The American Dream

**BrilloPad** · 21 August 2012, 09:08

Good find.

I liked this bit :-

"In fact, when we did this experiment another way and we showed people two distributions of wealth, one based on the wealth distribution in the US and the other based on the wealth distribution that is more equal than Sweden, 92% of Americans picked the improved Swedish distribution."

Interesting as it must include some of the top 20% who own 84%.

I have another worry besides fairness. If too much money is concentrated in the hands of a few it does not circulate.

**BolshieBastard** · 21 August 2012, 09:21

Although the article doesnt clarify it, I'd suggest they and anyone doing this sort of research will get slewed results. Why? Because if only 20% of a population owns upwards of 80% of the wealth, most of the people taking part in the research will be from outside the top 20%.

The original article doesnt give any indication (or one that I can determine) which 'wealth bracket' they fall into. Its very likely that in this example none of the respondents were in the top 20%.

**sasguru** · 21 August 2012, 09:26

Originally posted by BolshieBastard View Post

Although the article doesnt clarify it, I'd suggest they and anyone doing this sort of research will get slewed results. Why? Because if only 20% of a population owns upwards of 80% of the wealth, most of the people taking part in the research will be from outside the top 20%.

The original article doesnt give any indication (or one that I can determine) which 'wealth bracket' they fall into. Its very likely that in this example none of the respondents were in the top 20%.

My thoughts exactly. Without knowing how the sample of the population was selected and what the response mechanism was (e.g. if they had to respond to a survey, only individuals with an axe to grind might reply), it's impossible to draw any conclusions whatsoever.

**Ignis Fatuus** · 21 August 2012, 09:45

Originally posted by BrilloPad View Post

Good find.

I liked this bit :-

"In fact, when we did this experiment another way and we showed people two distributions of wealth, one based on the wealth distribution in the US and the other based on the wealth distribution that is more equal than Sweden, 92% of Americans picked the improved Swedish distribution."

Interesting as it must include some of the top 20% who own 84%.

Well, yes, it would. Remember that people were not asked what kind of wealth distribution they would like, they were asked what kind of wealth distribution they would be prepared to enter at a random point.

Wealthy people might like the current highly skewed distribution as long as they can stay in the wealthy bit, but if they didn't get to choose which part of the wealth distribution they were going to be in, they'd choose a much "fairer" one.

**IR35 Avoider** · 21 August 2012, 09:55

So people don't think a professors of Economics from Harvard and Duke know how to conduct a unbiased (as possible) survey?

People seem to doubt the outcome. Did everyone miss that the question asked was what people would choose if they did not know (had no control over) if they were going to end up in the rich or poor group?

Of course you're going to choose the most redistributionist scenario, if you really take into account the premise of the question.

**Robinho** · 21 August 2012, 10:29

Equal opportunity is all that matters.

Beyond that the free market should determine equality. It tends to make everyone richer to different degrees. Instead of making everyone equally poor.

**BlasterBates** · 21 August 2012, 11:16

But the Swedish model means as a middle earner you get taxed until your balls squeak, so to speak. Now people might in principle want a more even distribution but are you going to vote for a government who are going to "make your balls squeak".

no ...hence it won't happen.

**sasguru** · 21 August 2012, 11:23

Originally posted by Robinho View Post

Equal opportunity is all that matters.

Beyond that the free market should determine equality. It tends to make everyone richer to different degrees. Instead of making everyone equally poor.

You're beginning to sound as much of an ideologue as Dodgy.
Sadly it isn't true.
The most free market economies in the Western world, the US and UK are mired in debt and falling living standards for the forseeable future. Youth unemployment is huge and the next generation will almost certainly be much poorer than than their elders.
It is unfortunate when facts get in the way of ideology but I tend to trust facts.
HTH.

**Robinho** · 21 August 2012, 11:38

Originally posted by sasguru View Post

You're beginning to sound as much of an ideologue as Dodgy.
Sadly it isn't true.
The most free market economies in the Western world, the US and UK are mired in debt and falling living standards for the forseeable future. Youth unemployment is huge and the next generation will almost certainly be much poorer than than their elders.
It is unfortunate when facts get in the way of ideology but I tend to trust facts.
HTH.

Thanks to government the UK and the US is mired in debt. Youth unemployment again, is huge, thanks to government. So yeah, try not to be such a condescending ignoramus in the future.

In spite of this the US is the richest country in the world (ignoring all the microstates and oil barons) and has been at times in its recent past without a government created deficit problems. So that kind of pisses on your point anyway.

The American Dream