It's a major a fallacy that the poor tend to stay poor. We have longitudinal data on income mobility we can look at to see if this is really true. And it's not.
Based on long-term income mobility data, we can see that about 80% of the people who were poor in 2010, are no longer poor today. About 20% of them have moved into the top two quintiles for income.
So the argument that there's an intractable poverty trap that's been created by fiat currency just isn't true.
Most of the people who are poor -- young people, new immigrants, etc -- do not stay poor as they age. The cohorts are not stable across time, even though people seem to intuitively think it's true. It's not true.
I disagree I've lived in poverty my whole life and today I'm experiencing the worst poverty I've ever been through at 34 years old. Even with early retirement and financial fitness education the money only lasts so long before you run out.
Yeah upward mobility been crashing for decades lol
The trap isn't poverty, it's lack of sovereignty.
And the sovereignty trap is intractable under a fiat system.
But that's starting from a libertarian frame. Which is a normative atgument. Which was my point all along.
Can you link to where you got this data from?
Not saying the poor stay poor. Saying fiat is bad for them as
- they have no access to investments and keep the little they have in cash
- they have no access to credit
Then a lot of them get out of poverty through wages cause obv there is a generational and immigration aspect to it
But let’s say that for the bottom 80 pct of pop in terms of wealth fiat is bad, as it makes it more difficult for them to save and incentivizes to consume
Oddbean new post about login | logout