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.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (92931)	7/26/2012 4:42:52 PM
From: Haim R. Branisteanu	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217549

Are you trusting everything you see on the internet? I do not, even that is known that the Italian on average are rich - wealth amassed since the Roman empire <smile>

To: TobagoJack who wrote (92931)	7/26/2012 4:57:47 PM
From: Haim R. Branisteanu	3 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217549

In another vein a stupid question ; Picard has charged around $273 million for his firm’s Madoff work. Madoff, who cost investors around $17 billion in lost principal, is serving a 150-year prison sentence. bloomberg.com OK, so losing 17 billion equals to 150 year jail time JP Morgan lost 6 billion and counting so those involved should serve a collective 50 years jail time - but it seems that that gal Ina Drew left with thens of millions and no jail time sentence and Dimon is still in charge. it does not makes sense to me but is seems that no one cares about JPM losses Bear Stern losses, Lehman Bros 500 billion losses, AIG 200 billion losses MF Global ............ and list is long So could anyone explain to me the logic why only Madof went to jail? After all, all the above engaged in a Ponzi schemes with so called "synthetic" financial instruments with 3 or 4 letters names .......... and I believed in the US they have equal justice for ALL............ I think now, I am actually from Mars if I am believing in such things

To: TobagoJack who wrote (92931)	7/26/2012 5:17:01 PM
From: Amelia Carhartt	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217549

I see the US is in the bottom of the barrel. Bye Bye American Pie.

To: TobagoJack who wrote (92931)	7/26/2012 5:24:25 PM
From: Snowshoe	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217549

>>The average Italian has a net worth three times as much as you.<< The chart depicts median wealth, not average wealth. This reader comment explains the difference... Gadfly on the Wall says: In response to TaxSlave, “wealth” is defined as net worth. In other words, assets less liabilities. I do not like the use of “median” as a metric. What that means is that half of the people are above and half below, so let’s say you have 3 people … one has a net worth of $ 1,000,000, another has a net worth of $250,000, and another has a net worth of zero …. the median net worth would be $250,000. Now the average net worth would be $ 417,000 amongst those 3. In the U.S., which has the most billionaires in the world, the median could be low, but the average could be higher (or vice versa). Australia, with a lesser population than the U.S., but with possibly flatter net worth demographics, could register a higher “median” net worth, but a lower average net worth. As Mark Twain said, “there are lies, damn lies, and statistics.” Always be careful with statistics. Ric

To: TobagoJack who wrote (92931)	7/26/2012 5:36:04 PM
From: KyrosL	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217549

Median is the point which divides people in half. Half have more than the median, half less. This graph simply points out that wealth in America is distributed in a very lopsided way compared to other developed countries. This can also be seen in the Gini index which is much higher in America than other developed countries. Now, if you take AVERAGE wealth per person, America will most probably be near the top among large developed countries. The median person in America has most of their wealth as home equity. Homes in the US are typically much bigger than homes in other countries. That home was used as an ATM via cash out refinancing in the years before the great recession. Since then it has lost some 30% of its value and as a result the equity owned by the median person has plunged. Other countries have that problem. For example, the Dutch also have very high home prices and carry huge mortgages. As home prices are falling, Dutch median wealth is also falling rapidly, because home equity is vanishing, even though Holland is one of the richest countries in the world. Australia, on the other hand has a much more equal wealth distribution, since a lot of its population is relatively recent immigrants, plus its government follows social democratic policies. Also, the housing in Australia has not yet crashed, though it has stalled.