It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by byteshertz
Its all good to scoff at those on welfare but perhaps they actually just understand the game is rigged, or are tired of working their ass off only to luck out.
Just an observation, there seems to be an idea of lack expressed in your post. ie the more someone makes the less someone else makes. If you believe this, you will experience lack.
The Wealth Distribution
In the United States, wealth is highly concentrated in a relatively few hands. As of 2007, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 34.6% of all privately held wealth, and the next 19% (the managerial, professional, and small business stratum) had 50.5%, which means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 85%, leaving only 15% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers). In terms of financial wealth (total net worth minus the value of one's home), the top 1% of households had an even greater share: 42.7%. Table 1 and Figure 1 present further details drawn from the careful work of economist Edward N. Wolff at New York University (2010).
Table 1: Distribution of net worth and financial wealth in the United States, 1983-2007
Total Net Worth
Top 1 percent Next 19 percent Bottom 80 percent
1983 33.8% 47.5% 18.7%
1989 37.4% 46.2% 16.5%
1992 37.2% 46.6% 16.2%
1995 38.5% 45.4% 16.1%
1998 38.1% 45.3% 16.6%
2001 33.4% 51.0% 15.6%
2004 34.3% 50.3% 15.3%
2007 34.6% 50.5% 15.0%
Financial Wealth
Top 1 percent Next 19 percent Bottom 80 percent
1983 42.9% 48.4% 8.7%
1989 46.9% 46.5% 6.6%
1992 45.6% 46.7% 7.7%
1995 47.2% 45.9% 7.0%
1998 47.3% 43.6% 9.1%
2001 39.7% 51.5% 8.7%
2004 42.2% 50.3% 7.5%
2007 42.7% 50.3% 7.0%
Total assets are defined as the sum of: (1) the gross value of owner-occupied housing; (2) other real estate owned by the household; (3) cash and demand deposits; (4) time and savings deposits, certificates of deposit, and money market accounts; (5) government bonds, corporate bonds, foreign bonds, and other financial securities; (6) the cash surrender value of life insurance plans; (7) the cash surrender value of pension plans, including IRAs, Keogh, and 401(k) plans; (8) corporate stock and mutual funds; (9) net equity in unincorporated businesses; and (10) equity in trust funds.
Total liabilities are the sum of: (1) mortgage debt; (2) consumer debt, including auto loans; and (3) other debt. From Wolff (2004, 2007, & 2010).
Figure 1: Net worth and financial wealth distribution in the U.S. in 2007
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c05ca1e3e76d.gif[/atsimg]
In terms of types of financial wealth, the top one percent of households have 38.3% of all privately held stock, 60.6% of financial securities, and 62.4% of business equity. The top 10% have 80% to 90% of stocks, bonds, trust funds, and business equity, and over 75% of non-home real estate. Since financial wealth is what counts as far as the control of income-producing assets, we can say that just 10% of the people own the United States of America. Source and rest of article: sociology.ucsc.edu...
Originally posted by snusfanatic
reply to post by byteshertz
if i get a job managing the finances of a rich person, and i make that person 10 million a year by investing it wisely, working 80 hours a week to take care of this man's assets and make him a hell-of-a-lot more money while he goes out and relaxes and doesn't worry about it. what happens when that rich man says "my god! good work, you gave me an 8% return this year! here's 300k for your hard work" after all i did something worth 10 million dollars for this person! what's wrong with me making a measilly 3% of a return?
Originally posted by snusfanatic
reply to post by byteshertz
why stop at 200k man? why not go down 100k? hell why not go down to 1$ and just promise everyone all the food, shelter, healthcare, and vacation time that they need with all the money the government confinscates.
people only make 200k if they provide people with a product or service worth more than 200k.
if i sell a million 1$ buttons or songs on itunes, or podcasts that i charge for. if i didn't force or fraud anyone into buying that 1$ product then i deserve every one of those million dollars. now if the government wants to take a portion because i was educated in their schools, use their roads, am protected by their police, that is 100% fine with me! but what's not fine is to take 80% of that because somebody else outthere hasn't done as well as me and the playing field needs to be perfectly even.
if i get a job managing the finances of a rich person, and i make that person 10 million a year by investing it wisely, working 80 hours a week to take care of this man's assets and make him a hell-of-a-lot more money while he goes out and relaxes and doesn't worry about it. what happens when that rich man says "my god! good work, you gave me an 8% return this year! here's 300k for your hard work" after all i did something worth 10 million dollars for this person! what's wrong with me making a measilly 3% of a return?
Originally posted by Stillalive
are you guys JOKING OR SOMETHING!?!?!!
in bulgaria the monthy salary is 225euro, imagine for a year you get 225x12
and you AMERICANS think your poor if you make 30,000 a year?
if i had 10,000 i would OPEN A COMPANY
Originally posted by Stillalive
oh and that 225 salary is for a GRAPHIC DESIGNER!!!?
do you get? and the rent is 180,so why dont you come live here and see how nice life is
Originally posted by ofhumandescent
reply to post by byteshertz
Folks, the pie is not being cut evenly.