This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

The Definitive Rich Vs Poor Chart: "The Rich Hold Assets, The Poor Have Debt"

Tyler Durden's picture




 

This chart from Citi's Matt King pretty much sums it up (and contrary to what Magic Money Tree growers will tell you, debt is not wealth).

Why is it important? Simple - contrary to the Fed's flawed DSGE models, it is the poor who are more likely to consume. And logically with their purchasing power being funneled to the rich with every $85 billion in monthly debt monetization, they purchase less and less. As the slow but steady contraction in the economy over the past five years has proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

But hey: at least Hamptons' houses have never been more expensive and the Russell2000 keeps on hitting daily all time highs. Thank you "wealth effect."

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:08 | 4022816 Zer0head
Zer0head's picture

so was the DC driver shot in the Capitol yesterday (the one that the media has stopped reporting on) rich or poor?

 

http://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanhatesthis/everything-we-know-about-miriam-ca...

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:08 | 4022825 NotApplicable
NotApplicable's picture

I found it strange how people kept referring to her as the Capitol shooting suspect, rather than victim.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:12 | 4022840 Herd Redirectio...
Herd Redirection Committee's picture

The rich are too rich.  Millionaires always think I am shittalking them when I talk about rich people.  Rich = $1 billion or more

The rich have more than they can spend, and yet, they want more, because they aren't greedy, they are power-hungry sociopaths.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:17 | 4022859 therover
therover's picture

Power hungry sociopaths = greedy

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:19 | 4022873 Herd Redirectio...
Herd Redirection Committee's picture

But the 'greed' is just a symptom, not a cause.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:29 | 4022893 hedgeless_horseman
hedgeless_horseman's picture

 

 

 

Deceased single mother with a $250,000 condo and an Infinity on a dental tech income of $73k.

What was her debt/income ratio?

When people have nothing to lose, they lose it.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:31 | 4022909 MillionDollarBonus_
MillionDollarBonus_'s picture

If you really care about the economy then you have to care about the middle class. Economists believe that the key to economic prosperity is investing in the middle class, because this has a knock on effect of helping the poor. Read today's article at the Accredited Times to learn more about how our administration is helping the middle class and how we can improve the economy even more:

http://accredited-times.com/2013/10/04/investing-in-the-middle-class-the...

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:42 | 4022950 Beam Me Up Scotty
Beam Me Up Scotty's picture

How about we stop devaluing dollars?  The "poor" could more easily pay for things if their dollars were worth more, right MDB?

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:48 | 4022970 dontgoforit
dontgoforit's picture

$73K is more than my wife and I make together.  The condo I can understand.  The Infiniti is a bit much.  A Hyundai or Impala would fit better.  So they shot & killed her.  Unarmed.  (Well, an Infiniti can certainly look like a 'big' bullet - and she was crashing into stuff.)  They ought to do a DNA test and compare it with obama's - there's gotta be more to this than meets the eye?

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:50 | 4022975 Stackers
Stackers's picture

The epic Pete Stark Debt is Wealth meltdown - must watch if you haven't seen it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjbPZAMked0

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:07 | 4023038 Joe Davola
Joe Davola's picture

So debt's no longer an asset - good to know.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:17 | 4023070 James_Cole
James_Cole's picture

The rich own the debt, which for them is an asset, the poor owe the debt which means for them it's a liability. How the shit works.

Free market capitalism ftw!

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:46 | 4023139 MillionDollarBonus_
MillionDollarBonus_'s picture

Good point James. Debt is one of the major problems with the 'free market'. It's an inherently flawed system.

www.accredited-times.com

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:50 | 4023160 Meat Hammer
Meat Hammer's picture

If it were truly a free market it wouldn't be a debt-based, fiat monetary system with legal-tender laws that force people to participate in it.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:57 | 4023186 James_Cole
James_Cole's picture

I was commenting on the idea that the rich hold assets, poor hold debt - not any specific country. Free-market capitalism is specifically a system where people with assets / capital lend to people without. 

So it follows, people without assets / capital are forced to participate under the rules of those who control assets. The percentage of people in either group can obviously vary quite a bit. The more people who hold assets the more equitable the system and the more 'fair' the rules of the system. 

This is not rocket science...

 

Anyone bother to notice that rich lending to poor (with all the expected strings attached) was how the US built up it's entire empire??

 

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:33 | 4023115 Rentier
Rentier's picture

$73k in DC would be like $40-50k most other places.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 16:07 | 4023653 MachoMan
MachoMan's picture

1.5x+ the average household income...

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:43 | 4023135 Debugas
Debugas's picture

the poor are poor for a reason - they have no income generating capital

redistribution of capital is the ultimate solution

and it happens from time to time and mostly in a violent fasion (wars, revolutions etc)

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 14:51 | 4023359 Kobe Beef
Kobe Beef's picture

I beg to differ. Most of the poor people I've met were either born stupid or made stupid decisions.

Stupidity has a price. Poverty is usually it.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 15:13 | 4023458 James_Cole
James_Cole's picture

Einstein was impoverished when he fled to the US. 

The price of stupidity!!

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 16:09 | 4023654 darteaus
darteaus's picture

Not as impoverished as he would have become if he had stayed.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 15:21 | 4023486 FEDbuster
FEDbuster's picture

I know some technically broke PhDs.  Good earners whom live WAY beyond their means with little or no investments.  Stupid is, as stupid does.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 16:09 | 4023656 MachoMan
MachoMan's picture

technically broke, is that like technically pregnant?

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 23:49 | 4024926 FEDbuster
FEDbuster's picture

They count home equity, state funded pensions, etc... as part of their "net worth".  No liquid assets, no investments, a few grand in the checking account.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 16:16 | 4023672 Deacon Frost
Deacon Frost's picture

It appears MillionDollarBonus_ is responsible for a lot of the negatives on this site.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:55 | 4022998 bagehot99
bagehot99's picture

'Investing in the Middle Class' is absolute gobbledegook - it's the kind of horseshit that unqualified Marxist community organizers say when they want to funnel other people's money into, say, Solyndra.

The middle class grows when the economy grows, not the other way round. Which won't be happening while President ShutYellowstone is in the WH.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:52 | 4023170 Jumbotron
Jumbotron's picture

"Investing in the Middle Class' is absolute gobbledegook - it's the kind of horseshit that unqualified Marxist community organizers say when they want to funnel other people's money into, say, Solyndra.

The middle class grows when the economy grows, not the other way round. Which won't be happening while President ShutYellowstone is in the WH."

Since Ronald Reagan, the e CON omy has grown simply through debt issuance back by fiat paper backed by the full faith and credit of a hopelessly corrupt cabal of human scum.

But THE SCUM thanks you for your simplton solution as to simply kick out Obama and replace him with ......whom?  

I mean.... you do know that ONLY the CON gress has the Consitutional authority to issue coin and set the value of it and.....

.....OOOoooops!  Forgot.....the CON gress gave that power over to the newly invented Federal Reserve in 1913....as well as passing the Federal Income Tax in that same year.

But PLEASE......go ahead while the Powers That Be chuckle....please continue to believe that ALL we have to do is get that puppet out of the White House.  Just like the Libtards believed all we have to do is get rid of the puppet Bush out of the White House.  THEY bitch as much as WE do because they feel OBAMA IS WORSE than Bush because he's LIED about everything near and dear to them.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 14:56 | 4023377 Jumbotron
Jumbotron's picture

Already seen it.  Worth a repeat, though, every time.  Thanks.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 16:24 | 4023687 Jugdish787
Jugdish787's picture

Great video!  I have never seen it before.  The part that is so frustruting about all this information is that you and I can look at this video and think, wow! this makes sense.  Unfortunately I could send this to 100 people and they would all call me crazy and a conspiracy nut.  I think as a whole there is no hope until the majority of people get woken up to reality when it hits them in the face.  Short of that they are never going to care.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 14:47 | 4023351 Seer
Seer's picture

I have no idea whether Reagan understood the mounting forces or not, but all was already steam-rolling along when he hit the throne.

The light switch was thrown in 1971 (peak oil production & USD decoupled from gold; also, the Big China opening).  In order to make it look like the lights were still on we've been burning everything that we could get our hands on.  The Bill (due) was issued back in 1971, THAT was when the US defaulted, and it never did reconcile this default.  I wonder whether Carter was confronted by the bankers: Reagan sure the heck was- that's where we got the start of the "thousand points lights," all the shit burning (via "de-regulation")...

NOTE: It matters little what the actual "event" was, or who was there or was "responsible," as the perpetual-growth-on-a-finite-planet premise was going to end in utter failure anyway.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 14:58 | 4023384 Jumbotron
Jumbotron's picture

"I have no idea whether Reagan understood the mounting forces or not, but all was already steam-rolling along when he hit the throne.

The light switch was thrown in 1971 (peak oil production & USD decoupled from gold; also, the Big China opening).  In order to make it look like the lights were still on we've been burning everything that we could get our hands on.  The Bill (due) was issued back in 1971, THAT was when the US defaulted, and it never did reconcile this default.  I wonder whether Carter was confronted by the bankers: Reagan sure the heck was- that's where we got the start of the "thousand points lights," all the shit burning (via "de-regulation")...

NOTE: It matters little what the actual "event" was, or who was there or was "responsible," as the perpetual-growth-on-a-finite-planet premise was going to end in utter failure anyway."

THAT.....my friend.....is some Quantumly Cosmic Truthiness right there.

I'd give you a +1000 but I can't frack that.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 16:02 | 4023579 prains
prains's picture

1971 was the Fiscal Default for sure and what's followed for the last fourty years is the social, cultural and moral default. That fourty years of circling the drain is nearing it's end, whatever you want to call this latest Bukakkee theatre it's certainly another of the mounting cracks forming. The entire Syrian Bukakkee now makes so much more sense in light of this latest debacle. The entire raison d'etre for trying to start a war in Syria WAS TO AVOID this debacle. It's so much clearer now, these fucking pigs will kill anyone or start any war they can in order to protect themselves. What they absolutely DON'T want still is to be seen by the general population as the cause of any war. We at least have that going for us. There's still a tiny sense of shame amongst them that one day History will show they in fact were the evil doers. Most ZHers already now this but plausible deniability is still in play. Once that's gone, it's game on.....pack a bag

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:53 | 4023146 Meat Hammer
Meat Hammer's picture

"Economists believe that the key to economic prosperity is investing in the middle class"

You and they couldn't be more wrong.  People in the middle class got there by investing in themselves.  

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 16:09 | 4023655 Herd Redirectio...
Herd Redirection Committee's picture

Or rather, reinvesting profits in themselves.

One of the major differences between the American colonies and those in Latin America and elsewhere, was the amount of capital reinvested locally.  With Latin America, much more went back to the Old World (AFAIK).  Would be interesting if research has been done specifically in this area.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 16:37 | 4023727 bogdanlg
bogdanlg's picture

Man, I am tired of all you wannabe tinckle down economics proponents. A curse on your house and you will end up being the one looking straight into the monster's eye. You and all like you think you can grab that monster and pull yourself up and yet you don't see that's exactly the delusion that the 1% want you to believe. The vast majority on this board won't make it but will keep believing in this distorted concept of "freedom" until they die. Happy Delusion everyone!!!!

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 14:07 | 4023233 hawaiian waverider
hawaiian waverider's picture

your "investing" is called welfare and surprise- many of the recipients would rather sit at home and actually earn more than by working.  Accredited Times haha... accredited by who?  Your article you wrote says "force greedy corporations to hire more workers" sounds exactly like something Pelosi would say.  Hilarious. 

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 14:50 | 4023356 Seer
Seer's picture

"many of the recipients would rather sit at home and actually earn more than by working."

Banksters actually have their own "home away from home" (referred to as "the office").

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 14:34 | 4023314 darteaus
darteaus's picture

Yeah, because you can't have a middle class without opportuinties being designed, created and regulated by an all powerful federal government with tens of thousands of apparatchiks sending memos to and fro!

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:46 | 4022966 Canadian Dirtlump
Canadian Dirtlump's picture

sadly, this woman fits in with many of these mass shootings in one way. Mental illness. Specifically, you can bet your ass she was on some type of pharmaceutical poison. the litany of social welfare programs help buttress poverty rage, but the effects specifically of all these meds, especially coming off or going on can't be managed by money.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:55 | 4022977 hedgeless_horseman
hedgeless_horseman's picture

 

 

Sorry, but the cause simply cannot be the meds.

Pharmaceutical Manufacturing: Top Recipients

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:56 | 4022999 Yardfarmer
Yardfarmer's picture

a fine compendium of the authors of the "affordable" care act. how about one on the other cabal, the insurance companies.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:02 | 4023009 hedgeless_horseman
hedgeless_horseman's picture

 

 

Bribery is an act of giving money or gift giving that alters the behavior of the recipient. Bribery constitutes a crime and is defined by Black's Law Dictionary as the offering, giving, receiving, or soliciting of any item of value to influence the actions of an official or other person in charge of a public or legal duty.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bribery

"constitutes a crime"

lol

Stupid wikipedia.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:26 | 4023100 Anusocracy
Anusocracy's picture

So welfare constitutes bribery?

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:56 | 4023180 Meat Hammer
Meat Hammer's picture

I'll have those niggers voting Democrat for a hundred years.  Lyndon B. Johnson

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 16:12 | 4023665 Herd Redirectio...
Herd Redirection Committee's picture

LBJ, well, if organized crime wasn't in charge of the country before (I have some doubts), they definitely were with LBJ in the Oval Office! 

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:56 | 4023183 11b40
11b40's picture

Corporate welfare is the result of bribery.

The poor don't have much in the way of bribe money, or lobbyists.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 14:21 | 4023275 DOT
DOT's picture

Are you that stupid or is this some new kind of sarcasm?

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 16:02 | 4023643 Kirk2NCC1701
Kirk2NCC1701's picture

The way I read this chart:  I see the Top2 guys as the ones they 'bought' to "make things happen".

The rest were paid off to go along and convince their pals to do so also.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:53 | 4022993 Yardfarmer
Yardfarmer's picture

"mass shooting", not. mass shooters, yes.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:31 | 4023113 Rentier
Rentier's picture

0

MSM and other blame game clowns blaming it on postpartum depression, more like debt depression.  When I heard she was dental hygienist and saw her in video driving G37, one of two things either she has man(ruled that out after seeing picture = 60%+ chance she was single mom) that has money or she doesn't own a thing and lives beyond her means.  Loser in this is her child, so many child so few parents who are not losers.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:36 | 4023121 James_Cole
James_Cole's picture

G37 ~$300 / month, dental hygienist $55 - $90K / yr. 

http://www1.salary.com/CT/Bridgeport/dental-hygienist-salary.html

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:38 | 4023123 Jumbotron
Jumbotron's picture

"Deceased single mother with a $250,000 condo and an Infinity on a dental tech income of $73k.

What was her debt/income ratio?

When people have nothing to lose, they lose it."

 

Unreported Sugga Daddy(ies) income.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:45 | 4023131 James_Cole
James_Cole's picture

 

Deceased single mother with a $250,000 condo and an Infinity on a dental tech income of $73k.

 

That actually sounds very financially responsible. Payments on a $250k condo would be low, Infinity is cheap.

I know people who earn a bit more and live in $700k condos and drive BMW m equivalents, not to mention all the other trappings that go with. 

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:57 | 4023182 Jumbotron
Jumbotron's picture

I'm sorry....73,000 dollars for a car says EVERYTHING I need to know about her priorities.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 14:10 | 4023222 James_Cole
James_Cole's picture

says EVERYTHING I need to know about her priorities

Almost certainly she hadn't bought the car, the lease was probably 5000$ / yr at the high end and likely she could write some of that off. After tax that's what, ~8% of her income, probably less? Not unreasonable. 

The bit that's unreasonable is she chose a crappy Infinity when she could've got a much better car lol

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 14:40 | 4023327 Jumbotron
Jumbotron's picture

"Almost certainly she hadn't bought the car, the lease was probably 5000$ / yr at the high end and likely she could write some of that off. After tax that's what, ~8% of her income, probably less? Not unreasonable."

No it's not.  She's a perpetual rent slave.  And for a black woman no less.  You would think that amongst ANY people group it would black folk who cast a wary eye on ANYTHING that smacks of slavery.....particularly BANKING SLAVERY where it is ALL run by white folk.

Here's the deal.  Buy a beater all the while saving up that $5000 per year lease cost so you can buy outright a nice used Infinity.  Then....once again with the $5000 per year lease cost put that aside for repair expenses.  Then....except for tag, title and insurance cost and the cost of fuel....she OWNS that vehicle and a part of her life and destiny if and when it should break down.....not being a rent slave to a fucking bank.


Fri, 10/04/2013 - 15:02 | 4023390 James_Cole
James_Cole's picture

Here's the deal.  Buy a beater all the while saving up that $5000 per year lease cost so you can buy outright a nice used Infinity.  Then....once again with the $5000 per year lease cost put that aside for repair expenses.  Then....except for tag, title and insurance cost and the cost of fuel....she OWNS that vehicle and a part of her life and destiny if and when it should break down...

This actually a whole different debate, the lease vs. buy debate. If you're looking at a new luxury car, there's not much reason to buy it outright, by the time you drive off the lot its lost roughly as much value as the cost to lease it. So let's set that argument aside.

Lease a new car vs. buy an old one? Lots of pros and cons in each, from taxes to unexpected costs. Worth pointing out we actually don't know (at least I don't) whether she leased a new car or bought an old one. I figure since it makes so much more sense to lease a new one than buy an old one she'd of gone that route, but she may have done as you suggest. 

Anyway, we're not going to solve the lease vs. own debate in this thread so not worth going into. But absurd to write off a person's financial sense (someone who seemed to be doing OK in that regard) simply because they may have been leasing a $40k car.

We're not talking living in a mansion and buying a Bentley on 73k.  

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 15:09 | 4023437 Jumbotron
Jumbotron's picture

This actually a whole different debate, the lease vs. buy debate. If you're looking at a new luxury car, there's not much reason to buy it outright, by the time you drive off the lot its lost roughly as much value as the cost to lease it. So let's set that argument aside.

Sooooo......THIS is where the flipping house mentality came from.  "Hey never know when this eonomy is going to go to shit.  Fix that dog up and FLIP THAT BITCH !!!!

Who CARES....if the value of ANY CAR goes down.  EVERYTHING DIES AND ROTS !!!!  NOTHING CAN GO UP TO INFINITY.  The ONLY thing that can be added in perpetuity until you are laid in the ground are shackles and chains forged by the Powers That Be who spout utopian narratives that first enslave the mind and then the body and your bank account.

So...let's NOT set this argunent aside because it is PART and PARCEL to the WHOLE story.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 15:29 | 4023522 James_Cole
James_Cole's picture

Sooooo......THIS is where the flipping house mentality came from.  "Hey never know when this eonomy is going to go to shit.  Fix that dog up and FLIP THAT BITCH !!!!

It's pretty different with a car because most people don't stick with cars as long as they stick with a residence not to mention almost all cars lose value the longer you hold them whereas with a house the opposite is generally true. 

The fact that she had a 250k condo says a lot more to me about her financial sense. Obviously she could've got a mortgage on a much more expensive place, but chose not to (could've got a much more expensive car too, but that's a touchy subject haha). Also certain that the bank / realtor tried to talk her into buying a more expensive condo and she said no.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 14:56 | 4023378 Seer
Seer's picture

Where is it given that the CAR is/was $73k?

Need to brush up on your Emily Litella encore line.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 15:02 | 4023401 James_Cole
James_Cole's picture

Ha I missed that he was referring to the car, yeah the car isn't close to 73k, she was apparently earning 73k. 

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 15:04 | 4023411 Jumbotron
Jumbotron's picture

Well....Seer....it seems I was the one seeing things.  Mea Culpa.  Her income was 73,000 not her car.  Speed reading meets old age.

However....a new 2013 QX56 can go for 76,000.

Sooo....in the realm of possibility.

None the less.....good catch......my bad.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 15:41 | 4023576 Seer
Seer's picture

"However....a new 2013 QX56 can go for 76,000."

And was this in fact a new 2013 QX56 that this person had?

I drive a Toyota.  Given no other information one could also "conclude" that I drive a $76k vehicle! (http://www.cars.com/toyota/land-cruiser/2013/snapshot)  The FACT, however, is that the car that I drive (and own) is 23 years old and MAYBE worth $2k (in the used-car market).

Often what is in a name is just that, just the name...

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 15:57 | 4023622 Jumbotron
Jumbotron's picture

No.no.no.  You misunderstand.  A lame attempt at ACTING like I was trying to justify my mistake.  (Like facial acting on radio...it loses something in the translation.  Same with text.)

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 16:38 | 4023729 Herd Redirectio...
Herd Redirection Committee's picture

"ALL run by white folk."

Define'run by'.   And please define 'white folk'.  There is a racism policy here at ZH after all.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 14:17 | 4023263 quintago
quintago's picture

but the house is "good debt". Ha

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 16:12 | 4023664 Kirk2NCC1701
Kirk2NCC1701's picture

So WHY was it that FATAL FORCE had to be used on her, to get her car to stop?

No ACLU types out there, with moral/social outrage?  Or even average human beings who are equally outraged by the

  (a) Systematic Militarization of our LEAs, and

  (b) Systematic Desensitization to use of Overwhelming LEA Personnel, plus use of Murderous Force?

  (c) Police/Fascist state the US has become?

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:27 | 4022902 Keyser
Keyser's picture

Based on that chart, I am in the top 1%, although I hardly consider myself wealthy by any measure. 

So where do you draw the line between someone that is fiscally responsible, saves for the future, doesn't subscribe to the consumer based economy and the "greedy sociopath" you describe? A net worth of $500k, $1 million, $5 million? 

 

 

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:32 | 4022915 Herd Redirectio...
Herd Redirection Committee's picture

$1 billion, even.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:49 | 4022978 dontgoforit
dontgoforit's picture

Odd, but it looks like we qualify in all three categories.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 15:11 | 4023442 Seer
Seer's picture

"So where do you draw the line between someone that is fiscally responsible, saves for the future"

Unless one is "saving" it in a form that's not what is currently being manipulated one might not be all that responsible: perhaps in the eyes of those who want you to play the game, yes, as they want to have access to your "savings."

I SPEND for the future: Land; Tractor; Animals... (Water and Shelter secured)

I'm becoming less and less fond of the word "greedy."  Greed can motivate, it does not state actual outcome.  I see it more about being "excess," possession, and this calls into question sustainability.  The MOAR you have the MOAR energy to hold on to it: more tools can do more work, but they also require more and more maintenance.

If one doesn't "subscribe to the consumer based economy" then one is viewed by [that consumer] society as NOT being successful.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:27 | 4022897 yogibear
yogibear's picture

I know a couple. No matter how much they have it's not enough. They want it all (billions, trillions, infinite wealth and power).

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 15:15 | 4023467 Seer
Seer's picture

I recall repeated attempts to get my ex to understand this.  She wasn't a spend-thrift (and I'm highly thankful of that), it's just that she couldn't quite grasp the notion that one ought view things from the expense side FIRST: she was always in a hurry to "solve" financial pinches by looking to earn MOAR; I'd ask her how much more and she couldn't answer.  Oh, and I always made current financial info available (monthly).

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 15:36 | 4023558 guinnesslover
guinnesslover's picture

And Clinton was there name O.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 16:09 | 4023657 Weisshaupt
Weisshaupt's picture

No, I think Power hungry is different. A lot of people will make that first million, ten million, 100 million or whatever and be content, or at least far more interested in taking that wealth and doing differnt things with their lives.  The ones that make billions either made them so quickly they couldn't decide to quit soon enough, or they stay doing it not because of the money, because at a billion you should probably have enough ( not that like Obama I would think of telling you that with a gun pointed in your face) and they stay on because they want the power over the lives of others that the business gives them. 

 

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:23 | 4022886 Wave Maker
Wave Maker's picture

HR, so if the rich, having $1 billion, are too rich, should government then tax their wealth and redistribute it to everyone else?  They already paid more taxes than anyone else on their earnings.  Or are you saying the rich should be prohibited from making more, prohibited from investing their money in businesses that employ people?  That will really help.  You sound like a socialist.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:34 | 4022921 Herd Redirectio...
Herd Redirection Committee's picture

LOL, it should not go to the gov't.

The just thing is for that which is stolen to be returned to those it has been stolen from.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 14:30 | 4023304 Totentänzerlied
Totentänzerlied's picture

So let's return the North American continent to the Indians.

Or is there a statute of limitations on your curious definition of justice?

Who is going to organize this seizure of assets, divy up the loot, locate the victims, and reunite them with their property?

What if we cannot establish a chain of ownership?

How do you plan to return the oil - now in the form of atmospheric carbon etc. - which was stolen (per your definition) from various other countries? Maybe we can pay them in silver and gold, but who is "they"?

Do we have a way to return the lives that were stolen from all the people who were killed as collateral damage in this little game of debt-for-energy?

 

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 15:45 | 4023501 Seer
Seer's picture

I don't think that legislation is going to be the mechanism.  Isn't this what history tells us?

When I make statements they often are not of what I WANT, but of what I THINK (based on logical analysis) WILL happen.

Doesn't the Bible tell us who the owners are?  [Matthew 5:5; Psalm 37:11]  And, Mother Nature (physics) will dictate/force the realities of sustainability, whether anyone likes it or not.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:25 | 4022890 Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill's picture

Some yes,some not.Generalisations are dangerous.

I have a couple of clients that are like that.Mostly in the finacial field.

They are outnumbered by the ones that aren't.The ones that built real producing businesses.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:00 | 4023011 Bosch
Bosch's picture

She used her car as a weapon and tried to (& did) run over people.  She wasn't a victim. 

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 15:48 | 4023591 Seer
Seer's picture

So, you're the judge on this?  Can you provide everyone else with the transcripts?

Maybe you didn't think of this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudden_unintended_acceleration (yeah, </sarc>)

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 15:36 | 4023547 unununium
unununium's picture

Rich = $1 billion or more

Youd' be surprised what you can do with $100M these days.  Like not work again ever, nor anyone in your family.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 16:16 | 4023673 TheGardener
TheGardener's picture

All I see in that chart is paper wealth and promises thereof.

No PM`s or arable land and forests, what wealth ?

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 16:32 | 4023710 Kirk2NCC1701
Kirk2NCC1701's picture

Most Middle-Class people have the opportunity to become Affluent -- with a lot of effort and some luck.

The best book to read IMO, is "The Millionaire Next Door".  I still believe that IF they take it to heart and live by it, a young person can achieve a Net Worth (in today's Dollars) that ranges in the $5-15M.

The best place to start investing is in your Education: In a conventional and non-conventional education.  Having a durable world-view (Belief-system), and a stable and relatively healthy family environment are a foundation to character development and healthy psycho-emotional development.   Alas, fewer and fewer families offer either.

And plain (frikkin) "dumb luck" often makes a difference too, but we know that "Nature favors the prepared".

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 16:50 | 4023755 Herd Redirectio...
Herd Redirection Committee's picture

But how much will bread cost by then? 

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:14 | 4022852 spekulatn
spekulatn's picture

She could have been someone's daughter.

 

 

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:19 | 4022866 Jumbotron
Jumbotron's picture
"The Rich Hold Assets, The Poor Have Debt"

Not exactly true.  The poor have debt AND an iPhone and great health due to Obamacare.  Because after all.....the greatest asset of all is good health.....and...errr...a free iPhone.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:23 | 4022891 Skateboarder
Skateboarder's picture

Yes Jumbotron, Maslow's hierarchy of needs for the 21st century indeed puts the iPhone as the foundation of well-being.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:32 | 4022914 pods
pods's picture

No worries, they are currently working on including facebook likes into consumer sentiment.

pods

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:36 | 4022931 Skateboarder
Skateboarder's picture

'Consumer confidence' derived from # of likes.... that's the shit we've all been waiting for!

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:27 | 4023102 Harbanger
Harbanger's picture

Facebook, twitter, likes, dislikes, no. of followers, Everything is FAKE.  The same MSM perception manipulators are moving to social media.

"President Obama has nearly 19 million Twitter followers,
but 70%, or approximately 13 million of them, are fake or "inactive," according to a new analysis."

http://mashable.com/2012/08/24/obama-has-13-million-fake-twitter-followe...

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 14:41 | 4023334 pods
pods's picture

I wouldn't doubt it.  Why be honest in your own personal little Matrix.

Never been on FB, Twitter or any or the other "social media" sites.  No need really. If I want to be around stupid I can just go to walmart.

My wife showed me some postings of a neighbor.  When I read them I thought damn she has got it going on, but then realized it was far far from where they really live.

So I came to the conclusion of what those things are:

They are for real people to make up shit for their fake friends to make them feel better about their shitty little lives.

I see these people everywhere. Even in the midst of real life company and events they have to be clicking away on the phone telling their fake friends how much fun they are having.

Then come the accolades that they crave since they got their first trophy for almost hitting the ball off the tee.

Fuck it, my kids aren't growing up like that.  I take them fishing, for bluegills.  With worms and a bobber.  After reeling in the 8th or 9th bare hook they look at me upset and wonder how to catch them. I told them if they want to catch them, they have to learn how to do it.  It is called work. There are trophies though.  Big smiles when they are holding that little fish we adults take for granted by their side. Kids actually like learning and really accomplishing things though, if you give them the chance.

pods

 

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 14:56 | 4023376 Kobe Beef
Kobe Beef's picture

I bet those 13 million fake followers also voted multiple times in multiple precincts as well.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 14:01 | 4023205 Jumbotron
Jumbotron's picture

"Yes Jumbotron, Maslow's hierarchy of needs for the 21st century indeed puts the iPhone as the foundation of well-being."

Yes Skateboarder, that's precisely why I upgraded to an iPhone from my old Android phone.  I found out that if I rub my balls with the iPhone while sitting in the Lotus position that my Chakra lines right up and I maximize my Ki.

When I used to do that with my Android phone, a photo of my balls was instantly posted to my Google+ account and soon enough someone from the NSA would post back....

"Hey buddy....that's QUITE a pair !"

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 14:30 | 4023307 DOT
DOT's picture

Think of the stress she must have felt.

Don't Think, Feel.

It's no big deal.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 15:50 | 4023597 Seer
Seer's picture

Because there's only been one immaculate conception!

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:48 | 4022974 mickeyman
mickeyman's picture

She was Obama's secret mistress.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:29 | 4023109 Harbanger
Harbanger's picture

Impossible.  McCain still has Barry's nuts in his mouth.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:31 | 4023111 catacl1sm
catacl1sm's picture

Careful, that would make Reggi jealous.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:59 | 4023194 Meat Hammer
Meat Hammer's picture

Michelle's?

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:07 | 4022820 LawsofPhysics
LawsofPhysics's picture

But debt is money (in a mark to fantasy fiat world)!!!

The good news; We will all be billionaires!

The bad news; We will all be billionaires!

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:12 | 4022841 Seer
Seer's picture

Logged in to post the very same comment... as usual, you're all over it :-)

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:18 | 4022867 Skateboarder
Skateboarder's picture

Me 3P0, but with the order reversed, i.e. money is debt.

Cheers guys.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:07 | 4022821 NeedleDickTheBu...
NeedleDickTheBugFucker's picture

I thought debt was wealth?

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:12 | 4022823 Normalcy Bias
Normalcy Bias's picture

The Rich hold assets (including the debt of the poor), while the poor grovel for handouts in return for their votes. Lovely...

In happier news, Tongue-punching her fart box has confirmed heatlh benefits!
http://www.myfoxny.com/Story/23600644/pills-made-from-poop-cure-serious-... Film at eleven!" href="The Rich hold assets (including the debt of the poor), while the poor grovel for handouts in return for their votes. Lovely... In happier news, Tongue-punching her fart box has confirmed heatlh benefits! http://www.myfoxny.com/Story/23600644/pills-made-from-poop-cure-serious-... Film at eleven!" target="_blank">http://www.myfoxny.com/Story/23600644/pills-made-from-poop-cure-serious-...

Film at eleven!

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:13 | 4022845 Big Corked Boots
Big Corked Boots's picture

You missed an important data point there - the rich trade debt assets to politicians in return for effective handouts in the form of favorable legislation. The poor, meanwhile, still grovel, and give away thier votes for (false) hope and (spare) change.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:16 | 4022861 Normalcy Bias
Normalcy Bias's picture

Nope, didn't miss it at all. What you mentioned is obvious to most at this point. Apologies for the formatting clusterfuk above. I was trying to fix it.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 14:33 | 4023317 DOT
DOT's picture

Cash flow, Bitc................whuh, Fart box!

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:34 | 4022920 pods
pods's picture

Tossed salad is the best kind.

pods

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:15 | 4022830 firstdivision
Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:09 | 4022834 RaceToTheBottom
RaceToTheBottom's picture

After looking at the chart very hard, I have come to the conclusion that the issue is companies.  The rich have them and the poor don't.  They can just form companies and the issue is solved.....

 

Next?

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:18 | 4022862 LawsofPhysics
LawsofPhysics's picture

Well, the "Crips" and the "Bloods" tried to get a couple competing corporations started, but I don't think it's going too well.  Still waiting for the IPO.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:18 | 4023071 Lost My Shorts
Lost My Shorts's picture

Hey don't laugh.  Crips probably have a better PE than Twitter.  Just don't diss the CEO during the earnings call, or ask too many questions about the accounting.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 14:36 | 4023321 DOT
DOT's picture

Dude gets to have a nice ride cuz he lives with his grandma rent free.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:22 | 4022887 bogdanlg
bogdanlg's picture

Aaaa ... wouldn't that corporation be de facto the Government?

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:13 | 4022848 DOT
DOT's picture

Always wanted to work for those that could pay me. "marginal propensity to spend" is fuckin' nuts. Try selling an expensive product to some one who can't afford it.....and then you can just sit back and wait for those payments which will never come. Too boring.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:14 | 4022849 Inspector Bird
Inspector Bird's picture

This is not an informative story. The wealthy hold most of the debt in this nation. They do so because when they take on debt it is for productive purposes or asset accumulation. The poor take on debt to have 'stuff', which is a vicious cycle. Debt is a symptom, not a cause.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:23 | 4022883 Herd Redirectio...
Herd Redirection Committee's picture

They may hold the most debt, nominally, but they also have the largest nominal net equity position.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:13 | 4022850 Seer
Seer's picture

BUT!  Isn't this all measure in fiat terms?

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:15 | 4022851 NOTaREALmerican
NOTaREALmerican's picture

 

So, there are only two choices (?) :

1) The rich are slime bags but deserve what they've got because the poor are stupid and easily manipulated (survival of the fittest).

2) The rich are slime bags ripping off the poor and society needs to redistribute the loot downward.

Any other choices?   

 

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:29 | 4022896 Hongcha
Hongcha's picture

Simple-minded logic there NOTaREAL.  You clearly want the jungle to be Fair.  Would you elect a Politician who promised to do that for you, at someone's else's expense?  Sure you would.  And I was right there with you, a few decades back. 

What saved me was my overriding contempt for the hopeless stupidity of the majority.  So I stopped playing by the rules.

"One law for the lion and the ox is oppression" -- Wm. Blake.

The rich get there by edjumacating themselves in the laws of the jungle; by breaking rules when necessary; by delaying gratification; by accepting short-term sacrifice and pain for long-term appreciation; by choosing the security of cash over the bling of credit; by taking the occasional calculated risk.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:36 | 4022927 NOTaREALmerican
NOTaREALmerican's picture

Re: The rich get there by edjumacating themselves in the laws of the jungle; by breaking rules when necessary; by delaying gratification; by accepting short-term sacrifice and pain for long-term appreciation; by choosing the security of cash over the bling of credit; by taking the occasional calculated risk.

And by inheriting it. 

Re:  You clearly want the jungle to be Fair.

I don't want anything.  But society does have to answer that question.  Do you want a full blown jungle or something that at least attempts to level things out.

Society can try to level things out or revolutions can try to level things out.      Regardless, the dumbass get screwed and the sociopaths have an advantage.

The hardest thing for the Red and Blue Team people to comprehend seems to be cause-n-effect over time.   Over time,  wealth concentrate by inheritance.   So, over time, you can deal with it in a controlled way or wait for the sociopaths to get the revolution going.

Disclaimer:  I'll be dead before the revolution, so I could care less one-way-or-the-other.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:46 | 4022958 sansnobel
sansnobel's picture

So in other words they cheat more than the uneducated and then rig the game ie: "the Law" to ensure anyone else who might figure their game out and expose it for the fraud that it is does not have a way to better their own station in life without going into "debt" to the lords and ladies of society. It ends in revolution a' la 1793.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 14:58 | 4023387 DOT
DOT's picture

The idea of a ruling class that some how breeds so well that all of the progeny are skilled entrepenuers is too funny.

I remember (dimly) the oleo fortune heir and his air bourne crazies back in the 70s

-broke in about 14 mos. The money was just burned-up. Literally.

I have encountered numerous 'born well off' and found them as a group no different, than those 'born with-out hope', in their ability to think. If an open and un-coerced market place exists Human Nature will even the balance.

 

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 14:27 | 4023292 darteaus
darteaus's picture

Occu-pawn.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:16 | 4022854 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture

Very good. Very, very good.

There's a lot of acceptance of the "fake it 'till you make it" credo in USSA right now.

I notice that clients who feel compelled to borrow fiat in order to acquire tangible symbols of wealth, to impress or attempt to impress a similarly minded group of imbeciles known as their peers, are by far the most likely to go completely bust, also.

Nearly without exception, the most genuinely wealthy clients are so stealth like, they don't even show up as a blip on the radar screen.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:28 | 4022907 Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill's picture

You've got it.

I have one billionaire client that keeps a very low profile.

Nothing overly ostentatious at all from the outside.

The billionaire next door.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 14:41 | 4023332 robertocarlos
robertocarlos's picture

So what good is the money then? Does he spend it on hookers and blow?

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:15 | 4022856 edifice
edifice's picture

Being poor is mostly due to a lack of education.  There basically is no financial education taught in schools, so no one even knows the basics of what money is, or how to manage it.  One can argue at length about why this is, but it's beyond the scope of this post.

I know a guy, let's call him Jason, who fits the very mold of being poor.  His income is sporadic, he is married with kids, is on Section 8, SNAP, TANF, etc.  Whenever the guy has an extra dime that isn't state-provided, he spends it.  When I recommend possibly putting it away for a rainy day (and so he doesn't have to stay on government assistance), he poo-poos the idea saying, "But I want X and am buying X with this money."

I've deduced that it is a confidence or "feel-good" trap:  Since he's not successful, he consumes to make himself feel more successful or better about himself, no matter how fleeting the feeling.  This is because he doesn't know any better.  And yes, I'm aware that, in the current situation the world finds itself, "making it" is much more difficult; but it can be done, with some pretty simple education and lifestyle choices.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:19 | 4022869 NOTaREALmerican
NOTaREALmerican's picture

Re:  There basically is no financial education taught in schools, so no one even knows the basics of what money is, or how to manage it.

What about the people who are below average and will always be fodder for the people who are smarter than they are.

You can lead a dumbass to knowledge, but you can't make him think.  

What does society do with the dumbasses?    Allow the smart-n-savvy to eat them alive?   

Perhaps the US society like to watch the dumbasses being eaten alive?

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:23 | 4022885 edifice
edifice's picture

Of course, there will always be people (and I suspect Jason is one of them) who, no matter how much education you provide to them, are not in a mental state to receive or use it.  But, when there is no education provided, period, it becomes a different argument.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:38 | 4022937 hardcleareye
hardcleareye's picture

I have often wondered if the lack of eduction you speak of is a "oversight" or one designed with intent......

And it extends to those who have the eduction basis to understand the fundamental core issues....  referred to as "willful ignorance"...

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:42 | 4022946 Herd Redirectio...
Herd Redirection Committee's picture

Its not a bug, its a feature!

Now that thats out of the way, kids in America 100 years ago were raised in the 'schoolhouse', whereas kids these days are raised in the 'class room'.  Used to be kids aged 9-16 all in the same room.  The older kids were supposed to help with teaching the younger kids, as well as being role models for them (hence why an older child would get punished for misbehaving).

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:45 | 4022961 the grateful un...
the grateful unemployed's picture

consciousness is the process of willful ignorance, the reduction of outside and conflicting stimulus to a very few in a controlled environment. that some of these things actually work in the empirical world has fooled human kind into thinking they have the answer

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:00 | 4023014 hardcleareye
hardcleareye's picture

Cognitive Dissonance?

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 14:37 | 4023322 the grateful un...
the grateful unemployed's picture

modern man somehow came up with the idea that he has an unconscious mind. that is really silly if you think about. if its unconscious why are we talking about it?

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 16:56 | 4023770 Herd Redirectio...
Herd Redirection Committee's picture

Subconscious.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:58 | 4023008 shovelhead
shovelhead's picture

Being stupid, willful or otherwise, has a cost.

It's a luxury most can't afford, so they do something about it.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:08 | 4023039 hardcleareye
hardcleareye's picture

Hmmmm...  looking at our financial systems, schools, government would lead one to believe that the electorate/society as a whole..... is being "willfully stupid". I do not see people (myself included...) doing anything effective about correcting and addressing the issues.....

Why are we all so complicit?

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:42 | 4022945 the grateful un...
the grateful unemployed's picture

education only prepares you to work for the ruling class, the Bushes and Kerrys were C students, now they hire the A students to work for them. learning math and science is drudgery, better left to the lower classes (India pumps out civil engineers the way we flip burgers) enterpreneurs make their money by using, or misuing existing technology developed by someone else usually. most innovations arise by doing something with a technology or a math equation or scientific priniciple which the academics say can't be done. [and most really great inventions are the result of improvements in low technology processes, such as mining and refining uranium. once you get it down to fissionable material even a monkey can make it go bang]

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:49 | 4022972 Herd Redirectio...
Herd Redirection Committee's picture

Basically, the elite know how to 'scale up' and get their cut in the process.  Youtube, Google, Justin Bieber, etc.

Otherwise, though, they are good at looting. LBO, taking over a company and loading it up with debt, the usual cronyism, no bid gov't contracts...

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 12:46 | 4022959 NOTaREALmerican
NOTaREALmerican's picture

Re:   But, when there is no education provided, period, it becomes a different argument.

I agree.   But,  being one of the 50% who are below average is also "a different argument".

50% of the people are above the bottom 50%.

How do the bottom 50% compete with the top 50%?   

You can educate the bottom 50% all you want.   The top 50% will have the brain-power to screw the bottom 50% in a fair fight.  In a unfair fight, the bottom 50% is nothing but food for the top 50%.  

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 13:09 | 4023047 shovelhead
shovelhead's picture

That may be,  but it doesn't seem to keep the left hand side of the Bell Curve breeding beyond the limits of their meagre resources.

Apparently they have adopted a mosquito approach to survival.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 14:24 | 4023281 darteaus
darteaus's picture

How do the bottom 50% compete with the top 50%?

By getting a job and showing up everyday with a good attitude!

Copy what ambitious immigrants have done to move into the middle class for the last 150 years:

Save your money.  Don't buy stuff that goes down in value.  Don't commit crimes.  Work extra.  Take some classes at night school.  Improve your job skills.  Get a good attitude-it's free!  Keep working.  Buy the worst house in the best neighborhood, fix it up, move up to the worst house in a better neighborhood.  Don't waste your money on cars, clothes, TVs, etc.  Don't bet all your money on one thing-house, stock, 401K, etc.  Be the first in and the last out.  Work harder than everyone else.

That will put you into the middle class!

Be patient!

Out work the one's you can't out think, and out think the one's you can't outwork.  Will you be #1?  Probably not, but you will be in the middle class.

Fri, 10/04/2013 - 15:10 | 4023443 DOT
DOT's picture

Correct. Do something that works then add to it as you can.

Win.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!