• Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    1 day ago

    Not really complete. We did not shift the wealth from young to old. The old have money, because in their time, they still participated in the wealth they generated.

    Nowadays most of the generated wealth goes to the wealthy, not to those who generated it. This hits both old and young.

    The money that the youth is lacking went to the rich, not to the old.

    • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      The old have money, because in their time, they still participated had opportunities to participate

      Fixed it for you.

      Nowadays most of the generated wealth goes to the wealthy, not to those who generated it.

      🧑🏻‍🚀🔫🧑🏻‍🚀

      This hits both old and young.

      But the vast majority of the rich are old, and the vast majority of the young are poor.

      The money that the youth is lacking went to the rich, not to the old.

      Again, the rich are mostly the old.

      Far from all old people are rich, but the vast majority of rich people are old and/or have inherited wealth.

      • Xtallll@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        1 day ago

        The vast majority of the old are poor also. And the vast majority of the Rich would fit in a moderate concert venue.

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 day ago

          Fact is that my generation, Millennials, are the first generation since the 1930s to grow up economically worse off than our parents and it’s only gotten WORSE for the following generations.

          To the point that Boomer/Gen X middle of the middle class is rich by Millennial/Gen Z standards and will be considered economically obese by the time Gen A become adults.

          • Bubbaonthebeach@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            Which may represent reverting to the norm of history where very few were rich and everyone else was a peasant. If you want to change this look to the governments after the Depression and World wars. What did they do? High taxation for real public good.

    • boonhet@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      The old and the rich are the same. People over 55 own 52% of the US which is one of the best examples of inequality. Boomers all together own 8x more than billionaires. Any old person with a decent 401k or otherwise stock/index fund based retirement is one of the shareholders living off the working class.

      After the billionaires are guillotined or otherwise disposed of, there would still be terrible inequality that needs to be taken care of. Put simply, the billionaires alone don’t have enough assets to fix this.

      • Treczoks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 day ago

        Some few of the people over 55 own 52% of the US.

        You are trying to shift the blame from the rich to the pensioner.

        • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          "The son of the worker, on entering life, finds no field which he may till, no machine which he may tend, no mine in which he may dig, without accepting to leave a great part of what he will produce to a master. He must sell his labour for a scant and uncertain wage. His father and his grandfather have toiled to drain this field, to build this mill, to perfect this machine. They gave to the work the full measure of their strength, and what more could they give? But their heir comes into the world poorer than the lowest savage. If he obtains leave to till the fields, it is on condition of surrendering a quarter of the produce to his master, and another quarter to the government and the middlemen. And this tax, levied upon him by the State, the capitalist, the lord of the manor, and the middleman, is always increasing; it rarely leaves him the power to improve his system of culture. If he turns to industry, he is allowed to work–though not always even that --only on condition that he yield a half or two-thirds of the product to him whom the land recognizes as the owner of the machine.

          We cry shame on the feudal baron who forbade the peasant to turn a clod of earth unless he surrendered to his lord a fourth of his crop. We call those the barbarous times. But if the forms have changed, the relations have remained the same, and the worker is forced, under the name of free contract, to accept feudal obligations. For, turn where he will, he can find no better conditions. Everything has become private property, and he must accept, or die of hunger." - Peter Kropotkin (The conquest of bread)