re: Why GDP growth isn't even relevant (anymore) to 90% of the population

quote:

---

Should these types of stats upset me and people with similar mindsets as myself?

There have been times where I've felt like things weren't fair or were stacked against me in life. If they're easy to see then I'll complain or raise a funk about it, but for the most part I take complete responsibility for everything I do.

When I work really hard towards a task I find that I get positive results. When I take shortcuts or get lazy or get bogged down feeling bad for myself I sometimes fail. But in these cases it's very easy to point out why I had success or why I didn't. I pretty much never blame anyone else but myself if I frick something up. It has got to be damn near impossible to be your best if you can't figure out how to take responsibility of your own successes or failures.

I'm currently in school working towards getting a degree and starting a career. If I screw this up or suck at my career or end up not being a wealthy individual I'm pretty sure I'll blame nobody but myself.

I'm aware that the job world isn't always fair(not sure of exact examples) but why should I be upset that some people are really successful and some fail miserably?

Not once in my life have I looked at a successful person and thought "man, I want what they have and this isn't fair."

I am where I am because of decisions I've made and that's that.

---

This guy is a 1%ter. He may not have the income to show for it yet, but he's already a one percenter.

Income inequality is freedom. I love both.

quote:

---

No one would deny that ALL americans of today have greater access to material wealth than ever before.

---

Yep. Two things are increasing, IMO, that is causing income differences to increase and I don't see it changing. One is that you will not starve if you don't work. People are allowed through various types of welfare to not participate. And welfare is increasing. The problem is the longer you're dependent on welfare, the less likely you will be to move above that social class. So you have a growing bottom sector in that graph that skews the inequality higher each year. I bet if you controlled for employed versus unemployed it wouldn't be as drastic.

The second reason is why we can allow the first to occur; computer and machines are going to do much of the work for us which creates a barrier to entry below minimum wage. People just can't do the job machines can in an efficient way for many jobs and that list grows each year.

So what do we need to change? To me, the obvious answer is to not tie welfare to businesses/employers. If the public thinks people should have certain services or welfare, then we should pay for those directly by taxes. And the easiest way to distribute welfare would to simply provide a living wage directly to everyone.

quote:

---

There are structural reasons for this.

---

Trickle-down

I would like so see that graph include atmospheric CO2 concentrations. I suspect there would be a strong correlation.

quote:

---

I would like so see that graph include atmospheric CO2 concentrations. I suspect there would be a strong correlation.

---

Some points i'd like to make regarding inequality:
1. If everyone's income were to rise 50%, inequality would still increase because those who have more would gain more nominally even if everyone's wealth grew by the same percent. In that case, rising inequality is good. Rising inequality as a percent however, can lead to some very bad things.

2. Increased barriers to entry into a market are regulations that make starting a business in general or in a specific industry more expensive or difficult. This stifles competition and leads to inefficient markets, poor available consumer choices, and regional or national monopolies. While many regulations are necessary to protect consumers and public health, some are made specifically to protect existing companies from competition (see telecom industry).

3. Many regulations over the years have made hiring and firing of employees much more expensive than in the past. As the cost of hiring gets higher and the ability of a business to fire an employee get more difficult, businesses get more and more strict with whom they hire. They immediately weed out many capable applicants due to past personal choices because businesses can't afford to hire mediocre employees.

4. The availability of social safety nets allows for people to have all of thier living expenses (food, water, housing, education, health care, and child care) to be taken care of without working. Without this incentive, many who struggle to find work (whether due to lack of economic opportunities, lack of skills, or one of those personal flaws mentioned earlier) who are discouraged have the option to give up entirely and still lead a relatively comfortable life. In places where entitlement fraud is easy (Baton Rouge) or under the table income is added (drug dealing, smuggling, theft, all cash business, ect), that life style can actually be very comfortable. Why work if you don't have to?

5. There are more pitfalls that can make you "unemployable" than ever before. The following almost guarantee or greatly increase the likelihood on one living a life of poverty or on government assistance if one's parents aren't already wealthy: teen pregnancy, being arrested and convicted of a felony, dropping out of high school, more than one DUI, failing drug tests, getting very sick or in a car accident without health and/or auto insurance, divorce, being a racist.

6. However, on the flip side, there are several behaviors that all but guarantee at least a middle class lifestyle: don't have children until you can afford to take care of them, don't get arrested, don't get convicted of anything, graduate from high school and either graduate trade school or college, don't be a bigot (or at least keep your bigotry to yourself), don't get a debilitating disease without health insurance, don't get in a car wreck without car insurance, don't spend more than you make for more than one or two months at a time, don't get divorced, and establish and maintain at least ok credit. Do these things, and one will most likely at least be middle class for most of their lives.

quote:

---

think people who believe this are much more likely to succeed in life. And it likely holds true for 99% of people once they get through high school without going to jail in America.

---

I think people who are successful are much more likely to believe that they are responsible for their success. People who do good are going to credit themselves, people who fail are going to blame others. That's human nature. That doesn't really answer the question of self-determination.

quote:

---

who are successful are much more likely to believe that they are responsible for their success.

---

Well they are. It's not just dumb luck for 90% of the people out there.