Selling to the 1%

Generali

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/24/business/economy/velvet-rope-economy.html?_r=1

kabayiri

Generali wrote: »

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/24/business/economy/velvet-rope-economy.html?_r=1

Fascinating, thanks Gen.

I've wondered for a while if the Super Rich have much more in common with fellow Super Rich than their national compatriots.

Exclusivity clubs are only going to tighten these inner circles.

michaels

I bet retailers still haven't caught up with the tax authorities in terms of share of revenue from the super-rich so there is no doubt more of this to come.

There was also on that page a link to this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/24/upshot/rich-people-are-living-longer-thats-tilting-social-security-in-their-favor.html?&moduleDetail=section-news-1&action=click&contentCollection=Economy&region=Footer&module=MoreInSection&version=WhatsNext&contentID=WhatsNext&pgtype=article

Which I thought was fascinating - in the US because those on higher incomes live longer they actually benefit more per dollar paid into 'NI for retirement' than do those on lower incomes who pay in less. I wonder if the UK has such a strong relationship between income levels and longevity in which case perhaps the upper limit on NI should be revisited (music to the ears of chancellors who have surreptitiously increasing the employees NI bit that has no upper limit).

westernpromise

kabayiri wrote: »

Fascinating, thanks Gen.

I've wondered for a while if the Super Rich have much more in common with fellow Super Rich than their national compatriots.

Exclusivity clubs are only going to tighten these inner circles.

I think it was John Fowles who said that being rich was a sort of second nationality.

Generali

michaels wrote: »

I bet retailers still haven't caught up with the tax authorities in terms of share of revenue from the super-rich so there is no doubt more of this to come.

There was also on that page a link to this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/24/upshot/rich-people-are-living-longer-thats-tilting-social-security-in-their-favor.html?&moduleDetail=section-news-1&action=click&contentCollection=Economy&region=Footer&module=MoreInSection&version=WhatsNext&contentID=WhatsNext&pgtype=article

Which I thought was fascinating - in the US because those on higher incomes live longer they actually benefit more per dollar paid into 'NI for retirement' than do those on lower incomes who pay in less. I wonder if the UK has such a strong relationship between income levels and longevity in which case perhaps the upper limit on NI should be revisited (music to the ears of chancellors who have surreptitiously increasing the employees NI bit that has no upper limit).

I believe that there is a positive relationship between longevity and income in the UK. I know that there is in Scotland, it's very positively correlated there AIUI.

The reason? Poor people are disproportionately likely to smoke, eat few vegetables and drink too much whereas rich people are disproportionately unlikely to do those things.

I think it's less clear whether poverty causes poor lifestyle or poor lifestyle causes poverty. I suspect that there's a feedback loop at work: the stress of living in poverty encourages people to make poor lifestyle decisions which increase their poverty which create more stress.

westernpromise

duplicated

michaels

Generali wrote: »

I believe that there is a positive relationship between longevity and income in the UK. I know that there is in Scotland, it's very positively correlated there AIUI.

The reason? Poor people are disproportionately likely to smoke, eat few vegetables and drink too much whereas rich people are disproportionately unlikely to do those things.

I think it's less clear whether poverty causes poor lifestyle or poor lifestyle causes poverty. I suspect that there's a feedback loop at work: the stress of living in poverty encourages people to make poor lifestyle decisions which increase their poverty which create more stress.

I wonder if we can put a rational economic explanation into this analysis - if each year of your life is fairly carp then the 'cost' in terms of reducing life expectancy via behavior is lower - ie if your life is fairly !!!!! then the short term benefit of having a nice drunken evening may outweigh the cost in terms of shorter life expectancy whereas if each year of life is more pleasurable and thus more valuable then although that drunken evening brings the same pleasure its 'cost' in terms of life years forgone may outweigh the benefit....

CLAPTON

Generali wrote: »

I believe that there is a positive relationship between longevity and income in the UK. I know that there is in Scotland, it's very positively correlated there AIUI.

The reason? Poor people are disproportionately likely to smoke, eat few vegetables and drink too much whereas rich people are disproportionately unlikely to do those things.

I think it's less clear whether poverty causes poor lifestyle or poor lifestyle causes poverty. I suspect that there's a feedback loop at work: the stress of living in poverty encourages people to make poor lifestyle decisions which increase their poverty which create more stress.

I would add education into the loop
better educated people and both more likely to earn more and also be more aware of the benefits of nutrition and exercise

wotsthat

Generali wrote: »

I think it's less clear whether poverty causes poor lifestyle or poor lifestyle causes poverty. I suspect that there's a feedback loop at work: the stress of living in poverty encourages people to make poor lifestyle decisions which increase their poverty which create more stress.

It could be neither. People who make poor choices probably do so in many unrelated areas of life simultaneously.

mwpt

It is one approach to redistributing wealth I suppose, if taxes aren't working.

kabayiri

westernpromise wrote: »

I think it was John Fowles who said that being rich was a sort of second nationality.

I worked for a very large American corporation in the past which had operations in every part of the globe.

You got the distinct impression that it was company first, anything else second.

A different type of inner club then.

There was a massive catalogue of products from companies within the group, and you were strongly encouraged to purchase from sister companies, even though at times there might have been cheaper options.

I suspect UK taxation, particularly company level, is stuck in the mindset of an old world, when the newer formations are based on concepts extending way beyond the nation state.