patrick.net

Just to be clear the GINI index is rubbish because they don't show government transfers as income, which they most certainly are.

I have linked to the facts of this in the past and will not bother at this point.

tatupu70 says: "Actually, Yes. When you used google, it picked a random place that it considers "San Francisco". The 1hr 4 minutes is how long it takes to get to that point--including walking and a transfer. "

That's great if you work in the train station. Nobody works in the train station. So yes, 1hr 4 mins by public transit. And thank you for agreeing that what I posted matched what I said.

Zak says

That's great if you work in the train station. Nobody works in the train station. So yes, 1hr 4 mins by public transit. And thank you for agreeing that what I posted matched what I said.

lol--So, downtown SF is only one specific location then? My guess is more people work in the train station then at the "San Francisco" dot that you are using.

You are 100% incorrect. Give it up. When people speak of "downtown" SF, they aren't talking about one location that google selects...

The fallacies of the Gini index:

The most common definition of income used by the Census Bureau and other statistical agencies is total money income of a household, excluding capital gains. All of the members of a household are assumed to share in the household’s combined income.

Household income includes wages, salaries, interest, dividends, alimony payments, child support, Social Security payments, and any other cash transfers. It doesn’t include food stamps, Medicare, or other non-cash benefits

A major gap in the measurement of income inequality is the exclusion of capital gains, profits made on increases in the value of investments. Capital gains are excluded for purely practical reasons. The Census doesn’t ask about them, so they can’t be included in inequality statistics

The United States scores worse mainly because Social Security, unemployment insurance, and other cash benefits in the United States contribute much less to income than comparable programs in other countries.

- See more at: http://inequality.org/unequal-americas-income-distribution/#sthash.YMbFD4h1.dpuf

So Buffet would be greatly affected in his standard of living if he was not bailed out by the taxpayer. He also does not pay taxes on his investments which are the vast majority of wealth. Which greatly skews the index.

Government transfers to the poor do not count as income which greatly skews the index.

How much better would social security income be if the individual was allowed to keep and invest the 12.4%?

Another factor is the household income number. Which does not account, for a huge increase in divorce which cuts the household income in half. It also does not account, for the fact that in many successful households, there are multiple high income sources. Like in Asian families for example.

tatupu70 says

only one specific location then? My guess is more people work in the train station then at the "San Francisco" dot that you are using.

Are you just being stubborn now? How many people work 1 transfer and a short walk from the train station? FYI, I notice you're not trying to improve my estimated start point on the other side.. I'm sure everyone also gets to skip all transit TO the bart station right? They just magically wake up and are sitting on the train as it pulls out of the station, ready to go. No waiting, no ticket purchasing... yup, just automatically teleported from their bedrooms to the magic chair they sit in on the BART on their way to work.

It strikes me that you must really buy into the idea of socialism too. Because when you ignore all reality and just go off the theoretical model, socialism is also great.

Like the Gini index?

"Just another free-market fuckstick who is bloody ignorant of basic economics"

Do basic economics not count things as sold when one person sells them and another buys them? If you want to say that in Detroit there are no buyers, then I guess we can agree. Because there are a whole bunch of houses for sale that no one is buying. Then again, I guess you don't really want to hold up Detroit as an example of "free-market fucksticks" ruining a town because those aren't the guys who were in charge, were they?

One thing about "nobody buying", only the specuvestors can afford to DCA in a down market.

When prices are going down, it makes sense to stand aside.

Falling knife, etc.

Bellingham Bill says

One thing about "nobody buying", only the specuvestors can afford to DCA in a down market.

When prices are going down, it makes sense to stand aside.

Absolutely, that's called price and tail risk discovery. And it's a good thing but it cannot happen if the Fed takes away the tail risk and helps big investors to buy and drive up the price.