SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Common Dreams reports
The world's richest 1 percent now own more wealth than [the remaining] 99 percent combined. This finding comes from Credit Suisse's Global Wealth Report for 2015, [redirects to a PDF] released last week. Last year, Credit Suisse found the richest 1 percent of adults owned 48 percent of global wealth. According to the new report, the [richest] 1 percent now hold 50.4 percent of all the world's household wealth.
Credit Suisse's findings are in line with Oxfam's prediction that global wealth inequality is only becoming greater. Last January, we predicted that the richest 1 percent would capture more than half of all household wealth by 2016. It looks like our prediction was right, but that we were too conservative, since it has happened a year early. Alas, our forecast was confirmed, but it's nothing to celebrate.
When you look at the very top of the global wealth pyramid, the situation is much more alarming. When we first calculated in January 2014, the 85 richest individuals own more wealth than the poorest half of the planet. This trend has also worsened since that time. Last January, it was down to 80 people.
The implications of rising extreme wealth inequality are greatly worrying. The highly unbalanced concentration of economic resources in the hands of fewer and fewer people impacts social stability within countries and threatens security on a global scale. It makes poverty reduction harder, threatens political inclusion, and compounds other inequalities.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by SanityCheck on Sunday October 25 2015, @04:32PM
Wealth vs Income. [investopedia.com] He is technically correct. Everyone in the US that doesn't earn minimum wage is pretty much in top 1% income of the world.
If it wasn't for the cost of living you could accumulate that level of wealth pretty easily within one lifetime. And in fact quite a few people with 401K retirement plans do have that much by the time they retire, but they make 2 to 3 times that level of income due to the cost of living being pretty high.
I got a feeling some income redistributors won't be happy till we all live in mud-huts and spread cow-shit all over our bodies once a week to keep the mosquitoes at bay. They are Cultural Revolution level fanatic, and they drive the discourse to the gutter so pungently that it scares away any legitimate discussion. Maybe they are scabs for the .1% :/
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 25 2015, @05:12PM
> He is technically correct.
Yes, a technically true fact that doesn't address the point, instead distracts from it. I like to call such things "true lies."
> I got a feeling some income redistributors won't be happy till we all live in mud-huts and spread cow-shit all over our bodies
That's on you, not them. It doesn't even pass the laugh test. Sounds like it comforts you to believe that so you won't have to face their actual issues. Just like people who use the terms feminazi and SJW.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 25 2015, @09:12PM
Just like people who use the terms feminazi and SJW.
Or people who carelessly throw around terms like "patriarchy" and "misogyny".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 25 2015, @10:27PM
> Or people who carelessly throw around terms like "patriarchy" and "misogyny".
You know, those words have actual legitimate meanings while feminazi and SJW were created by people to let themselves brush off criticism of things they liked.
(Score: 1) by MorePower on Sunday October 25 2015, @06:12PM
Considering that the United States has about 4% of the world's population, I seriously doubt "Everyone in the US that doesn't
earn minimum wage is pretty much in top 1% income of the world."
And that's before you add in all the Canadians, Europeans, Japanese, etc that all live roughly on par wealth-wise with the U.S.
(Score: 2) by SanityCheck on Monday October 26 2015, @02:13AM
A lot of people in the US don't earn minimum wage. I mean they may be paid that if they are lucky to have a job, but they will not work 40 hour weeks, I guarantee that. When you account for labor-force participation plus the amount of people actually working full time, non-seasonally, you get close to that number. Regardless it might not have been extremely accurate, I can concede that.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 25 2015, @06:14PM
You will have to prove that point.
If it weren't for that pesky dying thing you could be immortal.
Just because you type something and say it is a fact does not make it so. Again, another point of your argument that must be proven.
Okay time to stop. If you want to prove a point, or even have anyone that does not already align with whatever view you are trying to communicate, you must provide a cogent argument. Your writing is not cogent. It is not even valid. Consider your thoughts being rejected by the human mind's compiler with a list of errors longer than your post itself.
(Score: 2) by SanityCheck on Monday October 26 2015, @02:31AM
Yes keep trying to spin your tale because you just found out you were using the boogie men of 1% for months (if not years) to run your mouth on the Internet without ever actually realizing some people consider you to be in it. I know it's hard to come to terms with that fact without making your own head explode, so I suggest some coping mechanism which you no doubt are familiar with: denial.