Comments on: Counterparties http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2011/11/16/counterparties-467/ A slice of lime in the soda Sat, 25 May 2013 16:48:33 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: Auros http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2011/11/16/counterparties-467/comment-page-1/#comment-33154 Auros Wed, 16 Nov 2011 18:17:30 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=11107#comment-33154 dsfan, what's interesting about the 70% figure is not so much the number itself, as the fact that it's so much higher for the top 1% than for everybody else. Look at the graph in the full article -- for most of the income scale, the percentage is 35-45%. Then suddenly at the very high end, it spikes. IOW, the very wealthy use their connections to help their kids get a good start. Not surprising, and not even necessarily immoral or anything like that -- but it should make us doubt the "I got my wealth by lifting myself by my bootstraps" rhetoric that the wealthy use to justify their anti-tax zealotry. Nobody becomes wealthy SOLELY through their effort -- they rely on many other factors, including the luck of being born into the right family, the physical and legal protections of the gov't, and so on. dsfan, what’s interesting about the 70% figure is not so much the number itself, as the fact that it’s so much higher for the top 1% than for everybody else. Look at the graph in the full article — for most of the income scale, the percentage is 35-45%. Then suddenly at the very high end, it spikes. IOW, the very wealthy use their connections to help their kids get a good start. Not surprising, and not even necessarily immoral or anything like that — but it should make us doubt the “I got my wealth by lifting myself by my bootstraps” rhetoric that the wealthy use to justify their anti-tax zealotry. Nobody becomes wealthy SOLELY through their effort — they rely on many other factors, including the luck of being born into the right family, the physical and legal protections of the gov’t, and so on.

]]> By: AlanVanneman http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2011/11/16/counterparties-467/comment-page-1/#comment-33143 AlanVanneman Wed, 16 Nov 2011 12:48:24 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=11107#comment-33143 Gingrich did not call Freddie Mac "insane" and then take $300,000. Rather, he took the $300,000 and then lied about calling them "insane." Read the story, then write the blurb. It works better that way! Gingrich did not call Freddie Mac “insane” and then take $300,000. Rather, he took the $300,000 and then lied about calling them “insane.” Read the story, then write the blurb. It works better that way!

]]> By: OnkelBob http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2011/11/16/counterparties-467/comment-page-1/#comment-33142 OnkelBob Wed, 16 Nov 2011 12:45:21 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=11107#comment-33142 "And Netflix takes up 32.7% of all internet bandwidth" With the remaining 67% being pr0n. The last .3% is a combination of spam, facebook updates, and groupon offers. “And Netflix takes up 32.7% of all internet bandwidth”
With the remaining 67% being pr0n. The last .3% is a combination of spam, facebook updates, and groupon offers.

]]> By: kenjd http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2011/11/16/counterparties-467/comment-page-1/#comment-33137 kenjd Wed, 16 Nov 2011 04:19:37 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=11107#comment-33137 Good point, dsfan. My father was a letter carrier, I am a lawyer. Different path, huh? But I was a substitute letter carrier a couple of summers in college, so I suppose I count as "same firm" on that chart. But there still seems to be some significance there. Good point, dsfan. My father was a letter carrier, I am a lawyer. Different path, huh? But I was a substitute letter carrier a couple of summers in college, so I suppose I count as “same firm” on that chart. But there still seems to be some significance there.

]]> By: dsfan http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2011/11/16/counterparties-467/comment-page-1/#comment-33131 dsfan Wed, 16 Nov 2011 02:40:16 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=11107#comment-33131 "70% of the top 1% have been employed by their father’s firm" That's not what that link says. It says 70% of the sons of the top 1% have worked at the same firm as their father. That's a completely separate metric, and says nothing about how the top 1% got their money. “70% of the top 1% have been employed by their father’s firm”

That’s not what that link says. It says 70% of the sons of the top 1% have worked at the same firm as their father. That’s a completely separate metric, and says nothing about how the top 1% got their money.

]]>