Broad Oak: your emotional support animal

Sunday, April 15, 2012

Is there a limit to wealth inequality?

What would happen if one person in the USA finally owned ALL its wealth?

Not possible, I suppose, because two of the three functions of money would be impossible: there would be nothing to act as a medium of exchange, or as a unit of account, until the omni-owner started to spend. And why would he spend? He would already own everything. Having no property, everyone else would be a slave.

So what is the theoretical maximum degree of financial inequality? And how close are we to that point?



Is this why the stockmarkets are stalling - there's not much wealth left to transfer to the upper crust, and what there is, the middle class are desperate to hang onto? Is that why, according to Tyler Durden, there's $8.1 trillion in cash holding off from investment - the rich won't put it back in unless they can pull out again at a profit, and the rest don't want to fall for the trick?

3 comments:

The Arthurian said...

This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang but a whimper.

Paddington said...

At some point, the measure of 'wealth' will not be money and stocks - perhaps guns and goats.

Sackerson said...

How do you fire a goat?