Basic Citizens' Income

[vtsnowedin]

This story in the Guardian today.
https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/ ... orest-half

The richest 0.1% of the world’s population have increased their combined wealth by as much as the poorest 50% – or 3.8 billion people – since 1980, according to a report detailing the widening gap between the very rich and poor.

The World Inequality Report, published on Thursday by French economist Thomas Piketty, warned that inequality had ballooned to “extreme levels� in some countries and said the problem would only get worse unless governments took coordinated action to increase taxes and prevent tax avoidance.

The report, which drew on the work of more than 100 researchers around the world, found that the richest 1% of the global population “captured� 27% of the world’s wealth growth between 1980 and 2016. And the richest of the rich increased their wealth by even more. The top 0.1% gained 13% of the world’s wealth, and the top 0.001% – about 76,000 people – collected 4% of all the new wealth created since 1980.

“The top 0.1% income group (about 7 million people) captured as much of the world’s growth since 1980 as the bottom half of the adult population,� the report said. “Conversely, income growth has been sluggish or even nil for the population between the global bottom 50% and top 1%.�

Article continues.
What it fails to note is that it is not a zero sum game and the growth in the wealth of the richest was not taken or stolen from the poor but is in fact new wealth that didn't exist before.
The fact that "middle class" wealth remained stagnant is due to the tendency of spending rising to meet income which is surely not the riches fault.

[Little John]

And, in that one post, you reveal you understand and have learned nothing from the time you have spent here.

Capitalism inexorably leads to the accumulation of wealth in the hands of a small number of people. It also leads to perpetual innovation in terms of automation of processes, where possible, as part of the profit motive. In turn, leading to massive upheavals in employment.

The only thing that has masked the above two flaws in capitalism has been the capacity to spread into new market territories, in turn diluting the effects of extreme wealth accumulation in a tiny sector of the population and rising unemployment in any given sector.

But, on a finite planet where we have hit the limits to material economic growth, that little trick doesn't work anymore and has not worked, in truth, for the last few decades. Hence, as the wealth of the top few percent continues to rise, this is now at the direct expense of the the rest of us.

The system is eating itself, since it has nothing else left to feed upon.

[kenneal - lagger]

..... The fact that "middle class" wealth remained stagnant is due to the tendency of spending rising to meet income which is surely not the riches fault.

Who do you think controls the interest rate and who controls where central bank's money goes? It's that top 0.1% who make money policy to suit their own ends. It's why when QE goes ahead the money goes to the *ankers and not into public capital growth or even maintenance of public capital; they put the money straight into their own pockets telling us that "the wealth will trickle down!"

The rise in property prices and the increased interest payments which the middle class pay are one of the main mechanisms by which money is transfered into the hands of the 0.1% and they engineer ever rising house and property prices to facilitate this. Yes, the middle class do gain a little from this mechanism but they pay for it in death duties and capital gains tax. The 0.1% largely avoid these taxes because the tax system is rigged in their favour by lackeys who are appointed to influential positions at their instruction.

They spend billions of our money bailing out their failed enterprises but when it comes to bailing out some poor sod who has fallen foul of their failures that unfortunate is immediately a lazy, undeserving sod who has got himself into his situation through his own fault. (or so you tell us VT) Yes there are a few who are in that situation by their own fault but bailing them out costs a minute fraction of what it cost to keep the 0.1% in the manner to which they are accustomed despite their continued, cyclical business failure.

You have been conned, VT; well and truly conned.

(Edited twice - Ken Neal)

[vtsnowedin]

.........
But, on a finite planet where we have hit the limits to material economic growth, that little trick doesn't work anymore and has not worked, in truth, for the last few decades. Hence, as the wealth of the top few percent continues to rise, this is now at the direct expense of the the rest of us.

The system is eating itself, since it has nothing else left to feed upon.

I must totally disagree with this. The owners of face book and DODGY TAX AVOIDERS and Microsoft have not taken a dime from anyone that did not want to buy what they were selling. The stock market has risen some 33 percent in a year or six trillion and no one anywhere is six trillion poorer for it. The planet is finite but we have yet to exhaust it's resources and innovation and invention are limitless.
It is you who have taken the socialist koolaid poison.

[vtsnowedin]

..... The fact that "middle class" wealth remained stagnant is due to the tendency of spending rising to meet income which is surely not the riches fault.

Who do you think controls the interest rate and who controls where central bank's money goes? It's that top 0.1% who make money policy to suit their own ends. It's why when QE goes ahead the money goes to the *ankers and not into public capital growth or even maintenance of public capital; they put the money straight into their own pockets telling us that "the wealth will trickle down!"

The rise in property prices and the increased interest payments which the middle class pay are one of the main mechanisms by which money is transfered into the hands of the 0.1% and they engineer ever rising house and property prices to facilitate this. Yes, the middle class do gain a little from this mechanism but they pay for it in death duties and capital gains tax. The 0.1% largely avoid these taxes because the tax system is rigged in their favour by lackeys who are appointed to influential positions at their instruction.

They spend billions of our money bailing out their failed enterprises but when it comes to bailing out some poor sod who has fallen foul of their failures that unfortunate is immediately a lazy, undeserving sod who has got himself into his situation through his own fault. (or so you tell us VT) Yes there are a few who are in that situation by their own fault but bailing them out costs a minute fraction of what it cost to keep the 0.1% in the manner to which they are accustomed despite their continued, cyclical business failure.

You have been conned, VT; well and truly conned.

(Edited twice - Ken Neal)

While not a fan of bank bailouts I think you protest too loudly.
Do you want Joe sixpack down at the pub handling the flow of money?
The rise in property prices is a function of the middle classes rising income and willingness to pay. And all the middle class that owned a home gained by the rise in prices. The middle class except farmers largely escapes death duties and capital gains taxes only apply if you have an actual capital gain.
Having never been paid a salary over $66K a year I have a hard time finding sympathy for a "middle class" person making $225k with a million dollar mortgage plus a second vacation home two Beamers and a child in private grade school. The fact he is spending it as fast or faster then it comes in is totally his fault certainly not mine or Bill Gates.

[kenneal - lagger]

The stock market has risen because of the QE money that has been pumped into it. It hasn't risen it has inflated. Because of that inflation any one without direct access to the QE money has lost out because their own money has decreased in value due to inflation. All our wages have lost value because of inflation. Prices have gone up, inflated, faster than wages so we have all lost money and it's all been engineered by the 0.1% so that they can get richer at our expense.

[kenneal - lagger]

We have yet to exhaust the planet's resources but we are having to put so much more energy into getting those resources that they are becoming unaffordable ecologically! Also the resources become more expensive so we can buy less of them especially as our wages are being globalised while, in the UK at least, our homes are being inflated out of our reach by greedy *ankers who keep stuffing more money into houses and forcing the price up.

You have been conned by the purveyors of the "American Dream", the thieving, sociopathic, kleptocracy that is the 0.1% and they are represented by your current President.

[vtsnowedin]

The stock market has risen because of the QE money that has been pumped into it. It hasn't risen it has inflated. Because of that inflation any one without direct access to the QE money has lost out because their own money has decreased in value due to inflation. All our wages have lost value because of inflation. Prices have gone up, inflated, faster then wages so we have all lost money and it's all been engineered by the 0.1% so that they can get richer at our expense.

The QE money went to the bankers eight years ago. No noticeable effect.
The stock market started to rise the day after Trump was elected and the GOP took control of all three branches of government.
Cumulative inflation from 2008 to 2017 is just 4.6% which is low for the post gold standard years. If your wages were stagnant ,and many were, blame Obama or your version of him.
What would be the point of the 0.1 percent engineering a recession? They would make money and grow their wealth faster in a booming economy.

[BritDownUnder]

The recently elected New Zealand Labour led coalition has just substantially increased transfers of money to the less well off families in the budget announced today.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/indust ... o-tax-cuts

[johnhemming2]

You cannot tell from this story which only looks at one aspect. The total package including tax changes need to be considered and there are clearly errors in the story anyway.

with some receiving hundreds of dollars more a week.

Some may have hundreds of dollars more a month, but not a week.

[fuzzy]

The day they start rewarding people for not copulating, I will be impressed.

[vtsnowedin]

The day they start rewarding people for not copulating, I will be impressed.

Considering the cost of raising children today why is not copulating without effective birth control not it's own reward?

[kenneal - lagger]

The 0.1% think that they are making money because their total keeps going up, and that is all they care about. The fact that they are engineering a recession by f***ing up the rest of us probably hasn't occurred to them because they have no contact with, or care for, the rest of us. They will be as surprised by the coming downturn as they were the last time.

Any bleating that they might hear from us will be considered as just that, the usual bleating of the spoilt masses.

[vtsnowedin]

The 0.1% think that they are making money because their total keeps going up, and that is all they care about. The fact that they are engineering a recession by f***ing up the rest of us probably hasn't occurred to them because they have no contact with, or care for, the rest of us. They will be as surprised by the coming downturn as they were the last time.

Any bleating that they might hear from us will be considered as just that, the usual bleating of the spoilt masses.

Your persistent belief that the rich get richer by stealing from the poor is charming. Totally wrong but charming.

[Little John]

How do the rich get rich in a capitalist system V?

Or, to be more precise - how do the rich get rich in a capitalist system where the limits to physical growth in a finite physical system have been reached?