[HN Gopher] America's 50 Largest Inherited-Wealth Dynasties Acce...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       America's 50 Largest Inherited-Wealth Dynasties Accelerate
       Inequality
        
       Author : bengtan
       Score  : 56 points
       Date   : 2021-06-27 03:12 UTC (19 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (ips-dc.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (ips-dc.org)
        
       | dagw wrote:
       | Of the 10 richest people in Sweden, you have 1 company founder, 1
       | hedge fund manager and 8 people who directly or indirectly
       | inherited their wealth, 4 of whom belong to the same family. This
       | is hardly unique to the US
        
         | ChrisLomont wrote:
         | The majority of the Forbes 400 is first generation.
        
         | hackerNoose wrote:
         | Sweden has one of the largest wealth inequalities in the world.
         | This might be unexpected given how how the aggressive taxation
         | keeps the income equality high.
        
           | ElViajero wrote:
           | > Sweden has one of the largest wealth inequalities in the
           | world.
           | 
           | Sweden has a low income inequality.
           | 
           | Around 20% of the population are immigrants that have yet to
           | accumulate wealth, myself included. If you own an apartment
           | in Stockholm you are already many times richer than any newly
           | arrived. And, at the current prices, it is going to take them
           | 50 years to pay for such an apartment.
           | 
           | So, the system needs time to let everybody accumulate wealth.
           | That is to be expected.
           | 
           | That does not mean that the situation is perfect. In Sweden,
           | like in the rest of the Western world, big corporation does
           | not pay taxes in the country but in tax havens. So, much more
           | can be done to increase the change of everybody getting a
           | good life.
           | 
           | tldr; Sweden is a rich country, newly arrived people from
           | poor countries have no wealth and it is going to take them
           | decades to catch up even if they get a fair salary.
        
           | boxed wrote:
           | No.
           | 
           | This is blatant lie found in a second on Google. https://en.w
           | ikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_eq...
        
             | mrep wrote:
             | Your link is for income, not wealth. For wealth inequality,
             | sweden had the 3rd highest gini in 2019: https://en.wikiped
             | ia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_wealth_in...
        
           | pbadg3r wrote:
           | Wow this is fascinating, GINI for wealth inequality is
           | definitely not talked about enough
        
             | tryptophan wrote:
             | Yeah I was pretty surprised as well. Made me re-consider
             | how much of a bubble of ideology I am in.
             | 
             | How could I NOT hear about such a statistic for so long?!
             | Especially with all these other inequality statistics being
             | thrown around.
        
             | boxed wrote:
             | It's a lie though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co
             | untries_by_income_eq...
        
       | ppf wrote:
       | >Dynastic families have seen their wealth grow significantly
       | during the COVID-19 pandemic
       | 
       | >Dynastically wealthy families wield a great deal of political
       | power, and use it to further their interests.
       | 
       | I've been saying this pretty much since the start of lockdowns
       | and restrictions. For the past year, we have essentially
       | legislated the transfer of more power and wealth to those already
       | wealthy and powerful. When the dust starts to settle, it will
       | become clearer just how much has changed, and maybe the
       | theoretical questions of "was this worth it"? will become more
       | practical.
        
         | tolbish wrote:
         | Does "this" = low taxes on the wealthy? Or allowing lobbying?
        
           | ppf wrote:
           | "This" = mandating most regular folks put their lives on
           | hold, while the rich and powerful get to continue with their
           | schemes.
        
             | 8note wrote:
             | Most regular people's lives go towards making those same
             | people wealthier and more powerful.
             | 
             | I'm not clear that putting those lives on hold acts in one
             | direction or another.
        
               | ppf wrote:
               | That doesn't matter. You consume their content, and buy
               | their goods. In fact, those two things have increased
               | massively over the past year.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | Proven wrote:
       | Another junky socialist article.
       | 
       | Sorry to break it to you, but different individuals must be equal
       | only before law. Elsewhere, their abilities, talents, effort, and
       | luck makes them realize different outcomes.
       | 
       | Many people in the US get unjust income, not just the rich.
       | 
       | Material inequality isn't illegal, and isn't a problem either.
       | Plunder still is illegal, but that's a necessary condition for
       | socialism so you won't write about that, will you?
        
       | ChuckNorris89 wrote:
       | That's cute compared to Europe where for example in Austria, the
       | top 50 wealthiest families own a third of the country's wealth.
        
         | captainredbeard wrote:
         | Correct: Europe has a far more entrenched elite / patrician
         | class than the United States with far less opportunities for
         | someone to "break out" by creating a company. Yet we
         | continually hear about how terrible the US's economic & social
         | policies are... to this observer, it makes no sense.
        
           | slumpt_ wrote:
           | Socioeconomic mobility is low in the US. This has been
           | litigated and resolved in research ad nauseam.
           | 
           | Survivorship bias, on the other hand...
        
             | mk81 wrote:
             | >Socioeconomic mobility is low in the US.
             | 
             | Compared to where?
        
       | DrNosferatu wrote:
       | Laudable goals and action points - for which I would vote.
       | Already, if nothing more, raising awareness is a positive outcome
       | of this initiative.
       | 
       | *However*, I guess it is easy to agree that the prescribed
       | policies would face huge political opposition in attempts to
       | implement them. Look at what happened to Bernie's campaign!
       | (Unless, of course, something majeur / extraordinary
       | circumstances - like the Pandemic - are invoked to pass such a
       | policy package in one clean swoop).
       | 
       | Being it so, how about considering a simpler, less contentious,
       | parallel alternative - a bypass around the mighty legal
       | loopholes, media & lobby opposition?
       | 
       | That would be *the creation of Citizen's Wealth Fund*. Just like
       | Norway's Oil Fund. But instead of oil, the asset would be *the
       | bailed out stocks*. In other words, in the "bailout action", the
       | State buys stock, then the State would keep said stock in the
       | fund. Extendable to 5G auction proceeds, other licenses, etc.
       | 
       | best explanation, also longer read, the 208 page book:
       | https://angrynomics.com/
       | 
       | https://www.ippr.org/media-item/watch-a-citizens-wealth-fund...
       | https://youtu.be/rC9RAylrl0s
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_wealth_fund
        
         | geofft wrote:
         | They face huge political opposition because rich people have
         | the means to create that opposition (through all sorts of
         | mechanisms from bribery on the one extreme to subtly
         | influencing popular media to create the perception that wealth
         | accumulation is a virtue on the other extreme).
         | 
         | That means that any policy at all that effectively solves the
         | problem will face opposition - or in other words, if your
         | proposed policy somehow doesn't face opposition, it means the
         | rich families have figured out a loophole in it that lets them
         | keep their money and power.
         | 
         | You have to figure out either a way to get this done despite
         | opposition or a way to break their ability to effectively
         | create opposition.
        
           | DrNosferatu wrote:
           | Dear Geofft, I think aiming at a CWF would simply be a more
           | attainable goal.
           | 
           | But what course of action do you purpose? Revolution? They're
           | notoriously messy and difficult to implement...
        
           | seibelj wrote:
           | Wealth accumulation, i.e. "savings", is a virtue. Benjamin
           | Franklin is known for the phrase "a penny saved is a penny
           | earned." It is extremely common to want to leave a legacy to
           | your kids after you die - this is a natural, human trait.
        
             | geofft wrote:
             | I don't think "A penny saved is a penny earned" is
             | advocating _virtue_ , just strategy. The phrase predated
             | Ben Franklin; the first written source seems to be George
             | Herbert's 1640 _Outlandish Proverbs_ , which has it in the
             | form "A penny spared is twice got" - a bit clearer in that
             | it's about effectiveness and not the moral value of either
             | saving or earning. It's also got phrases like "Ever since
             | we wear clothes, we know not one another," which is very
             | clearly an observation and not a statement about the virtue
             | of nudity!
             | 
             | Herbert does include some quotes that advocate virtue,
             | though, including "Great alms-giving lessens no man's
             | living," "Poor and liberal, rich and covetous," "Wealth is
             | like rheume [a cold]: it falls on the weakest parts," "He
             | is not poor that hath little, but he that desireth much,"
             | and "Honor and profit lie not in one sack."
             | 
             | Franklin quotes the phrase in a column "Hints for those
             | that would be rich" (https://founders.archives.gov/document
             | s/Franklin/01-02-02-00...), which isn't about earning money
             | and isn't even primarily about savings; it's about not
             | buying unnecessary things on credit and paying interest on
             | it forever. Sound advice, but again, more strategic than
             | moralistic.
             | 
             | I also think that it's natural and human to want to leave a
             | legacy to your kids. It is unnatural and inhumane to leave
             | them such a legacy that they don't have to work at all;
             | there's a reason "trust fund kids" are a stereotype. The
             | article talks about inheritances on the orders of
             | _billions_ , richer than even monarchic dynasties of
             | centuries past, which aren't particularly considered
             | exemplars of virtuous resource allocation these days. (Even
             | Queen Elizabeth II has a personal net worth of only half a
             | billion dollars.) That's well beyond a "legacy."
             | 
             | Anyway, thank you for providing a perfect example of the
             | actual battle here. So long as people believe the
             | propaganda that giving your children billions of dollars is
             | simply the larger-scale version of the virtue of working an
             | honest job and living frugally, they'll hold on to their
             | power.
        
               | seibelj wrote:
               | The government has the ability to print and spend
               | _trillions_ easily and quickly. When one person,
               | exclusively through the private sector system by
               | generating value for customers, creates enough value to
               | obtain billions of dollars, it's a great thing. I like
               | that private people have billions of dollars - with a
               | fraction of the resources of the state, private people
               | and entities accomplish magnitudes better outcomes,
               | products, and services.
               | 
               | I say, let's allow some people to have large resources.
               | If they inherited it, their ancestor usually earned it
               | via a company, or that is the vast majority of the cases
               | nowadays. Wanting to seize a family's money is because of
               | envy, or because you fear private power. I myself am not
               | envious and also wish there was more private and
               | decentralized power.
        
       | prometheus76 wrote:
       | Pareto Distribution makes people angry. Film at 11.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-06-27 23:02 UTC)