goals. ...
- Don't Waste Money To Impress Others. ...
- Have Plenty of Liquidity. ...
- Avoid Fees at All Costs. ...
- Know What You're Paying in Investment Fees. ...
- Asset Location Is as Important as Asset Allocation. ...
- Choose the Right Retirement Savings Account.
Secret millionaires employ long-term strategies and invest for several decades. Most started saving and investing early—such as in their 20's. Most live into their 90's or beyond, giving investments many years to grow.
What countries do rich people hide their money? ›
The top five best countries to hide money are as follows:
- Cayman Islands.
- Switzerland.
- Belize.
- Singapore.
- China.
"So in general, if we take 10 per cent growth rate in dollar terms, the value doubles in seven years. So if India's dollar GDP grows at 10 per cent per annum from April 2023 onwards, it could be a 7 trillion economy by 2030," Nageswaran said while speaking to Business Today's Managing Editor Siddharth Zarabi.
Who will have the richest economy in 2030? ›
GDP forecast 2030
- 1 92.5 China. $ 43.879 Tn 2030.
- 2 60.5 United States. $ 28.708 Tn 2030.
- 3 37.8 — India. $ 17.948 Tn 2030.
- 4 13.3 Japan. $ 6.337 Tn 2030.
- 5 12.5 Indonesia. $ 5.951 Tn 2030.
- 6 10.4 Russia. $ 4.973 Tn 2030.
- 7 6.8 South Korea. $ 3.282 Tn 2030.
- 8 +4 4.5 Pakistan. $ 2.159 Tn 2030.
While the consensus is that a global recession is likely sometime in 2023, it's impossible to predict how severe it will be or how long it will last. Not every recession is as painful as the 2007-09 Great Recession, but every recession is, of course, painful.
Why the poor stay poor and the rich stay rich? ›
In a simple explanation: The Rich operates in Abundance mode, while the Poor operates in scarcity mode. Abundance – You give more because you are already in a better position, which in return attracts more returns.
What state has the smallest wealth gap? ›
According to the American Community Survey's (ACS) 2019 estimate, Utah is the most equal state when it comes to income, while New York is the most unequal by this measure, with the Gini indices, before taxes and transfer, of 0.4268 and 0.5149, respectively. Note that the uncertainties are not shown in the table.
Are there more poor than rich in the world? ›
Income and wealth inequalities significant
The richest 10% of the global population currently take home 52% of the income. The poorest half of the global population? Well they earn just 8%.
