We are a capitalist country with very few capitalists

[Anonymous]

In an interview with the Financial Times, Steve Bannon (I know!) said, "The country's in a financial crisis. We've had the greatest concentration of wealth under President Obama because of the bailouts in 2008, how they were done. And now, because of Covid, we have a tremendous concentration of wealth in this country, such that we have a capitalist system with very few capitalists. I think 75 per cent of the people don't own any real assets or financial assets."

Do you agree with him and do you think he will regret helping the Republicans come to power or do you think the Republicans can actually undo the economic inequality in this country?

[Anonymous]

No matter the system it is often said that if everyone were put on a level playing field, and all wealth was equally distributed, that within a decade the poor would be poor again, and the rich would be rich again.

Not 100% of the time, but that rule tends to speak true most of the time.

[Anonymous]

Oh that's actually not true at all! Look at Figure 1 in this link : https://www.cbpp.org/research/poverty-and-inequality/a-guide-to-statistics-on-historical-trends-in-income-inequality

Income gains in this country were pretty equal across all income groups from at least the end of WW2 until Ronald Reagan took office in 1980 with a mandate to unto all the regulations and privatize everything: https://www.cbpp.org/research/poverty-and-inequality/a-guide-to-statistics-on-historical-trends-in-income-inequality

After that, the rich got markedly wealthier and the rest of us pretty much stayed the same.

[Anonymous]

And yet he seems to be fine with wealth concentration, because the right-wing parties o this world have never managed to redistribute funds or level the playing field at all. They believe in "trickle down" economics, which has never worked.

So as usual, he's talking out of both sides of his mouth.

[Anonymous]

The current president is the most socialist president the country has had in a long time.

Tariffs, picking winners and losers and generally trying to centrally plan the economy are socialist policies.

Bannon’s ideas are closer to communism than capitalism.

[Anonymous]

Bailing out farmers= socialism

[Anonymous]

My experience is that people don't want to own assets. They'd rather spend their money. They may buy a home for living, but that's it.
I always ask why they don't want to buy or own assets. The answers are very different, but show ignorance or not understanding what assets are more than anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My experience is that people don't want to own assets. They'd rather spend their money. They may buy a home for living, but that's it.
I always ask why they don't want to buy or own assets. The answers are very different, but show ignorance or not understanding what assets are more than anything.

What assets (besides a home) do you think people should consider owning?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No matter the system it is often said that if everyone were put on a level playing field, and all wealth was equally distributed, that within a decade the poor would be poor again, and the rich would be rich again.

Not 100% of the time, but that rule tends to speak true most of the time.

This is the stupidest thing I've read today, though the day is young. This is "often" said? By whom? And how can this rule be true even 1% of the time when such a distribution has never actually happened?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bailing out farmers= socialism

What is bailing out bankers and subsidizing rich corporations called?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My experience is that people don't want to own assets. They'd rather spend their money. They may buy a home for living, but that's it.
I always ask why they don't want to buy or own assets. The answers are very different, but show ignorance or not understanding what assets are more than anything.

What assets (besides a home) do you think people should consider owning?

art, jewelry, maybe be a patron to an artist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My experience is that people don't want to own assets. They'd rather spend their money. They may buy a home for living, but that's it.
I always ask why they don't want to buy or own assets. The answers are very different, but show ignorance or not understanding what assets are more than anything.

What assets (besides a home) do you think people should consider owning?

Investments are assets…so stocks and bonds.

[Anonymous]

I don't understand the OP.

I always understood that the objective of a "capitalist country" is to have most aspects of life (and governance) to be controlled by corporations and to concentrate wealth in the hands of a few (10%, 1%, 0.1%, take your pick).

Mission accomplished. It was totally a bipartisan success.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No matter the system it is often said that if everyone were put on a level playing field, and all wealth was equally distributed, that within a decade the poor would be poor again, and the rich would be rich again.

Not 100% of the time, but that rule tends to speak true most of the time.

Disagree. Also, it's never been tried, so, how would you possibly assert this with a straight face?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No matter the system it is often said that if everyone were put on a level playing field, and all wealth was equally distributed, that within a decade the poor would be poor again, and the rich would be rich again.

Not 100% of the time, but that rule tends to speak true most of the time.

Disagree. Also, it's never been tried, so, how would you possibly assert this with a straight face?

NP. Spending habits and work ethic are a big factors for financial security. Some people will always get ahead and some people never will.