This video is the first part of a 2-part series on Income Inequality. Watch Part 2 here:
▶What People Get Wrong About 'Income Redistribution': https://youtu.be/pvGP1OJbvi4

This is absolutely fascinating. I can't think of anyone who has ever pointed this out to me before.

Thank you , so refreshing to hear intelligence , not propaganda.

All his information is so good and always relevant.

I’m so glad I came across Sowell after my lefty phase was down, otherwise I never would have been able to recognize the brilliance of this man.

Nice points based on readily available public data and not twisted to fit the narratives of grievance politicians. The fact that people's wealth is at times highly transitory, which means there are good years and bad years in terms of income and wealth status, is an important one. Not all rich people stay rich and not all "poor" people stay poor.

its like being mad that a big percentage of the population doesnt have voting rights and never had, until you go and look, and the demographic in question is CHILDREN XD (who then grow up and out of the demographic and the can vote).
simplistic views are the tools of the annointed.

There is a basic flaw with "income inequality", and that is production inequality. If one farmer produces 500 tons of wheat a year, he rightly makes less money than a farmer that produces 1000 tons of wheat.

We as society have made decisions on which products have more value. We value a new car more than a new chair, or fork.

This makes inequality a permanent part of the human condition whithout even considering someone who works 80 hours a week will make more than 10 hours a week.

An educated and wise man.

Thomas is a national treasure!

He made some brilliant points. He's such an intelligent man that his character, and this video, are about to be attacked by the woke mob.

Even worse, the people with this hatred of income inequality love to talk about "generational wealth", as though nearly all rich people were born to rich parents and will die still rich. In medieval times this was more often true, nearly all rich people were people with noble title, you couldn't die rich if you weren't born rich (with title). The statistics shown here make it plainly obvious that this isn't the case any more. Most rich people are only rich for a small fraction of their lifetimes, let alone their entire lives.

Thomas Sowell is a true wise man. He made a capitalist of me.

The faulty economics of Income Inequality (brilliant analysis by Sowell as usual, but moving from one income to another depends upon incentive, not income)
The distinction between rich and poor is not just a matter of perceived contrast, but demonstrable need. And the often-dire needs of others are relatively easy to meet. About 1% of the population has 99% of the world’s assets, or so the argument goes. So it is a simple matter of redistributing wealth, with everyone’s needs can be met without the slightest encumbrance to the wealthy. However, provisioning assets to meet someone’s need is not the same as provisioning the incentive for that person to meet that need. Or in other words, to give a person a fish does not teach him to fish, or necessarily give him the opportunity to fish or even market his fish. These are all dependent upon incentive systems that are independent of the charity of others, and are built into the social, economic, and political institutions that govern the motivations of peoples and the wealth of nations.
In the past, European empires provisioned rudimentary incentive systems (English common law, religious conversion) that were imposed through conquest. Now if a foreign expeditionary force took over some impoverished state and imposed the social democracy of say, the prosperous state of Singapore, this would be the height of rudeness, racism, and injustice. Indeed, intervention in the legal, religious, social, and familial institutions of other countries and cultures is nowadays not worth the trouble for intervention, but worth merely the palliative of charity. But this changes nothing, as no one proverbially learns how to fish (or for that matter raise and educate a family or have a democratic politic), with the result that social problems fester and worsen, and in the increasing debilitation and impoverishment of the race.
Ultimately, the issue is not income inequality, but incentive inequality, with the former having current intellectual precedence due to the false assumption that individual volition is unmoored to incentives both subtle and real, but would follow some golden mean if one merely had the resources but not the guidance, while ignoring the fact that it is the guidance of incentives that provides for resources, or a world of abundant fish.
From p. 82 of ‘A Mouse’s Tale’ Incentive motivation theory for a lay audience from the perspective of modern affective neuroscience https://www.scribd.com/document/495438436/A-Mouse-s-Tale-a-practical-explanation-and-handbook-of-motivation-from-the-perspective-of-a-humble-creature

This channel is incredible

There is also a problem with the difference between family income and per capita income. Every time there is a divorce, family income is cut in half.

This is eye opening.

Great work Dr. Sowell. Scooby snacks for you!

Is there a source for a majority of the bottom 20% ending up in a higher bracket?

It’s just the entire slew of statistical fallacies being put to work. A wise man once said “if you torture the statistics enough, they’ll admit to anything”.

I love me some Thomas Sowell.