SoylentNews

World's Top 26 Billionaires Now Own as Much as the Poorest 3.8 Billion

posted by takyon on Tuesday January 22 2019, @10:32AM   
from the self-made-trillionaire dept.

Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:

Global wealth inequality widened last year as billionaires increased their fortunes by $2.5 billion per day, anti-poverty campaigner Oxfam said in a new report.

While the poorest half of humanity saw their wealth dwindle by 11%, billionaires' riches increased by 12%. The mega-wealthy have also become a more concentrated bunch. Last year, the top 26 wealthiest people owned $1.4 trillion, or as much as the 3.8 billion poorest people. The year before, it was the top 43 people.

[...] To address many of these ills, Oxfam advocated raising taxes. It estimated that a 1% wealth tax would be enough to educate 262 million out of school children and to save 3.3 million lives. As of 2015 returns, Oxfam says that only four cents in every tax dollar collected globally came from tariffs on wealth, such as inheritance or property. The report also claims that the rich are hiding $7.6 trillion in offshore accounts

Previously: Only 1% of World's Population Grabbed 82% of all 2017 Wealth

---

Original Submission

• Re:Instead of tax: hard ceiling Re:Instead of tax: hard ceiling (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 23 2019, @05:55PM (1 child)

  by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 23 2019, @05:55PM (#790717)

  Most times when the CEO screws up big time it is everyone else in the company that face layoffs and pay cuts.

  Thus, a total valid reason to get a shitty CEO. Because if there aren't shockwaves, pressure rings, and fifty million years of mantle plume-generated volcanic activity coming off the collapse of your company then you didn't fail hard enough.

  No one is arguing to "get a shitty CEO". The point, which you seem to be steadfastly avoiding, is that CEO compensation seems to negatively correlate with performance on the job.

  Or we could just not be idiots here.

  Yes, I agree; you should stop being an idiot.

  CEO failure is real bad, ok?

  Again, we agree.

  Grabbing a random set of degrees, pay it peanuts, and then expecting your company to not self-destruct, is insane.

  On the flip side, merely throwing a bunch of money at the problem and hoping for the best has not produced good results.

  Just because some businesses don't do due diligence - and end up in a train wreck - is not an indication that the CEO is just another job that one can throw a little money at.

  So, finally, you agree with me? It was hard to bring you to this point, but it looks like we may have made it!

  OK, this article has now slipped off the front page so I am dropping out of this conversation. I've noticed that you seem to have an almost compulsive urge to have the last word, so I will now turn it back over to you for your final thoughts (such as they may be).

  Parent

• Re:Instead of tax: hard ceiling (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday January 24 2019, @07:42AM

  by khallow (3766) on Thursday January 24 2019, @07:42AM (#791127) Journal

  I'll note here that you're still doing the "But we can pay the CEO less" game - that remains completely irrelevant to how much the CEO is worth. As to the gobbledygook about pay not correlating with outcome. Badly run companies are a huge risk for an incoming CEO. And those companies are usually overseen by incompetent boards of directors who are desperate for a great CEO but without the hiring skills or rudimentary negotiating skills to get one. So that can explain the correlation without requiring some unscientific but narratively pleasing rationalization for CEOs being overpaid.

  I've noticed that you seem to have an almost compulsive urge to have the last word

  So what is it to you? I have some stamina and I believe in good idea hygiene. Maybe a little OCD as shit. If someone finishes strong, instead of with a whiny parting shot, I just might let them have the last word. But this particular thread kept recycling the same dull nonsense over and over again. When some AC wrote:

  But the point which you seem to be avoiding is that I can't think of anything that a CEO might do that would be worth $1500/hr. Can you?

  after numerous back and forth posts where the answer was in my very first reply [soylentnews.org]:

  Run a business that employs hundreds of thousands of people a year.

  I didn't "avoid" the point. I answered it instantly in my very first reply. Yet here we are a half dozen posts later playing games with someone berating me for "avoiding".
  
  I find it remarkable just how dumb you and who knows who else have been in this thread. I don't care anymore why you can't figure out why running a business that employs hundreds of thousands of people and generates lots of profit for various shareholders (the latter who control the hiring of the CEO) might be worth a lot of money. You're obviously not listening or thinking about the subject.

  Parent