Is Corporate Greed Causing Inflation?

bobzilla said:

Duke said:

In reply to GameboyRMH :

The whole bit about no one being worth more than $300,000 a year lies pretty solidly in the realm of "feelings".

and lets not forget the absolutely made up 91% figures thrown out, the all women make less than men, housing prices, income related to housing etc that I debunked time and again. But sure... BESIDES ignoring all of those things he's right in the "facts".

Let's address each of these. 91% is not made up, you can see the pretty sharp divide between bottom-90% income and that above it here:

On housing prices and income vs. housing, yes you've shown that if you shop around very carefully you can indeed find a '70s-sized house for inflation-adjusted '70s-house money in certain areas. The issue is that those are the screaming deals you can find with today's modern search tools and the assumption that you're ready and willing to move across the country, in the '70s those kinds of prices were just a totally average house purchase, which was likely not a long-distance one either. Not the same thing. The averages aren't lying.

Gender wage gap, totally a real thing. I only mentioned it as example of a very well-documented form of economic injustice. If the gap happens to match the time women take on average for maternity leave, then women who don't take maternity leave are still getting shortchanged throughout their entire careers for something they potentially could have done at some point (but didn't). And underpaying women throughout their whole careers to compensate for any maternity leave they could potentially take kind of defies the point of it anyway.

https://iwpr.org/new-report-women-earn-less-than-men-in-all-occupations-even-ones-commonly-held-by-women/

On the topic of the idea that there's a problem with people making more than $300k, or whatever the maximum people tend to get paid for doing most any form of knowledge work outside of upper management these days is, I was looking it as an issue that can be spotted through trend analysis on the data rather than one that just feels bad. You can graph out top incomes rising abnormally over time and spot those that aren't following the trend of the lower 90%. And what is it that changed about those top jobs over time that made their value rise so sharply in comparison? Something that didn't change about all the other jobs?

In reply to budget_bandit :

Go to your dashboard and remove it from your watch list.

Then stop clicking the link. 

In reply to GameboyRMH :

Your ability to converse with walls about the same topics that appear over and over on this forum every few months astounds me. 

Speaking from the people I know personally, which is a small sample size. A lot of that "money that doesn't make a difference" that they get paid, over and above what you deem to be a reasonable amount makes a very big difference that you don't see.

Lots of things happen with no credit being taken because they're private people and they don't want neverending lines of charities with their hand out, looking for something.

One guy I know bankrolls an addiction recovery center for men.

Another built a new wing for a local music school, funds a kids camp and helps to fund two other addiction recovery centers, one for women and one for men.

The last guy who is probably the wealthiest I've ever met donated a new wing at a local children's hospice and I'm sure there's way more stuff I don't know about because, he's a very private person. Heck, it took me three years to get the guy to laugh out loud.

I've only met a few but the wealthy people I have met seem to give back more than I ever could. 

I don't doubt there are people who are only in it for themselves but I bet numbers are pretty small.

In reply to GameboyRMH :

So how does the top 9% of incomes on the chart compare to the change in value of the stock market?

Are the top incomes rising at the same rate as the market, or is stock value increasing a higher or lower rate than their salary increase?

Are those salaries increasing at the same rate as their productivity (the increase in stock value)?

I did my best to direct this to pie.

Seacrest out!

How Foreign Purchases of U.S. Homes Impact Prices and Supply I was working a project with a bank manager that handled most of the loan transactions and he was talking about how a lot of the land in a very small city in PA was being bought by foreign investors based out of San Francisco. He said that in the small talk with them that they were doing so because it was incredibly cheap, the local government doesn't care if it's abandoned or a eyesore, as long as they collect taxes it's fine, and alot of areas with the tax deferment/opportunity zones. Then they would turn around and sell it for 3 or 4 times more. Lastly some of them have oil and gas rights which they can retain even after the sale of the property.

Ok, I was outside weeding my onions this morning and thinking. I like working outside, it gives me time to slow down and think.

Gameboy, I know this thread has become about you and you didn't want it to, sorry about that.

Everyone on here wants you to succeed, we're all on the same path, some are just further along than others.

I think we can all agree, the system isn't fair. It never will be though and pointing it out over and over won't change anything.

I know you said you aren't invested in the stock market but actually, you are. The Canada Pension Plan has been under active management (and badly) since the 90's. The government invests the money they take from you every month on your behalf and they do very badly at it.

Perhaps you should consider learning to use the system we have to your benefit and start investing.

There are minimal risk investments you can get into which will give you a tasty return that beats inflation and sure as hell beat keeping money in the bank or letting the government do what they think is best for you.

Things like Robinhood and Wealthsimple let you manage your money for almost free and with a little research you can do well. 

You're in Canada but there are funds you can buy that play on the US stock markets, are lower risk and because you're involved through a fund manager, there's no excess paperwork to manage.

An RRSP and a TFSA are incredibly powerful investing tools if you use them correctly.

Generating passive income is the only way to make money while you sleep.

You can do it in realestate (out of reach for most of us), stocks, ETF's, REIT's or private lending.

You have enough money to go motorsporting so clearly you have enough money to be putting away a little bit for a rainy day.

I have nothing to gain from this except that I want you to succeed, I'm sure others do too and there's people way smarter than I am on here who are doing the same things.

Use the system to your advantage. The same opportunities exist for everyone.

I know the system isn't fair, I've been at a negative income for the last three years but stuff is starting to come around for our business and hopefully I'll be back to making money again soon. That's the nature of starting a business. At least when you work for someone else there's a guaranteed cheque every month, just for showing up.

Fueled by Caffeine said:

I did my best to direct this to pie.

Seacrest out!

Pie!!

In reply to GameboyRMH :

I know I sound like a broken record, but you keep doing the same thing over and over again. Your "research" consists entirely of highly biased sources that appear to start with a conclusion then work backwards to cherry pick data to support it. If that's not enough, they present the data in a misleading manner to lead you to a conclusion. And you fall for it every time, because you are doing the same thing. 
 

Look at your source. If it's too close to the flame, maybe cross check others and find something more neutral. 
 

Your graph above was produced by the EPI. They aren't shy about who they are and what they believe. From their website...

EPI provides visionary solutions and leadership.  EPI was the first—and remains the premier—think tank to focus on the economic condition of low- and middle-income Americans and their families. EPI shapes public policy on the federal and state level through compelling research and innovative ideas. We are recognized as national leaders on breakthrough liberal economic policies. Our encyclopedic State of Working America, published 12 times since 1988, and in complete electronic form as well, is stocked in university libraries around the world. In the 1990s EPI researchers were the first to illustrate the decoupling of productivity and pay in the U.S. economy, a trend now widely recognized as a key element of growing economic inequality. EPI changed the nature of public debates over international trade agreements by underscoring their effects on workers and the importance of putting enforceable labor standards in trade agreements.

If you search wage inequity, you will find many of their articles at the top of the results, because that's what they do. On the graph itself, it's almost meaningless unless the terms are defined. For example, what is an annual wage? Total compensation? If so, what influence does being paid with stock have on the graph? Who is included? All people that make money, or just employees? Are professional athletes and movie stars included? We can also ask, is it surprising that wages rose faster for the top 10% of earners? But what really makes me suspicious- they lumped the "bottom" 90% in the same bracket, averaged to 28.7%. That makes it easy to push that it's us Vs. them. I'd expect the top 80-90 percent is quite different than the bottom 10%, and that this graph should have a pretty consistent fan shape if you broke out each 10%. Add that people jump from line to line over 40 years, and it tells a very different story. 
 

Your article about the gender pay gap was written by The Institute for Women's Policy Research. It would be fair to ask the question of if or how bias has affected the results or presentation of their research. Women do make less than men in many instances. But if you stop there, you are missing the meat of the story. Women often make different career choices then men, which accounts for the difference in pay. They don't often choose physically dangerous (high pay) careers. When they do choose the same career paths as men, they more frequently chose employment that prioritizes flexibility and less hours over higher pay. Comparing like for like, there is no appreciable difference between men and women's pay. 
 

And yes, there have been big changes at the top and bottom that explain much of the delta in wage growth, even in your misrepresented model. The top jobs in 2020 are not the same as they were in 1980. The competition for talent at the top is much greater than at the bottom. Supply and demand. Add in automation that has made less and less jobs at the bottom necessary and easier to do. It's not a conspiricy, it's just math. 

I propose that future replies in this thread be limited to one ( 1 ) word in length.   Further, that the pool of acceptable one word replies be selected from the following set { Yes, Pie, No }.  No other replies should be allowed.

Pie is good, but...

In reply to 1988RedT2 :

Can we use pictures?

In the finger lakes region of ny. They make a grape pie. (Lots of grape juice grapes grown around there)

I am not a fan. But it is a thing.  
 

https://www.visitfingerlakes.com/blog/post/naples-grape-pie/

Fueled by Caffeine said:

In the finger lakes region of ny. They make a grape pie. (Lots of grape juice grapes grown around there)  I am not a fan. But it is a thing. 

I forget if it was high school or college, but one of the cafeterias used to make fruit cocktail pie.  This stuff:

...with some kind of thickener for the syrup.  Baked in a pie crust.

In reply to RX Reven' :

That kind of looks like a Fuchs or Cragar S/S wheel.

Cake is better than pie. Fight me. 

In reply to Toyman! :

Yes!

goth lasagna ftw

Sweet potato pie

Pecan pie.

barefootcyborg5000 said:

Cake is better than pie.

No.

barefootcyborg5000 said:

Cake is better than pie. Fight me. 

If it's carrot cake with cream cheese icing then yes.