Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Joe NYC who wrote (153292)	10/14/2002 10:11:45 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1585168

Re: , this evil fifth quintile that you are denouncing Hmmm. I should have written more. The CEO's that are getting millions to billions for showing up at their desk each day (hired hands of us stockholders) -have done a terrible job, while abusing their fiduciary responsibility and paying themselves 100% and more of the earnings of the companies they were hired to operate. They're like clerks in a store that keep all the profits for themselves, leaving the owners with nothing. A separate issue is that too much wealth in too few hands kills off consumption. I tried to make it clear that it's just as bad when the wealth is spread around too evenly (then there's not enough investment). I'm concerned that we've gotten to the point where too much income is in too few hands - which is limiting total demand and resulting in recession and deflation.

To: Joe NYC who wrote (153292)	10/14/2002 10:30:25 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1585168

Re: I have studied the tables, and it is not that much. I could believe 0.9% reduction from 4.0%. Look at table 6 on page 20. Definition 4 excludes transfer payments (Social Security, Veteran's Benefits, Educational Assistance, Railroad Retirement, Medicare, Welfare, etc.) and leaves 20% of households with 0.9% of the income. The top 20% get 55.6% of the income - about 60 times as much on a per household basis. It's probably giving too much to able bodied adults who, in the words of Homer Simpson, "Don't feel like going to work in the morning". But our society would fall apart if the children in these households weren't fed, clothed, and educated - there would literally be riots in the streets. No system is perfect, but I think our balance of "here you are" welfare and "get a job or starve" has been better than that of most societies. In recent years, we've been moving away from that balance, and I think it's starting to damage the economy.