SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
An Oxfam report claims that the world's eight richest billionaires control an amount of wealth equivalent to that of the world's 50% poorest people. That's a dramatic decline from the 62 billionaires estimated in the previous year's report:
In a report published to coincide with the start of the week-long World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Oxfam said it was "beyond grotesque" that a handful of rich men headed by the Microsoft founder Bill Gates are worth $426bn (£350bn), equivalent to the wealth of 3.6 billion people.
[...] Oxfam said the world's poorest 50% owned the same in assets as the $426bn owned by a group headed by Gates, Amancio Ortega, the founder of the Spanish fashion chain Zara, and Warren Buffett, the renowned investor and chief executive of Berkshire Hathaway. The others are Carlos Slim Helú: the Mexican telecoms tycoon and owner of conglomerate Grupo Carso; Jeff Bezos: the founder of Amazon; Mark Zuckerberg: the founder of Facebook; Larry Ellison, chief executive of US tech firm Oracle; and Michael Bloomberg; a former mayor of New York and founder and owner of the Bloomberg news and financial information service.
NextBigFuture points out that Oxfam's numbers are skewed by indebtedness.
The Business and Sustainable Development Commission has released a report calling for... sustainable development ahead of the World Economic Forum (from Jan. 17th-20th in Davos, Switzerland):
"Those losing out either economically or environmentally, such as the citizens of smog-choked Asian cities, or socially, through the breakdown of traditional rural communities, are asking whether the costs of our global economy are greater than its benefits," the commission said.
The group's report is a call to action: Corporate leaders must quickly change the way they do business in order to rebuild trust between industry and wider society. Members of the group include Alibaba founder Jack Ma, Mars CEO Grant Reid and Paul Polman, the CEO of Unilever. "We believe radical action is needed," the group said. If businesses need convincing, there's even a monetary incentive: The commission estimates there's $12 trillion to be made in extra growth and savings from sustainable development by 2030. Sectors that could benefit include heath care, clean energy and urban infrastructure.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 18 2017, @09:06AM
They pour the money that they're stiffing the workers back into their investments which then result in more money being looted from the workers.
Remarkable absence of gratitude there for what's being done for those "looted" workers.
It's not that complicated. People at the top do not work several thousand times harder than those at the bottom. Anybody who makes that assertion should meet a few of those poor people, because there is literally not enough time in a day for that to happen.
Indeed. For example, Bill Gates's efforts have only resulted in the creation of millions of worker-years of gainful employment over the course of his career and of course, a company worth several hundred billion dollars. While the equally important burger flipper's efforts have resulted in the creation of zero worker-years over a similar time frame and a lot of burgers. Thus, they should deserve very similar pay.
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Wednesday January 18 2017, @03:26PM
For example, Bill Gates's efforts have only resulted in the creation of millions of worker-years of gainful employment over the course of his career and of course, a company worth several hundred billion dollars.
Those who make Windows have done well for themselves. So have malware authors and antivirus vendors. A story:
http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/08/broken-window-fallacy.asp [investopedia.com]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday January 19 2017, @05:19AM
So have malware authors and antivirus vendors.
Those would still exist for Linux and other competing OS. I agree that Windows is a hive of villainy and security flaws without compare, but it remains that the economical dynamics of such ecosystems would still result in malware authors and antivirus vendors.
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Monday January 30 2017, @04:56AM
Those would still exist for Linux and other competing OS.Those would still exist for Linux and other competing OS.
Antivirus software for Linux does exist, but it is used there to protect Windows computers.
CNet called antivirus software on OS X "more trouble than it's worth."
http://www.cnet.com/news/mac-os-x-anti-virus-software-more-trouble-than-its-worth/ [cnet.com]
PC Magazine wrote that "using an Android device without security software is no longer an option" yet someone in the industry told me that the uptake has been disappointing.
To its credit, Microsoft has greatly improved the security of Windows. But there was a great deal of room for improvement. For instance, the DOS-based versions of Windows (Windows Millennium Edition, Windows 98 and their predecessors) lacked the notion of an administrator account: once logged in, a user could do anything. The file-systems they used also had only rudimentary permissions. Security just wasn't a priority.
It isn't just Windows, either. Microsoft Office documents can include code that Office will execute; this has been a boon to malware authors.
https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2015/09/28/why-word-macro-malware-is-back-and-what-you-can-do-about-it/ [sophos.com]
I can't help but wonder whether greater diversity in the computer industry would have been salutary.