>Seems like a very small amount of evidence to base such a large idea on.
I acknowledge this. Keep in mind though that in economics it is extremely difficult to comprehensively analyze all the data relevant to your stated hypothesis. Gates points out several areas where Piketty's data falls short, and the amount of data Piketty collected and analyzed for his book is considered one of the strongest points of his thesis.
>This is important, because wealth in the modern US does sustain itself. Quite heavily, even.
Are you talking about Google, Apple, Walmart, etc, or financiers on Wall Street? Or could you expand in general on this? The companies I listed invest heavily in R&D (creating jobs and a better product for the consumer, and sustaining their wealth in the process). Aside from Warren Buffett, I'm under the impression most wealthy individuals in the financial services industry fail to maintain their wealth for the long term, although I don't have any specific examples on hand to support that point. Aside from this, if modern wealth sustains itself through natural processes, then great! We should be looking for ways to make other people just as wealthy, not figuring out ways to tear down those who have been successful.
I think some of Gates criticisms fall in the arm chair category of criticisms on this, honestly. (And to be fair, I know mine do.) I have no desire to silence any of them, and I am excited about seeing them debated. But, I am fairly skeptical about how good they are.
I am genuinely interested in any discussions on this. Though, I will probably duck out of it soon, as it is beyond me. Please keep it going.
Regarding the investments, I am really talking about individual investors more than the companies. Find me someone with a couple hundred k in investments, and I posit you have found someone that will remain wealthy for some time. Probably long enough to pass it on to their children. Find me someone with a million in investments, and I am even more sure. More, they are in a position to make it so that most dollars they spend directly relate to some more dollars they will make.
I believe you are correct, historically. However, in recent times the wealthy are more and more made up from people that invested well. Pretty much period.
Consider your average home buyer. (Well, scratch that, consider your average successful home buyer.) The banks and lenders gain more from the purchase than the purchaser does. By a pretty large margin. If we look at the ones that go bust, this is even more true.
I agree that we don't need to tear down successful folk. I'm just not sure I've heard any plans that successfully help the less successful ones.
>I think some of Gates criticisms fall in the arm chair category of criticisms on this, honestly. (And to be fair, I know mine do.) I have no desire to silence any of them, and I am excited about seeing them debated. But, I am fairly skeptical about how good they are.
Mine as well, and neither of us have time to compile the data that Piketty has done. Appreciate your thoughtful criticisms.
I acknowledge this. Keep in mind though that in economics it is extremely difficult to comprehensively analyze all the data relevant to your stated hypothesis. Gates points out several areas where Piketty's data falls short, and the amount of data Piketty collected and analyzed for his book is considered one of the strongest points of his thesis.
>This is important, because wealth in the modern US does sustain itself. Quite heavily, even.
Are you talking about Google, Apple, Walmart, etc, or financiers on Wall Street? Or could you expand in general on this? The companies I listed invest heavily in R&D (creating jobs and a better product for the consumer, and sustaining their wealth in the process). Aside from Warren Buffett, I'm under the impression most wealthy individuals in the financial services industry fail to maintain their wealth for the long term, although I don't have any specific examples on hand to support that point. Aside from this, if modern wealth sustains itself through natural processes, then great! We should be looking for ways to make other people just as wealthy, not figuring out ways to tear down those who have been successful.