And though I am a capitalist, as I've realized more and more just what an unacceptably high percentage of them didn't earn it and achieved such wealth through nepotism and cronyism instead of skill and game, I will take joy in their misery.
Wednesday, January 07, 2009
Percent of Millionaires that Have Lost Money
Seems like all of them;
And though I am a capitalist, as I've realized more and more just what an unacceptably high percentage of them didn't earn it and achieved such wealth through nepotism and cronyism instead of skill and game, I will take joy in their misery.
And though I am a capitalist, as I've realized more and more just what an unacceptably high percentage of them didn't earn it and achieved such wealth through nepotism and cronyism instead of skill and game, I will take joy in their misery.
I can see why it is viewed that way.
ReplyDeleteThe ones that have earned it are pretty modest people and don't flaunt their wealth. So they appear as average Joe's.
The ones that have inhereited it often flaunt it, but not always.
The ones that really FLAUNT their wealth are the ones that have no wealth. It is all debt...
So it is difficult to cast judgement...
Cap'n...
ReplyDeleteNot sure your wealth envy is well placed here.
From the Book The Millionaire Next Door (Stanley and Danko, 1998) (yes it is 10 years old, however), less than 19 percent of millionaires receive any income from trust funds or an estate, fewer than 10% received more than 10% of their wealth from an inheritance, and more than half received no inheritance.
I could relate the anecdotal story of my WW2 Veteran grandfather and the way he earned his millions, but it's just an anecdote and I'm sure there are others that are trust fund babies (and I've seen those folks having lived here in New Jersey for 2 years now), so I won't.
Wealth envy is not a pillar of capitalism. It is a founding point of socialism, marxism, and communism. I'm not sure why you would partake in base wealth envy.
What is needed instead is Wealth Justice; where those who greedily played with other people's hard money and lost it, like Zorba, should be highlighted and disclosed in front of the public.
Cap'n...
ReplyDeleteNot sure your wealth envy is well placed here.
From the Book The Millionaire Next Door (Stanley and Danko, 1998) (yes it is 10 years old, however), less than 19 percent of millionaires receive any income from trust funds or an estate, fewer than 10% received more than 10% of their wealth from an inheritance, and more than half received no inheritance.
I could relate the anecdotal story of my WW2 Veteran grandfather and the way he earned his millions, but it's just an anecdote and I'm sure there are others that are trust fund babies (and I've seen those folks having lived here in New Jersey for 2 years now), so I won't.
Wealth envy is not a pillar of capitalism. It is a founding point of socialism, marxism, and communism. I'm not sure why you would partake in base wealth envy.
What is needed instead is Wealth Justice; where those who greedily played with other people's hard money and lost it, like Zorba, should be highlighted and disclosed in front of the public.
(excuse if this submitted more than once, blogger never responded with a "Your comment has been submitted")
Anon is right on. My father is probably worth around $2M. He went to a state school (a decent one, but by no means UNC or Michigan) and became a CPA when he graduated. He's worked for the same large and well known company now for almost 25 years, not knowing a single person in said company before he began, and has risen to a well paying position in the company. Through smart investments and a bit of luck through the stock market, such as liquidating nearly all stocks in early 2008, his net worth is now $2M.
ReplyDeleteEntirely self made, he paid his way through college and didn't receive a dime from his dad after he graduated, who did help him out a little during college by subsidizing rent. And by looking at our family from the outside, you'd never guess he was worth more than at most $500,000, obviously not including primary residence which is not that impressive of a house.
And I forgot to add, he loves seeing the people who got money off of nepotism fail even more than you do Captain.
ReplyDeleteI'm not very impressed by this post of yours, Captain. I wouldn't call it envy necessarily, but blasting the rich as a whole is a rather left wing hobby, and it doesn't suit you.
ReplyDeleteCaptain, I think you owe it to the integrity of your own opinions to do a little research into how many millionaires inherited their money vs how many worked for it. I've always read that the trust fund babies are a small minority.
I am for meritocracy before capitalism, only in that if you pursue the former you will have the most productive of the latter. And what I have seen, in no short order, is those with the connections, regardless of skill or talent, get the job. And it pissing me off because the loss of production is profound.
ReplyDeleteThis has nothing to do with envy, it has to do with who is the best. Who is the ultimate gladiator. Who is the one who can do the best and produce the most. Not suck off of daddy's teets and falsely claim some sort of "achievement" because they're a vice president of Goldman Sachs.
You want revolution?
It will be when the best had enough of "getting by" and decide it's easier to just bitch slap and kill these Mother Effers in positions of power they didn't earn because, frankly, it pisses them off and they're entitled to the throne and the only means by getting the throne is to cheat just as much as they do and resort to something as simple as revolution, killing and assassination.
Sorry to get so real, but I'm fed up and bar something grandiose happening I don't see society going any other way.
So... should we start calling you Captain Meritocracy then? I just want to make sure I'm up to speed on this.
ReplyDeleteSure there are companies that are little more than a pyramid of cronies and people who got their jobs because their daddy plays golf with the VP, but in a free market companies that do that are at a competitive disadvantage against companies that don't. Their market share is just waiting to get nabbed by the first guy who knows what he's doing. Only the government can prevent this from happening, which is one of the many reasons why we ought to keep the government away from the economy.