>>10613
yes economy is global so it does not matter where you own your assets. there is no difference in their safety buying US stocks will not be any different from buying stocks or land in Australia or Nigeria.

When economy will crash it will crash globally. there will be no place which will be unaffected where you could preserve your wealth. and nobody will benefit from anyone's crash. because as you said "economy is global"


>So, you're entire argument is based around YOU not being creative enough to know how to earn money in a way that you can double, triple quadruple, etc. the amount that you currently have.

Not at all, Your argument is that I am supposed top outsmart all those other people by choosing the right investments at the right time so that I gain and everyone else loses. I am not that kind of guy who will expect to win Olympic race while being amateur LOL

what I mean is that total wealth will be generally lost while of course very few lucky people may benefit in that casino. but the longer the depression will continue the less of such people there will be if any will be left at all.
I suspect that in the end most of the super-rich people will loose big very chunks of their wealth up to 90%, while moderately rich amateurs will lose pretty much everything.

>Your stupid "PE ratio" doesn't exist in the scenario of "Dividing up all the world's wealth and giving equally to everyone" because everything is restarting from ZERO.

No that not wahst I do. I do not care about physical money it is totally meaningless term. I can't even understand why did you come up with that idea in the world which practically has no physical money.

I do this:
total world market capitalization is 68 trillion
divide that by wolds population and divide it by average PE ratio which indicates how much income this capital is generating each year or just rechecked everything and now it will be 26$ a month for every person (although is you divide all US market capitalization by US population you will get a bit more)

If we divide all wealth to everyone on the earth you will likely end with less than 1$ or even severely negative income because lots of assets will be actually liabilities. If for example I give you a Bill Gates mansion that will cost you over am million a year of maintenance costs, and you will have no use from owning it neither you will even be able to rent it.


Nobody is arguing that certain people will earn more and some will earn less. but what you earn is again not wealth it is your assets or at least your savings. If you own a huge mansion that you cannot sell that is not wealth that is a liability.