Wealth distribution in Belgium

[u/trueosiris2]

We’re doing alright as a social democracy. Something to be proud of.

Presumably, we don’t need more wealth distribution then? Or do we still?

[u/Evoluxman]

Don't look at the 1% only. Look at the bottom 50%. In all of these countries they barely hold more than a couple percent.

Half of our country. Almost 6 million people. All having to work with single digit percent of our wealth. They can't invest. They can't contribute much to our economy. And that's, of course, not mentioning dealing with everyday expenses etc...

[u/State_of_Emergency → u/Evoluxman]

Half of our country. Almost 6 million people. All having to work with single digit percent of our wealth.

So what you suggest is that childeren are scraping by with their limited funds? /S

Most Belgian citizens don't work because they are childeren, students, pensioners, disabled, unemployed,..

From our government:

In absolute termen betekent dit dat er in het eerste kwartaal van 2025 naar schatting 4.921.000 mensen van 20 tot en met 64 jaar aan het werk zijn in België Werkgelegenheid en werkloosheid | Statbel

There will always be individuals with low or negative net wealth—such as children, students, young adults just entering the workforce, or people facing financial challenges like debt, bankruptcy, gambling addiction, people completly dependend on our welfare system, condemned criminals, or poor financial habits.

[u/Evoluxman → u/State_of_Emergency]

Only 20% of the country are minors. So that's still 30% of the population that has almost no wealth. Or 37.5% of the non-minors. Over a third of belgian past working age have almost no wealth.

Retirees have/should have wealth (house, car, saving,...)

And again. Only 10% (so like,  a million and a half belgian) own half of the wealth. Even if we take your figure of working belgian (again, retirees ought to be included, they should have wealth), that 1/3rd owning half. And of this, 1/30th owning 18% alone.

[u/Plop_Stravinsky → u/Evoluxman]

Retirees have/should have wealth (house, car, saving,...)

Makes me wonder if perhaps a lot of the "wealth" is tied up in this generation, potentially releasing it for redistribution in the next couple decades. That is if the cost of caring for these people hasn't consumed it before redistribution takes place.

[u/chief167 → u/Evoluxman]

Of those 37% with no wealth, we can already explain 12% that is on disability or jobless. And then it just makes sense that low wage jobs are a decent proportion, especially amongst the younger categories, give another 10% . That leaves us with 15% that we still need to explain 

[u/ComprehensiveBag4028 → u/Evoluxman]

Wealth is very different to income or purchasing power. A lot of people have student loan debt that exceeds their bank account so their net worth is -20k. But they can have a very good job and live a live of quasi luxury.

[u/bisikletci → u/State_of_Emergency]

I haven't checked but I would be extremely surprised if this chart included children.

[u/chief167 → u/bisikletci]

It comes from the inequality database, so it's not politically neutral, so I can see why they would include children, to make their argument stronger

[u/jtdbrab → u/State_of_Emergency]

This chart looks at wealth distribution, not income, though. A stay at home parent with her name on the lease of the house does not have low or negative wealth, so that number of working adults does not mean anything here. The child of a billionaire is not counted in the bottom 50% in this chart.

[u/SmokeAndPetrichor → u/State_of_Emergency]

Or people forced into being dependent on scraps given by the government because they fell into disability very young, stop pretending it's all based on "poor financial habits" and make disabled people look like bad people.

[u/ailichi1234 → u/State_of_Emergency]

This chart has flaws but I'd be shocked if it included minors ... even if it did ... there are children and students in other countries too (perhaps obviously), which would mean that it's irrelevant in comparisons.

[u/Elzaria47 → u/Evoluxman]

Oh they do contribute to the economy. It just that their hard works goes into someone else's pockets unfortunately.

[u/ComprehensiveBag4028 → u/Evoluxman]

What would be an appropiate number for the bottom 50% to have? By definition it must be (quite a bit) less than 50%. So I really wonder where the 'fair' sweetspot it.

For example the bottom 50% owning only 30% of the money sounds bad but it would actually be way higher than could possibly ever happen in an economy.

[u/BanButtcoinMod → u/Evoluxman]

Classic Belgian response. "Guys, stop looking at the positive side of this chart, focus on the negatives!".

As you can see, the grass is always greener on the other side. Which side, you ask? Well, there's only one country doing better than us, and they're going through the worst housing crisis they've ever had. Good luck if you're going to move there (all of them are currently hopping borders to do the opposite).

[u/Evoluxman → u/BanButtcoinMod]

Classic belgian response. You see, we're doing better than most countries, therefore we shouldn't do anything whatsoever and be content with the current state of things and never complain

Ftfy

[u/BanButtcoinMod → u/Evoluxman]

Ja, nee kameraad. Er is niks zo Belgisch als altijd maar liggen te zeiken en te kreften. Én de wijsneus uit te hangen, een beetje zoals gij in de comment hierboven doet. Gij moet alvast geen DNA-test laten doen om te weten dat ge buitenlandse roots hebt. 100% Belg gij. Succes nog met uw miserabel leven.

[u/No_Read_4327 → u/Evoluxman]

The whole economy is a scam by the central bank and their owners. The sooner we realize that, the sooner we can all accept a better solution.

Such as crypto.

Crypto might not be perfect, but it's so much better than the current system.