inequality stocks Trump

Dear America: Here’s What Egregious Wealth And Income Inequality Looks Like

Any questions?

We've spent a lot of time talking about inequality in these pages. This discussion is particularly relevant now for two reasons. the policies adopted by central banks in the wake of the financial crisis have exacerbated inequality Donald Trump's tax plan, variously pitched as a "middle class miracle", amounts to little more than a handout for the wealthy Taking those in turn, the policy response to the financial crisis served to inflate the value of financial assets and those assets are disproportionately concentrated in the hands of the wealthy. One of the most important things to understand about this dynamic is that it's not linear. Here's how Salient's Ben Hunt described the situation in a recent note called "The Pecking Order": The goodies of a trebled stock market aren’t evenly distributed. Who owns stocks? If we’re talking about households, leaving aside pension funds and endowments and other institutional investors, it’s the rich, mostly. And that household share of the Central Bankers’ Bubble doesn’t increase linearly with wealth, but exponentially, meaning that the really rich own a lot more stocks than the merely rich, so the really rich have gotten a lot
Subscribe or log in to read the rest of this content.

6 comments on “Dear America: Here’s What Egregious Wealth And Income Inequality Looks Like

  1. Mark says:

    H, the 401K participation chart from the GAO would seem to say that most employed Americans, nearly 80%, participate in a corporate 401K, which seems to validates the President’s claim that the stock market rally is helping most Americans.

    Of course the lowest quintile shown have limited participation….those incomes listed are incredibly low. At the new CA minimum wage of $15/hour, that converts to over $31k per year. Therefore, most working Americans fall into the > $30k category…..

    I also find your commentary stating that the % tax benefit accrues unfairly to the wealthy disingenuous. Lower income Americans pay very little income tax to begin with.

    Best regards,

    Chump

    • “I also find your commentary stating that the % tax benefit accrues unfairly to the wealthy disingenuous.”

      I don’t care how you “find it.”

      the numbers are the numbers. that tax bill is disproportionately skewed towards benefiting the wealthiest Americans. Period.

      And my guess is, you’re not a billionaire, so what you’ll “find” if you look, is that you too are falling further behind the richest Americans.

      So when you “find” that your 2015 Lexus looks increasingly poor-people-ish next to someone’s Bentley Mulsanne, you can “find” your way back to the charts in this article.

      That’s the end of that story. The numbers are just the numbers.

      best regards,

      H

      • also, what the fuck are you talking about with this? “validates the President’s claim that the stock market rally is helping most Americans.”

        do you not see the Credit Suisse charts? there is no sense in which it “benefits most Americans”

    • Lance Manly says:

      Jesus

      https://smartasset.com/retirement/average-401k-balance-by-age

      >What’s the Average 401(k) Balance by Age?
      >Overall, Americans’ average 401(k) balance as of the second quarter of 2017 is $97,700.

      >According to data from Fidelity, here’s the average breakdown by age:

      >Ages 20 – 29: $9,900

      >Ages 30 – 39: $38,400

      >Ages 40 – 49: $91,000

      >Ages 50 – 59: $152,700

      >Ages 60 – 69: $167,700

      >Ages 70 – 79: $160,200

      I could blow that in a weekend.

      • but i mean the larger point here is that the charts in this post clearly show that stocks are overwhelmingly concentrated in the hands of a relative few of Americans. So for the commenter above to effectively say “well, if you just strip out all the poor people, Trump is right,” is dumber than a bag of hammers.

  2. Sam Bachman says:

    The chart right above the President’s tweet, is Ex-President Obama years. Please don’t make it political, because that just makes it a fight. There is a legitimate problem here. There are things we can do. For example, let’s bring back stock splits. They have virtually disappeared in my lifetime. This is bad enough for people trying to start in stock ownership, but even worse for those who would like to participate in Level 2 Options strategies. If I want to sell a cash-secured PUT on Google, I have to have a minimum of $1000X100 = $100,000. That effectively make options trading for risk management an elitist-only tool – and that is not fair.

Leave a Reply to Mark Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.