this post was submitted on 30 Mar 2024
657 points (98.4% liked)

News

23261 readers
3494 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Key Points

  • The wealth of the top 1% hit a record $44.6 trillion at the end of the fourth quarter.
  • All of the gains came from stock holdings thanks to an end-of-year rally.
  • Economists say the rising stock market is giving an added boost to consumer spending through what is known as the “wealth effect.”

The wealth of the top 1% hit a record $44.6 trillion at the end of the fourth quarter, as an end-of-year stock rally lifted their portfolios, according to new data from the Federal Reserve.

The total net worth of the top 1%, defined by the Fed as those with wealth over $11 million, increased by $2 trillion in the fourth quarter. All of the gains came from their stock holdings. The value of corporate equities and mutual fund shares held by the top 1% surged to $19.7 trillion from $17.65 trillion the previous quarter.

While their real estate values went up slightly, the value of their privately held businesses declined, essentially canceling out all other gains outside of stocks.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 105 points 7 months ago (2 children)

We have to take back that wealth. Right this is the reason why we have not the lifes we deserve. That are the funds that were siphoned off from our society. The people created this worth. Not some guys at the top.

[–] [email protected] 57 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Correct. This is the stolen education of our future generations. This is the stolen lunch’s of our children. When does America wake up? I guess it takes physically seeing it happen. We are gonna be so down trodden before someone steps up it seems.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 7 months ago

No, don’t you see the real issues are trans people and some other random social problem Fox News tells conservatives to get in an uproar about.

Why we can’t have nice things.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 69 points 7 months ago (15 children)

Economists say the rising stock market is giving an added boost to consumer spending through what is known as the “wealth effect.” When consumers and investors see their stock holdings soar, they feel more confident spending and taking more risk.

I somehow suspect that this thing about the wealth effect is total and utter bullshit.

[–] [email protected] 46 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Just like trickle down economics.

[–] givesomefucks 16 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (3 children)

What's crazy is the reason people believe in it, is total coincidence.

Bill Clinton thought it was a good idea and republicans just implemented it wrong, and then when he was president the dotcom boom happened and everyone gave credit to Clinton's policy. It stopped being a conversation on if it worked, and became how best to implement it.

Like when Biden did the "child predators" bill, it wasn't harsh punishments that got crime under control, it was the normal effect of banning leaded gasoline 20 years earlier. But we're left with two "tough on crime" options even though that approach just doesn't work.

In both cases it's reminiscent of cargo cults, a good thing happened, so we just repeat what we were doing when it happened and expect the good thing again.

But with how long political careers are and how slow science moves, by the time we can prove it, they've built huge careers off the false assumption they had something to do with it. For them to admit they've been wrong, they have to realize they spent decades doing the wrong thing and while they had good intentions they've been causing harm.

That's a big ask for anyone, but especially for someone whose over 60.

So they ignore all evidence and double down even harder

[–] [email protected] 9 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (7 children)

That’s a big ask for anyone, but especially for someone whose over 60.

Interesting that you reference Bill Clinton, because he is actually on record on realizing some stuff he did was the wrong choice. Specifically the idea of treating food as commodities and not a human right. Not that that invalidates your point, just an interesting note.

"Food is not a commodity like others," Clinton said. "We should go back to a policy of maximum food self-sufficiency. It is crazy for us to think we can develop countries around the world without increasing their ability to feed themselves."

Clinton was 61 years old in 2008.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] ABCDE 6 points 7 months ago

whose over 60.

Who's. Whose is for possessive, like: whose beer is this? It's the guy whose car is outside.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
[–] Etterra 67 points 7 months ago (11 children)

tHe EcOnOmY iS dOiNg GrEaT

No, the stock market is doing great at making the rich richer. The economy is fucking broken. On purpose. The crushing of the working class to enrich the 1% is capitalism working exactly as intended.

[–] m13 25 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I’m sure the wealth will trickle down any moment now. Been waiting about 40 years now. Must be happening soon.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 7 months ago

And no one will listen to you because America has a stake in the stupidity of its people.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 months ago

Some much computational energy and human talent is wasted on finance coming up with imaginary and derivative products that do nothing but make rich people richer.

It’s nothing but speculative wealth that doesn’t actually exist, but the federal government prints bonds to underwrite this garbage. Then morons talk about how the feds print money that cause inflation, but are too stupid to realize why.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] gAlienLifeform 62 points 7 months ago (23 children)

We just shouldn't allow individuals to have over a billion dollars, just 100% tax on anything over a billion when combined assets exceed that number. Both because there's no good reason for any one person to have that much money and because as pathetic as American campaign finance laws are it's a legit national security risk for someone to have that kind of money to throw at their pet causes.

[–] FlyingSquid 42 points 7 months ago (38 children)

I would lower that to $100 million. I don't think there's even a good reason for anyone to be that rich, but if we're going for a crazy upper limit...

load more comments (38 replies)
[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer 23 points 7 months ago (6 children)

If you had a billion dollars and never earned a penny more, you would actually find it hard to spend it all before you die. It could probably fully support several generations of your family. I'm totally fine with saying, "Congratulations! You maxed out the money counter in the game of Life!"

[–] [email protected] 8 points 7 months ago

We could give them a trophy and everything

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] CosmicCleric 9 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

We used to have a super high tax rate on the wealthy (91%) in the past, but it got repealed.

Let your house representative know you'd like that to return.

load more comments (20 replies)
[–] 3volver 55 points 7 months ago (7 children)

Thanks Reagan, still waiting for it to trickle down you fucking liar.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Suavevillain 41 points 7 months ago (2 children)

It should be trickling down any second now. Meanwhile, the Kellogg's CEO is telling people to eat cereal for dinner because they are poor.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 7 months ago

Not to mention that per weight beef is cheaper

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RemoveEgoDivineFreedom 37 points 7 months ago (4 children)
[–] RememberTheApollo_ 8 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Plenty of meat on those bones.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 36 points 7 months ago

44 trillion would end world… problems.

Let’s END… the… problem.

🍽️ the 🤑

[–] Daft_ish 35 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (30 children)

Nice! Good job all. It sucks that our wealth is being harvested by a few psychos but dam we are working our asses off and generating vasts amounts of it. For someone else but still damn, super impressed.

load more comments (30 replies)
[–] theangryseal 31 points 7 months ago (6 children)

And here I am terrified to spend a penny.

Maybe the billionaires will buy each other’s shit and we can all just die already and let them play with resources without us.

I don’t know what I’m trying to say. Going to bed for my back to back 16 hour shifts over the next two days.

Good night fellow poors.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Ultragigagigantic 29 points 7 months ago

Capitalism is working as intended, support ticket closed.

[–] theblueredditrefugee 29 points 7 months ago
[–] [email protected] 25 points 7 months ago (7 children)

Out-of-control. The USA should return to the 1960's tax brackets.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 7 months ago

It's too late. We need to be even more aggressive now to correct the egregious imbalance.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 7 months ago (19 children)

When do we start taking heads?

load more comments (19 replies)
[–] DirkMcCallahan 16 points 7 months ago

Absolutely disgusting. And conservatives are itching to cut taxes on the wealthy even further.

[–] lennybird 14 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

... But it's the poor mother pulling herself up by the bootstraps, making the perilous journey north to work comparatively-shit jobs to help give her kids a brighter future that is apparently the problem to righties — who, by the way — we all benefit from their cheap labor in the first place...

$20 spent to a person making 100,000/year...

... Is the same as a single-billionaire spending $200,000.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 7 months ago (3 children)

May be unpopular but congrats to all 7 of them

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 months ago

That's over 5k per human currently alive.

[–] notaviking 11 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (7 children)

Ok hear me out. I just want to do quick maths. The world population is according to worldometer just over 8,1 billion people. So 81 million people make up the top 1%. So this article says they have now 44,6 trillion dollars. So $44600000000000/81000000 is equal to $550617.28 per person in the one percent. So that means if you have more than $550 000 in wealth, you are a one percenter.

I am curious if the wealth of the top % as a value has grown or outpaced the rate of inflation and population growth added together.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (3 children)

The article is talking about the US. (Because of course it is).

So, it's only 3.3 million people, so it's $13.5 million each on average.

So that means if you have more than $550 000 in wealth, you are a one percenter.

No, that's not how distributions work.

If Elon Musk walks into a bar, it's a Nazi bar now. Also, if he walks into a bar with 99 other people in it, the average wealth of everyone in the bar is $2 billion. But, that doesn't mean that the typical person in that group has over $2b in wealth.

The top 1% contains Elon Musk plus about 3.3 million other people, but he skews the distribution considerably. That means the bottom of the distribution of the top 1% is around $6m, and it also includes people like Musk and Bezos who bring the average up to $13.5m per person.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 7 months ago

You'll be in the top 1% on much less than that. It's still heavily skewed towards the 0.0001%.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 7 months ago

OFF. WITH. THEIR. HEADS.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 7 months ago

It’s Guillotime™️

[–] Hobbes_Dent 8 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Was Reagan in Australia when he mentioned trickle-down economics?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Buffalox 6 points 7 months ago

Wow, this is great news!! Imagine all the trickle down. 😂 😂 😂

load more comments
view more: next ›