Hacker News
points by twoodfin 1 day ago | 0 comments
I would flatly reject the idea that a just-graduated neurologist with a negative net worth due to loans is “poor”.

Wealth being the integration of gains - consumption over time makes it a poor metric for looking at society as a whole.

Something like 50% of Americans will be millionaires at some point in their lives—upper quintile per this chart, typically later in their earnings years. Almost all of them started “poor” as young adults, per this chart’s definition.

[–] MikeNotThePope 1 day ago
I don't disagree with you. Obviously a doctor can bring in a lot of money. In the same a stock can be valued as the sum all future cash flows w/ a discounted cash flow analysis, a doctor's future income can have a quite high valuation.

That being said, one accident or illness that strips away that doctor's ability to earn, leaving them in a soul crushing amount of debt that can't be discharged via bankruptcy. Their debt obligations are real.

[–] tclancy 1 day ago
I have, and will always have, a simple rule when evaluating job offers: can I pay my mortgage with that today? No one is feeding your broke neurologist based on future returns.
[–] jongjong 1 day ago
With this kind of wealth distribution, there's no point doing any job which services regular people. Everyone should become an informant, bodyguard, lobbyist or propagandist for a rich person. That's going to be the only kind of job that pays in the future.

Look at that last bar; consider just the annual yield or interest payment on that wealth; soon, it's going to be more than all other bars combined. If people understood the situation, they would all stop working and start making lists of who these people are and work for them. That's the only logical (legal) thing to do. Every other job or career is a waste of time.

[–] Rapzid 1 day ago
What do you think is happening right now? Where did that wealth come from? We are already all working for them.
[–] jongjong 1 day ago
>> Where did that wealth come from?

Clearly, the money printers. How else could there be such an enormous gap between those last two bars?

[–] ozgrakkurt 1 day ago
I think it is already way bigger than the other bars combined right?
[–] jongjong 1 day ago
Yes but I'm thinking about just the yield on that last bar.

Given that the Shiller P/E ratio is now 40 (under 3% of the value of the assets), the yield is actually a pretty small fraction of that last bar... but even then, I'm saying one year's yield could exceed the worth of all the others if things continue.

But IMO, it's already the case that the economy is centered around the free money/proceeds received by top 0.1%. This is why we saw all that nonsense with COVID, DEI, Wokeism, etc... This is what happens when a small number of elites decide to spend a bit of 'spare change' on politics and social activism. Imagine how bad it's going to get after that wealth has compounded in 10 years...

[–] sfn42 1 day ago
We already do work for them. They're the ones who own all the corporations.
[–] yanslookup 1 day ago
That's what most corporate jobs are . Us just working for the oligarchs.
[–] a_ba 1 day ago
Do you also flat out reject the idea that it is raining because there will be sun later?
[–] twoodfin 1 day ago
I reject that we should craft tax policy on the idea that young people with significant human capital and low current wealth are “poor”!
[–] a_ba 1 day ago
Who is suggesting to tax the human capital of these people?