Now that's an eye popping stat!
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-income-inequality-20140121,0,3481555.story#ixzz2r0t8MT2f
QuoteOxfam report highlights widening income gap between rich, poor
The 85 richest people on Earth now have the same amount of wealth as the bottom half of the global population, the Oxfam report says.
By Jim Puzzanghera
January 20, 2014, 4:45 p.m.
As business and political leaders gather in Davos, Switzerland, to discuss the improving world economy, new evidence emerged about how much the rich have become richer — and how much further the poor are falling behind.
The 85 richest people on Earth now have the same amount of wealth as the bottom half of the global population, according to a report released Monday by the British humanitarian group Oxfam International.
The findings highlight the widening gap between rich and poor ahead of the annual World Economic Forum this week. The report, and others recently on the issue, could boost efforts in Washington to increase the federal minimum wage, which President Obama has made a priority.
"It is staggering that in the 21st century, half of the world's population own no more than a tiny elite whose numbers could all sit comfortably in a single train carriage," said Winnie Byanyima, Oxfam's executive director.
"Widening inequality is creating a vicious circle where wealth and power are increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few, leaving the rest of us to fight over crumbs from the top table," Byanyima said.
The bottom half of the population — about 3.5 billion people — account for about $1.7 trillion, or about 0.7% of the world's wealth, according to the Oxfam report, titled "Working for the Few."
That's the same amount of wealth attributed to the world's 85 richest people.
Those wealthy elite are a small part of the richest 1% of the world's population, which combined has amassed about 46% of the world's wealth, or $110 trillion, according to the report. The top 1% had 65 times the total wealth of the bottom half of the population.
Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, said he's not surprised by the Oxfam report and others showing increased inequality between rich and poor.
"As long as we maintain high rates of unemployment, I don't see any prospect of reversing this situation," Baker said. "The only time where workers in the middle and bottom of the wage distribution were able to achieve sustained gains was in the late '90s when we had low unemployment."
He's less concerned with measures of wealth, which have been inflated by stock market gains and could reverse with a market downturn. But he noted that income growth for poor and middle-class Americans has lagged behind that of the rich in the last three decades.
The Oxfam findings and others should help build support for an increase in the federal minimum wage, Baker said.
In a report last week, the World Economic Forum said widening income inequality was the risk most likely to cause serious damage in the next decade. Obama recently called the expanding gap between rich and poor a bigger threat to the U.S. economy than the budget deficit.
A Gallup poll released Monday found two-thirds of Americans were dissatisfied with the way income and wealth are distributed in the nation. The wealth gap was a factor in nationwide rallies last month by fast-food workers seeking higher wages.
Oxfam said the United States has led a worldwide growth in wealth concentration.
The percentage of income held by the richest 1% in the U.S. has grown nearly 150% from 1980 through 2012. That small elite has received 95% of wealth created since 2009, after the financial crisis, while the bottom 90% of Americans have become poorer, Oxfam said.
The uneven gains of the economic recovery, in which many people have had to take lower-paying jobs, have exacerbated income inequality, said Christine Owens, executive director of the National Employment Law Project.
"The people who are losing ground are the people in the middle and the bottom" of the economic spectrum, Owens said.
There also are concerns about the broader effect of the wealth gap.
"Income inequality is also socially destabilizing," Owens said. "So it's not just a question of fairness; it's a question of how do we preserve a functioning democracy, and it's difficult to do that if we don't have broadly shared prosperity."
The problem exists worldwide, Oxfam said.
The share of wealth owned by the richest 1% since 1980 expanded in all but two of the 26 nations tracked by researchers in the World Top Incomes Database. That has put a "massive concentration of economic resources in the hands of fewer people," the report said.
Falling taxes for the rich and an increased use of tax havens have helped widen income inequality, Oxfam said.
The group called on World Economic Forum participants, which include some of the wealthiest and most influential corporate executives, to take steps to reverse the trend.
Among other things, Oxfam wants them to support progressive taxation, pledge not to dodge taxes, pay a living wage to workers at their companies and push governments "to provide universal healthcare, education and social protection" for their citizens
Econometrics!
It is a disingenuous statistic in my opinion.
I wonder how many people in the world have a net asset position of zero or less? Let us say a billion or so for argument. Many of these people will be young professionals in the developed world of course, with college debts and large mortgages. I'm well into positive territory myself, largely due to age, so I give you a new headline :
Bloke in Preston, England, Owns as Much as the World's one Billion Poorest
It is an eye-catching headline, but I'm not sure if it is really meaningful. It reflects the relative strength of the different economies and ignores national boundaries. Bill Gates paying more taxes to the US federal government won't help the poor villagers in Chad. What those folks really need is a decent and honest government in their own country.
Quote from: Monoriu on January 21, 2014, 02:41:32 AM
It is an eye-catching headline, but I'm not sure if it is really meaningful. It reflects the relative strength of the different economies and ignores national boundaries. Bill Gates paying more taxes to the US federal government won't help the poor villagers in Chad. What those folks really need is a decent and honest government in their own country.
That won't really help them. They can never improve themselves to a reasonable level, because all the proceeds from such improvement would be moved out of the country. The mere existence of the West ensures that small Third World countries can never be good.
Quotehighlights widening income gap between rich, poor
Then the system's working the way it should.
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on January 21, 2014, 02:21:48 AM
Bloke in Preston, England, Owns as Much as the World's one Billion Poorest
Then the system's working the way it should.
The worst part about inequality is that wealth is now concentrated into so few hands that only an equally lucky few will get a chance to drag them from their beds when the revolution comes. :(
Quote from: Ideologue on January 21, 2014, 07:07:33 PM
The worst part about inequality is that wealth is now concentrated into so few hands that only an equally lucky few will get a chance to drag them from their beds when the revolution comes. :(
It's like reading the Guardian comments section!
*takes a drink*
These are the jokes folks.
You could easily have 10 times the number of bed-draggers as bed-draggees. Even more if they don't have to physically be touching the draggee, but merely be part of the mob.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on January 21, 2014, 07:12:12 PM
You could easily have 10 times the number of bed-draggers as bed-draggees. Even more if they don't have to physically be touching the draggee, but merely be part of the mob.
I said "equally lucky." I thought the liberal arts were valued on this board!
STEM or go home!
Quote from: Ed Anger on January 21, 2014, 07:17:44 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on January 21, 2014, 07:10:40 PM
These are the jokes folks.
I'm enjoying them.
For now, until I turn your den into a forward communications post to support revolutionary operations against the Cincinnati Bengals. LOLZ BAY OF PICKS
Quote from: Ideologue on January 21, 2014, 07:07:33 PM
The worst part about inequality is that wealth is now concentrated into so few hands that only an equally lucky few will get a chance to drag them from their beds when the revolution comes. :(
:D
Quote from: CountDeMoney on January 21, 2014, 07:22:36 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on January 21, 2014, 07:17:44 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on January 21, 2014, 07:10:40 PM
These are the jokes folks.
I'm enjoying them.
For now, until I turn your den into a forward communications post to support revolutionary operations against the Cincinnati Bengals. LOLZ BAY OF PICKS
:lol:
Quote from: Ideologue on January 21, 2014, 07:07:33 PM
The worst part about inequality is that wealth is now concentrated into so few hands that only an equally lucky few will get a chance to drag them from their beds when the revolution comes. :(
Um, you do realize that more than 85 people in the world possess wealth, right?
For plebs like me, I don't really care if 85 or 8 people have half the world's wealth. That's not really my concern. My concern is to have the opportunity to live a reasonably comfortable life if I work for it.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on January 21, 2014, 07:24:46 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on January 21, 2014, 07:07:33 PM
The worst part about inequality is that wealth is now concentrated into so few hands that only an equally lucky few will get a chance to drag them from their beds when the revolution comes. :(
Um, you do realize that more than 85 people in the world possess wealth, right?
You know, I appreciate the implied compliment, but not every little thing I say is meant to be an expression of or taken with grim seriousness.
Quote from: Ideologue on January 21, 2014, 08:31:00 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on January 21, 2014, 07:24:46 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on January 21, 2014, 07:07:33 PM
The worst part about inequality is that wealth is now concentrated into so few hands that only an equally lucky few will get a chance to drag them from their beds when the revolution comes. :(
Um, you do realize that more than 85 people in the world possess wealth, right?
You know, I appreciate the implied compliment, but not every little thing I say is meant to be an expression of or taken with grim seriousness.
In the grim future, there is only Nationalization.
Nationalization 40K
Miniature wargaming is a bourgeois affectation.
Quote from: Ideologue on January 21, 2014, 08:35:57 PM
Miniature wargaming is a bourgeois affectation.
At Games Workshop prices, it sure is.
Quote from: Ed Anger on January 21, 2014, 08:39:52 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on January 21, 2014, 08:35:57 PM
Miniature wargaming is a bourgeois affectation.
At Games Workshop prices, it sure is.
I applied for a store manager position at one of their stores, just for shits and giggles. :lol:
Quote from: CountDeMoney on January 21, 2014, 09:37:21 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on January 21, 2014, 08:39:52 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on January 21, 2014, 08:35:57 PM
Miniature wargaming is a bourgeois affectation.
At Games Workshop prices, it sure is.
I applied for a store manager position at one of their stores, just for shits and giggles. :lol:
You would have ended up strangling the customers.
Quote from: Ed Anger on January 21, 2014, 09:43:29 PM
You would have ended up strangling the customers.
I am confident I possess the knowledge, skills and experience to succeed in the Warhammer universe.
Except for Eldar fans. Fuck those faggots. Space Legolas-fuckers.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on January 21, 2014, 10:15:56 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on January 21, 2014, 09:43:29 PM
You would have ended up strangling the customers.
I am confident I possess the knowledge, skills and experience to succeed in the Warhammer universe.
Except for Eldar fans. Fuck those faggots. Space Legolas-fuckers.
Or Dark Eldar. Bunch of Space Martinuses, the lot of them.
Space Marines are fascinating, but if I were ever hardcore into WH40K miniatures, I'd have to go with Orks. They're like the Red Army '45, but more disciplined.
I liked the guys with the political commissars.
I would like to strangle Games Workshop customers at least.
Quote from: Razgovory on January 21, 2014, 10:24:38 PM
I liked the guys with the political commissars.
The Imperial Guard.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on January 21, 2014, 10:20:16 PM
Space Marines are fascinating, but if I were ever hardcore into WH40K miniatures, I'd have to go with Orks. They're like the Red Army '45, but more disciplined.
Oh, I'd go full-on Ultramarines.
I was always a Tyranids fanboy. :bowler:
Quote from: Ed Anger on January 21, 2014, 10:29:59 PM
I would like to strangle Games Workshop customers at least.
The Emperor protects.
It is not my fault lazy people are poor.
They should work harder.
The number of rich people is now down to 80, and the number of plebs is up to 3.6 billion. It took the 388 richest people to equal the poorest half, just four years ago.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/meet-the-80-people-who-are-as-rich-as-half-the-world/
QuoteMeet The 80 People Who Are As Rich As Half The World
7:01 PMJan 18 By Mona Chalabi
Eighty people hold the same amount of wealth as the world's 3.6 billion poorest people, according to an analysis just released from Oxfam. The report from the global anti-poverty organization finds that since 2009, the wealth of those 80 richest has doubled in nominal terms — while the wealth of the poorest 50 percent of the world's population has fallen.
To see how much wealth the richest 1 percent and the poorest 50 percent hold, Oxfam used research from Credit Suisse, a Swiss financial services company, and Forbes's annual billionaires list. Oxfam then looked at how many of the world's richest people would need to pool their resources to have as much wealth as the poorest 50 percent — and as of March 2014, it was just 80 people.
Four years earlier, 388 billionaires together held as much wealth as the poorest 50 percent of the world.
Thirty-five of the 80 richest people in the world are U.S. citizens, with combined wealth of $941 billion in 2014. Together in second place are Germany and Russia, with seven mega-rich individuals apiece. The entire list is dominated by one gender, though — 70 of the 80 richest people are men. And 68 of the people on the list are 50 or older.
If those 80 individuals were to bump into each on Svenborgia, what might they talk about? Retail could be a good conversation starter — 14 of the 80 got their wealth that way. Or they could discuss "extractives" (industries like oil, gas and mining, to which 11 of them owe their fortunes), finance (also 11 of them) or tech (10 of them).
There might be some quiet voices in the room, though, because 11 of the wealthiest people on the planet were simply born into their money (19 others inherited their wealth and then made it grow). The remaining 50 names on the list, according to Forbes, are self-made billionaires.
Oxfam notes that global wealth inequality is increasing while the rich get richer. If trends continue, the organization projects that the richest 1 percent of people will have more wealth than the remaining 99 percent by 2016.
Here's the list of the 80 people with as much wealth as the world's poorest 3.6 billion people:
Proof capitalism works. Yay for capitalism.
Quotethe wealth of the poorest 50 percent of the world's population has fallen.
I wonder why that happened. Fall in the price of gold maybe?
Yay QE.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on January 20, 2015, 08:42:07 PM
Quotethe wealth of the poorest 50 percent of the world's population has fallen.
I wonder why that happened. Fall in the price of gold maybe?
Or maybe the wealth was 'stolen'?
Or "misplaced." Or "spent." The possibilities are "endless."
Quote from: Admiral Yi on January 20, 2015, 08:55:53 PM
Or "misplaced." Or "spent." The possibilities are "endless."
It certainly couldn't have been redistributed upwards, what with gravity and all.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on January 20, 2015, 08:55:53 PM
Or "misplaced." Or "spent." The possibilities are "endless."
I'll go with 'misplaced' and perhaps someone else pick it up?
I'm working on a new theory of extremism. Originally it was only meant to apply to political extremism, but I think it might work for any kind of extremism.
Two characteristics I've identified so far that are shared by all extremists: a proclivity for inductive reasoning, and a tendency to rageaholism.
Have you noticed how Barack Hussein never mentions the name of Mohammed? That is because if he did, he would have to add "peace be upon his name" after saying that name, and then we would all know for a fact that he is a muslim.
He said that the future does not belong to the slanders of the prophet of Islam, instead of saying the actual name of the dude.
So we need someone to challenge President Hussein to say the name of Mohammed.
No, we don't.
:lol:
Quote from: Siege on January 21, 2015, 12:13:28 PM
Have you noticed how Barack Hussein never mentions the name of Mohammed? That is because if he did, he would have to add "peace be upon his name" after saying that name, and then we would all know for a fact that he is a muslim.
He also has to tell us if he's a cop if we ask him and he can't lie, or it's entrapment.
Seige... :lol: :lol: at McCain's town hall during the first election.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRq6Y4NmB6U
Well, my cursory google search couldn't find any evidence to debunk Siege's claim, though nearly all the stories I found were about the one speech to the UN.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on January 21, 2015, 12:32:00 PM
Well, my cursory google search couldn't find any evidence to debunk Siege's claim, though nearly all the stories I found were about the one speech to the UN.
Well don't worry he did in a speech "A New Beginning" by President Barack Obama, Cairo. June 4th 2009.
QuoteToo many tears have been shed. Too much blood has been shed. All of us have a responsibility to work
for the dawhen the mothers of Israelis and Palestinians can see their children grow up without fear; when
the Holy Land of the three great faiths is the place of peace that God intended it to be; when Jerusalem is
a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of
Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra—as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus,
and Mohammed, peace be upon them, joined in prayer
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-cairo-university-6-04-09
Of course, he did sort of say what Siegy said he would need to. :D
The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.
What are you laughing about, you enemy of freedom of expression?
Quote from: Siege on January 21, 2015, 01:24:23 PM
What are you laughing about, you enemy of freedom of expression?
They do say there are no stupid ideas...
Sorry, my last one for 11B4V, not for you guys.
You guys are cool.
Quote from: garbon on January 21, 2015, 12:40:24 PM
Of course, he did sort of say what Siegy said he would need to. :D
Indeed, and he camouflaged it by adding the names of the other dudes.
Had he mentioned Mohammed alone he would have come out of the closet.
Quote from: Siege on January 21, 2015, 01:30:46 PM
Indeed, and he camouflaged it by adding the names of the other dudes.
Had he mentioned Mohammed alone he would have come out of the closet.
As it is, he has revealed himself to be a Jew.
Quote from: Siege on January 21, 2015, 01:24:23 PM
What are you laughing about, you enemy of freedom of expression?
Infantile