RE: Some people cannot understand economics of scale. Bernie is one of those people. #freethemarket
Wealth disparity is a non-issue in itself. The more important issue is whether or not the middle and lower classes are improving or getting worse.
A CEO doesn't NEED to make enough to buy a small country but if the net effect on everybody else is nil (which would seem to be the case based on basic numbers), then it's irrelevant. If there is a problem with jobs or income with the average person, it has nothing to do with CEO salary. That's kind of the point of the OP and exactly the type of argument the OP is addressing.
As far as the statistics, the basic numbers are pretty clear. For the time being, more people are employed by small businesses than by large corporations (though it's nearly a 50/50 split). It's true that large corporations are always buying up smaller companies and consolidating but it is also true that new small businesses are created every day. If you have some better statistics I would love to see them. I don't consider "How the world looks to you" to be a very reliable source either unless you can back that up with some specifics. I can look around my town at small business vs. large corporations and the 50/50 split looks about right to me.
50/50 split, so 0 gov. Jobs?
If wealth disparity is a non issue why did it accelerate so much in the last 10 years in the us? How do increasingly super rich individuals living amongst an increasingly poor population benefit the overall population? Is an accelerating wealth gap a sign of a healthy ecOnomy & society? How does that work over time? Do the haves at some point decide to help out the little guys?
Bezos has 150 billion, would it make a difference if we added several zeros to that #? Or make the people he shares the city with half as wealthy (what’s 1/2 of a negative)? That’s where the trend has obviously been heading & accelerating with inflation. The fake resources are being hoarded in the hands of the gov supported few & have been for a very long time. The symptoms will get worse before they get better.
50/50 split meaning the number of people employed by large corporations is almost as much as the number employed my smaller businesses. The U.S. Federal government employs approximately 2% of the workforce.
The wealth gap isn't an issue if everybody is getting richer. It doesn't matter that the rich get richer faster. That was my point. The "poor" now are far better off than the "poor" of 100 years ago for example. Wealth disparity itself is a meaningless statistic. Bezos getting richer doesn't matter. If everybody else was getting poorer, it would. However, this isn't a zero-sum game. The pie is always growing. One person getting richer doesn't mean someone else has to be getting poorer.
“The "poor" now are far better off than the "poor" of 100 years ago for example.”
How do you define better off?
Speaking economically. Living in greater comfort, have more luxury items, are better off nutritionally, etc. The percentage of people living below the poverty level (a somewhat arbitrary designation anyway) hasn't varied by more than a few percentage points in decades but the standard of living has gone up, even for those at or below the poverty level.