Wealth Inequality in America

4 thoughts on “Wealth Inequality in America”


  1. Why does it really matters what 90% of population think how distribution of wealth should look like? Most of these 90% have very simple jobs (yeah, they just mention all the good ones, doctors, engineers, lawyers, etc.), trying to escape from any responsibility at their job and cheating whenever they can.

    Of course there are folks who inherited all the wealth or were in right time and place or got lucky, but majority of them I believe are businessman who created their wealth themselves, and furthermore jobs for the rest 90%. And this is US, country where laws actually work, employee can sue your ass off, you have to deal with all the regulations, competition, etc. this is not Russia where you can bribe officials to maximize your profits and pay pennies to the workers and simply eliminate your competitors.


    1. Hi Chester. Oh boy, where do I even start? :)

      It does matter how people think the world should be. It provides an insight into where the society thinks it is, and where it wants to be. Things like that stay behind change. And by change I mean a broad range of things -- legal system, social programs, and even revolutions and wars. It helps if government knows where people are and want to be. And it also helps individuals to understand the surrounding world better if they get insights into people around.

      Simple jobs. These are important too your know. Look around you. All these things have been built by people doing “simple jobs” -- factory workers, builders, drivers, gardeners, etc. It’s not all about business and management. Sometimes things just have to be done.

      Inheritance of wealth does happen, but the video mentions that there is a huge growth of how much wealth was had by the rich 30 years ago and now. That’s not all just about inheritance and more opportunities. There is in imbalance. Rich people are getting richer, while poor people get poorer. Or so it seems.

      Oh, and as far as US is concerned, yeah -- maybe they do have a better legal system than many other countries, but there is plenty of corruption and bribery happening there. Look at their government grants, military projects, and foreign policy for examples. I hope you don’t think it’s all about bringing democracy to third world countries… :)


      1. Hello Leonid,

        I cannot disagree with most you’ve said. My point was rather about underestimating the riches part. Well of course rich are getting richer, they got all these money to invest :) Poor are getting poorer? I really doubt that, compare lifestyle of today and 10 years ago (well ok, it depends from country to country) but you got the picture. Take a look at crime level in US by year for instance. Compare access to education, pretty much everybody nowadays in developed countries have access to the internet to study whatever they want, for free. Few decades ago you had to be slightly rich to get decent education. Technological progress in past 20 years made it happen. There were people who were investing in it, they made it happen, of course they got their interest, but also created value for the rest, including poorest.

        The gap between poorest and richest become bigger -- that’s for sure, but is it bad? Why? Because they did a good investments? To me it sounds more like society feels they own a share of this wealth for some reason. And finally if we’re talking about top richest people, let’s look at two richest man in the world Warren Buffet and Bill Gates, both donated into charity most of their wealth.


        1. Hi Chester,

          I don’t think the part of the rich people is underestimated. On the contrary. However, the importance of equal opportunities, social values, and humanism and compassion are, IMHO, underestimated.

          This makes me think of the distant roots of society. Why are we herding together rather than leave our own individual lives? Maybe, because surviving in a group is easier than on your own.

          Sure, in any group of people you’ll get those who are at the top, those who are at the bottom, and those who in the middle. That’s natural. The question is only about how much of that difference is natural for a society. Where does it start to break out into individualism?

          Going back to the original video, I can say that people on both ends of the chart are pretty much outsiders in the society. The poorest have so many ugly problems -- hunger, health, crime, etc -- that many people try to avoid even looking at them. Just push them out of your neighborhood, lock them up in prison, do anything really. Just make sure the society doesn’t have to face them. Similarly, the other end are outsiders as well. For a variety of reasons -- celebrity statuses, personal choice, etc.

          The thing though is that people on the poorest end rarely can do anything about it. Whether they want to or not. Their debt is getting more, their life expectancy goes down, etc. People on the richest side of the chart CAN make a difference. But many, if not most, simply don’t care enough.

          That’s where the system as a whole, and the government should kick in and balance things. But, as it turns out, in many places rich people are either more powerful than the government, or, what’s worse, they ARE or they OWN the government.

          And my last point is about learning from history. Gladly, we have many examples. Sadly, most of them are violent and bloody. When the difference in wealth distribution goes to wide, what often happens is a “RE-distribution” of wealth. In a form of revolution, regime change, and so on.

Leave a Comment