Hi meekerdb  

Some economists argue that the wealthy invest their money, 
creating capital for creating businesses, hiring workers, 
and generally enriching the economy.  (The poor don't
save money for others to use.)

So greed is good for the country. 


[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 
12/25/2012  
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen 

----- Receiving the following content -----  
From: meekerdb  
Receiver: Barrett Meeker,Art Shaffman,Bill Stermer,Dan Foster,Gennifer home,Ed 
Gravlin,Hugh Kramer,Jim Wilkinson,Kirsten Meeker,Lara gmail,Mae Meeker,Marsha 
home,Mark Morgan,Mike Kory,Terry & Lucy home,Tom Blattel  
Time: 2012-12-24, 14:56:25 
Subject: Re: clearing up the confusion on the fairness index 


I was not confused. I think a good argument can be made from simple fairness; 
that income (and wealth) should be more evenly distributed.  But even this 
chart doesn't fully illustrate the problem.  If all those households simply 
spent their money on goods and services and investments the inequality would be 
fairly benign.  But at the high end, there is so much disposable income 
available that the very rich also spend it on influencing public policy (aka 
buying legislation).  To paraphrase Al Capone: You can get a lot further with a 
vote and 10M$ than you can with a vote alone. 


On 12/24/2012 8:48 AM, Roger wrote:  
Hi meekerdb  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States 



This graph shows the income of the given percentiles from  
1947 to 2010 in 2010 dollars. The 2 columns of numbers in the  
right margin are the cumulative growth 1970-2010 and the  
annual growth rate over that period. The vertical scale is  
logarithmic, which makes constant percentage growth  
appear as a straight line. From 1947 to 1970,  
all percentiles grew at essentially the same rate; the light, straight  
lines for the different percentiles for those years all have the same slope.  

Meaning that the gini didn't change. 


Since then, there has been substantial divergence, with  
different percentiles of the income distribution growing at different rates.  
For the median American family, this gap is $39,000 per year (just over $100 
per day):  
If the economic growth during this period had been broadly shared  
as it was from 1947 to 1970, the median household income would  
have been $39,000 per year higher than it was in 2010.  

Almost double what it is. 


This plot was  
created by combining data from the US Census Bureau[48]  
and the US Internal Revenue Service.[49] There are systematic 
 differences between these two sources, but the differences are small  
relative to the scale of this plot.[50] 


Brent 
You can get further with a kind word and a gun than you can with a 
kind word alone. 
      --- Al Capone

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to