[MP-Ryan]

I'm going to leave this here and refrain from commenting for a little while because I'm curious what sort of comments its going to generate around here:

http://mashable.com/2013/03/02/wealth-inequality/

[deathfun]

That's actually the first good video regarding the whole 1% stuff

Youtube comments are quite a read as well.

[Lorric]

This doesn't surprise me much. It's still higher than I thought it would be, but I was expecting a skyscraper column on the right. I'm more surprised what people's perceptions were than my own. You look at rich lists and they're full of Americans. Imagine how many average Americans combined would be required to match the wealth of one such individual, and America is full of rich people. Full of celebrities, full of tycoons. It would be interesting to compare to other countries.

Here's the Forbes 400, the top 400 richest individuals in America:

http://www.forbes.com/forbes-400/list/

Bill Gates on the top is worth $66,000,000,000.

I have no idea how much the average American has in the bank. Imagine a whole bunch of people with $50,000 in their pockets. An easy number to work with. It would require 1,320,000 people each holding $50,000 to match the wealth of Bill Gates.

The next two people on the list are worth a combined $87,000,000,000.

In 400th place we actually have a group of people in joint 392nd. One of these individuals holds $1,100,000,000. One of these has the wealth of 22,000 of the people with $50,000.

So America has at least 400 billionaires. Probably a good deal more. They're whales and we're plankton.

[Dilmah G]

****ing insane. The YT comments are almost as bad. Seems a lot of people have...'interesting' definitions for Communism and Socialism.

[watsisname]

I'd be interested in seeing a similar comparison of wealth inequality within and between other countries.

[IronBeer]

Good video. I already was rather aware of how severe the wealth disparity was, but the video does a really good job of driving the point home.

Naturally, the talk turns to: is this right? If not, what can/should be done about it?

[Nuke]

if we had more wars all the poor people would get drafted (and they dont even have to reinstate the draft, the benefits alone would make poor folks sign up in droves), then slaughtered, and would tilt the numbers a little to make everything look more fair.

[watsisname]

Wouldn't slaughtering the top 1% make it even less inequitable?

[Nuke]

we could do that too. but they have private security. the poor are easier to slaughter.

[deathfun]

we could do that too. but they have private security. the poor are easier to slaughter.

I disagree. While they lack the defenses available to the rich, they have far greater numbers. One could easily find themselves swarmed and out of bullets rather quickly

Initially it'll be a bloodbath, the unorganized lot will scatter. The poor scare easily, but they'll be back... and in greater numbers

[Nuke]

when the earth exploded and bodies burned to ashes, the leaders of men died first and common people changed... into beasts of genocide.

[redsniper]

we could do that too. but they have private security. the poor are easier to slaughter.

I disagree. While they lack the defenses available to the rich, they have far greater numbers. One could easily find themselves swarmed and out of bullets rather quickly

Initially it'll be a bloodbath, the unorganized lot will scatter. The poor scare easily, but they'll be back... and in greater numbers

Basically yeah, if things get bad enough, like to the point that the lower classes will literally starve, this is what happens. See: France back in the day.

[StarSlayer]

  Nice to see this thread developing in a healthy and productive manner.

[Lorric]

Nice to see this thread developing in a healthy and productive manner.

My sentiments exactly.

Surely only on HLP could a thread about the concentration of wealth among the rich turn into a thread about exterminating the poor. 

[watsisname]

That's nuke for ya. =P

To get the thread back on track, should something be done about wealth inequality in the US, and if so which policies would be the most successful?

[Kobrar44]

Policies? For a start, next time when you install windows on your machine consider installing linux and giving the spared 100$[or whatever it will cost] to the poor. For a start. Then talk about policies.

[General Battuta]

I think the big question for me is to what extent the same systems that have created such enormous inequality have also helped improve standards of living for everyone - the 'rising tide lifts all boats, though some more than others' model. I think by this point it's clear that this model is incomplete and that the enormous postwar wealth spike is linked to systems that do not consistently help the notional average American.

[Lorric]

It would be interesting to know how many of those people in that top 400 list are self-made billionaires. Especially if they came from humble backgrounds.

[BrotherBryon]

I would like to see similar chart comparisons from a couple of other times in our nation's history. The time of Rockefeller, J.P. Morgan, and Carnegie would likely reflect the current distribution while the time period after Ford and WWII might be closer to what they say should be the ideal. The only way this gets fixed is for businesses to start doing on their own what Ford and others like him did and that was to pay his workers better thus creating a stronger customer base also known as the middle class. Wages in this country have been stagnant for over 30 years now even amongst skilled and educated positions while executive and investment positions have enjoyed disproportionally huge rewards.

[deathfun]

Might help if you guys stopped outsourcing to China