Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
Not exactly. The financial crisis is changing the current economic landscape. And when some get poorer, others get richer. This rule applies to both the poor and the rich.
Poor people find it harder to get rich during a crisis because:
One of the above three factors is enough to prevent a person from becoming richer at least during a crisis.
Rich people, as a rule, on the contrary, have the necessary resources and skills, but not everyone gets richer during a crisis.
If an entrepreneur's business suffers during a crisis, then the entrepreneur becomes poorer. This does not mean that he has become poor. But this means that before the crisis, he was richer than after.
On the other hand, if an entrepreneur sees a new opportunity, how they can make money during a crisis, then they can use their ideas and, if successful, become richer.
Let's look at some examples. With the unstable economy caused by the pandemic in 2020, many business sectors have experienced what quarantine means.
What we have:
Accordingly, 2 different rich entrepreneurs with businesses in the same area may have different results after the crisis – one will become richer and the other poorer.
Becoming a rich person depends in part on luck, luck. However, first of all, for the most part, it depends on the person himself – on his hard skills and soft skills.
—
Telegram channel “Private welfare”.
I have two views:
1. This is a subjective perception that when you are doing poorly, you are more and more watching those who are doing well-you are jealous, it begins to seem that they are stealing your happiness.
This is not a completely correct statement. During the crisis, those who had capital in the form of a “cache” to buy up cheaper companies get richer. Those who did not have such a cache (for example, they were full of stocks or businesses) also get poorer during the crisis. And those of the rich who had a high level of debt, in general, may well go bankrupt.
The crisis is a good time only for a certain category of rich people-investors and speculators. When good assets can be bought at significant discounts, like at a sale. And then recently, the printing presses of Central Banks especially do not allow assets to fall much and actively disperse their value, not allowing them to go “completely at the bottom”
There is nothing like this in the world. In a financial crisis, both the poor can get rich and the rich can go broke. But more people go broke than get rich. The options are different.
A financial crisis is always a man-made process. This is the first and most important thing, no matter what analysts, experts, or financiers tell you. Financiers do it, and experts and analysts try to explain to those who were robbed why this happened. Many arguments are made, but they are all in favor of financiers, not people affected by the crisis. Isn't that weird? The strange thing is that experts and analysts are trusted. But they don't believe their eyes.
Crises are absolutely fiscal in nature : money is withdrawn from those citizens who can become even richer, and as a result, it can become a serious threat to those who are at the top of the pyramid and at some point shake the position of the richest and most influential people in the world. Therefore, when conducting regular financial transactions, a very important task is being solved-preserving power and capital in the hands of the global oligarchy. Because only children do not understand who is the master in the world. The people in whose hands all the wealth of the world is concentrated – these are the main organizers of all financial crises.
The mechanisms of their implementation in some cases are not particularly inventive : this includes playing with national currencies through authorized financial structures, fluctuations in commodity prices, and manipulations with elections in various countries (as a rule, these are raw materials appendages of the so-called developed countries). . They are no longer called the ” center. They are simply countries with developed democracies.
Crises are beneficial in that they constantly and steadily remove the middle class. The middle class is a variable quantity: only it joins the ranks of the poor, on the one hand, and on the other – the number of rich and super – rich people from the middle class also increases.
The rich can't sleep well as long as there are young, enterprising, cynical and unscrupulous people who want to get rich at all costs. Therefore, those who are at the top of the pyramid mainly use financial levers to ruin the middle class. The poor are not part of the elite's vision. They are bothered by those who step on their heels.
It is for them that various “surprises” are prepared in the form of a collapse of financial markets, mortgage bubbles and many other equally interesting things.
The crises of early capitalism were also man-made. For example, in a bad harvest year, hide bread, and then raise prices for it. This is a classic example of how to change the balance of power in society.
But in any case, the crisis of the rich makes you richer, the middle ones are ruined, and the beggar remains with his own people.
Not exactly.
In a financial crisis, as in a war, those who are able to quickly rebuild and adapt survive.
Or someone who has learned to learn new things quickly and take risks skillfully.
Many rich firms and people in a crisis start to quickly eat up their savings and become poor.
Well, here's an example of artists: Those who were able to quickly find a new job, like advertising, even for very little money.
And those artists who sit and proudly wait to be invited to an expensive and well-known job are quickly disappointed.
And the difference is that some people, when faced with difficulties, run away to alcohol or self-pity, and become poorer.
And others, when faced with difficulties, begin to work twice as energetically. Both hands and head.
And they become wealthier.
Or they survive.
And this law of evolution is more than one thousand years old. Well, that's the way the world works, nothing can be done.
It is necessary to clarify that not all the rich get richer and not all the poor get poorer. But the general trend is yes!
The whole point is that in the money-commodity-money or commodity-money-commodity chain, the rich have assets in all links, and the poor have assets only in money. The main result of the financial crisis is a sharp depreciation of money and the vast majority of the poor have nothing to replenish their financial assets with.
Usually, during a financial crisis, one part of the population gets poorer (this is the part that was rich before the crisis), while the other part gets richer.
Unfortunately, there is no level of socialism where everyone is equal, and there is no regulator either.
John P. Morgan in 1929, a few days before the stock market crash, managed to get rid of almost all the shares that he owned. The US Congressional Commission suspected Morgan of using insider information and market manipulation. The banker explained that the decision to sell was made when his shoe shiner asked him about the prospects of the railway company's shares, which he had recently bought in some quantity. “When shoe cleaners come to the market, there is nothing left for professionals to do,” the financier reasoned.
Famous bike
If you're interested, read something about behavioral finance.
Inside information and great opportunities. In other words, the possession of information and large amounts that allow you to use this information. And the poor have only information from the TV, but a negative balance in the form of mortgages and other obligations. With such an anamnesis, horseradish will get rich.
That's not so.�
More precisely, it is an illusion. In a crisis, profitability increases and risks increase many times over. The market turns into a casino, where the majority goes broke, but a few hit the jackpot. Of course, those who have more money are more likely to make a successful bet, including the fact that they make more bets.
And then the media tells about these lucky people, and the illusion is created that the rich are lucky.
The crisis is a reason to reduce wages for the poor and increase profits for the rich :-)))
The rich have a serious financial “safety cushion” and the ability to hire experts in any field.
The rich have opportunities for collusion.
In a crisis, money is usually the most scarce commodity, and the rich have it.
The state protects the interests of the rich.
Primitively, everything goes according to the following scheme: in a crisis, most people are concerned about survival, prices are higher, and money in the pockets of the majority is less and less – factories that produce goods that no one buys anymore are closed, their dealers and retailers are closed – there are many unemployed people who are ready to work for even less wages – there is even less money in The poor are getting poorer.
The rich in a crisis can buy up failing businesses for a song, actively conduct mergers and acquisitions – they have enough to live on, and by the end of the crisis, their new companies will be market leaders and determine the rules of the game. The rich get richer at the expense of the less rich.
The role of the state-in the Russian Federation, gasoline is constantly becoming more expensive regardless of the price of oil – the poor pay the rich for the stability of their profits. The rich get richer at the expense of the poor. Not to mention the introduction of income redistribution systems from poor drivers to rich Rotenbergs like Plato…
Modern inequality is based mainly on the fact that the capital of the rich is growing at a faster rate than the salaries of ordinary people. Since the main assets of the rich are not money, but real estate or business, while the rest have money, inflation primarily affects monetary assets. This way, the rich lose less again. Moreover, the wealth of the rich is usually managed by professional managers who are more sensitive to the approach of crises and build appropriate defensive strategies.
I think the fact is that rich people are more aware of the processes that cause a crisis.
And they are able to prepare for it in order not only to save, but also to increase their wealth.
Unlike the poor, for whom all these crises “out of the blue”. After all, everything is always good on TV.