62 richest people own half world wealth

Story

The world's 62 richest billionaires have as much wealth as the bottom half of the world's population, according to a new report from Oxfam International.

The wealthiest have seen their net worth soar over the five years ending in 2015. Back in 2010, it took 388 mega-rich people to own as much as half the world.

And the Top 1% own more than everyone else combined -- a milestone reached in 2015, a year earlier than Oxfam had predicted.

__________________________________________________________

Ugh. And certain people will tell you there's nothing wrong with the distribution of wealth, poor people just need to get off their asses.

There's a tipping point somewhere. Just wish I knew where.

only half? fucking rich people be slacking off

That's just wrong.

I feel like at some point the rest of world will be slaves to a small minority like in North Korea.

If we give them more tax incentives the wealth will trickle down and the problem will take care of itself.

388 down to 62 in 5 years? yikes.

On the upside you can work at Walmart for $9/hour now. With an income like that people really need to stop being so greedy.

People need to stop being so jelly. It's awesome that we live in a world where such a thing is even possible. At one time, you had to be born into aristocracy to be wealthy. However waiting for handouts in life like so many jelly's do isn't what made them billionaires.

Being born into it generally was.

Lol oxfam lol

Pretty much. This entitlement generation kills me.

All 62 of them...

That's wrong on so many level.

Yeah, ironically this actually infers that you still have to be born into "aristocracy."

so if you are number 63 you are already a loser? lol :D

How did we let this happen?

When will it stop?

Hmm....seems to be something wrong with that. Which is why I hate tax loopholes.

those are two completely different things. :/

Not exactly. If they own half the worlds wealth then they have an equal amount of wealth as the rest of the population.

@LJS9502_basic:

but they don't own half the worlds wealth. they own an amount of wealth money equal to the bottom 50% of the world.

hence me being baffled by topic title.

@Storm_Marine: You're just playing semantics. If we say $100 is the total amount of wealth for 1000000 people then 62 owning $50 is half the worlds wealth.

I'm not sure tax loopholes are the primary culprit here. An economist named Piketty recently completed some research and concluded that this type of wealth concentration is "natural" for capitalism. It can be prevented or lessened by various government policies or a burst of rapid economic growth, but even in the absence of taxation at all or a straight up flat tax it will occur.

@Storm_Marine: Half is still half but it doesn't surprise you're arguing semantics...you're a Republican....they want all the wealth for themselves.

Tax loopholes help. When you aren't wealthy you spend a good portion of your money on taxes and have less disposable income. If you can hide money then you come out ahead. I'm not saying they are the reason. Just that they keep money that would be better spent and thus helpful to society in general. When politicians need money they raise taxes. Income doesn't keep up. That's why the middle class is shrinking.

i agree with SM here. they're not the same thing.

for example ( just making up numbers here ): suppose the total world's wealth is $20T ( 20 trillion dollars ) and world population is 7B people. suppose $5T is owned by 3.5B people and the other $15T is owned by the other 3.5B ( uneven distribution ). if 62 people in the half with the $15T themselves own $5T they would have equivalent wealth to 1/2 the world's population ( the lower half with only $5T in wealth ) but NOT half the total world's wealth. that amount would be 1/2 of $20T or $10T

You're splitting the numbers up differently than the OP stated. I'm going by what the TC said.

Anyone claiming that America’s economy is in decline is peddling fiction.

They got rich off the Fed's crappy monetary policies while everyone else got poorer.

My mind can't really comprehend that. Like trying to understand the size of the galaxy.

How can a few people own half the wealth of the world (and, essentially, half the actual world). I mean, wealth is more than just cash; we're talking land, production (factories, etc), stocks, and so forth.

No argument from me. Tax policy is one of the tools Piketty recommends to keep it in check.

what SM was saying and I agree with is that the topic title isn't the same thing as what is later said in the text of the post. 62 people having as much wealth as the bottom half (sorted by wealth ) of the world's population is not the same thing as 62 people owning half the world's wealth outright ( as the title implies )

in any case, i agree with the sentiment. 62 people having as much wealth as 3.5 billion people ( be them the poorest or not ) is a little ridiculous.

Yup, pretty much that: "hell, goddam it !, I´m number 63 !"

That may be true but I disagreed with the SM posting the two statements and saying they weren't the same. He could have addressed other facts in the link if he wanted that argument....which you did by the way....but he didn't do that. He played semantics with two sentences that in and of themselves said the same thing.

Any way I don't think we are in disagreement here.

they don't, read the article

Storm_Marine is correct.

The article isn't saying that the 62 richest own half of the total wealth in the world (lets say 5 out of a whole 10).

But that the 62 richest own as much wealth as half of the population of the world owns (whatever the hell is that they do own, for example, if half the population of the world owned just $1 then the 62 richest in the world, between them, would own $1 too. But $1 isn't half the wealth of the world).

***Half the population in the world (the bottom half) doesn't own exactly half the wealth in the world***.

You guys act like they received this wealth by following the rules and playing the game we all play.. They don't.. People like the Koch's for instance have directly impacted government policy for their own gains regardless of how many people it may negatively impact.. You should be concerned because these types of people have the ears of the governments and massive power over any of us here to the point that their decisions have a immense impact of the future of the human race..

This isn't about being as wealthy as them, but more about how much power they have.. Aren't you the guy that screams about the second amendment in stopping a tyrannical government or the government getting too much power?.. How is this any fucking different? These people shape the landscape and world policy for their own benefit.. I would hope this would be as big concern as too much government or a tyrannical government..

Sure, but what you are describing is that people with money can influence governments. So the solution (not saying your are necessarily proposing this, but some seem to be suggesting it) is not to take away money from those who have it. Why not just work toward making money not being able to influence governments? Because I guess that would entail the rich "keeping" their money.

Basically, if we could neutralize the influence of money has in governments would others "allow" the rich to keep their money? Maybe some think that one way to neutralize the power money can have over governments is to simply re-distribute it more "fairly". But hat's another topic.

It's strange how "entitlement" is only ever a bad thing when it's exhibited by poorer people.

A woman who spends 60 hours a week working two jobs just to stay above the poverty line is damned if she dares to deem herself "entitled" to decent health care.

But what about a rich slob who inherited a whole lot of money-earning assets from his Daddy and who has never done an honest day's work in his life?

• He deems himself "entitled" to see his gifted assets bring in money every month.
• He deems himself "entitled" to the best health care that money can buy.
• He deems himself "entitled" to live in luxury, with more living space at his disposal than is occupied by scores of lowly, 60-hour-a-week workers.
• He deems himself "entitled" to his yacht.
• He deems himself "entitled" to his summer cottage.
• He deems himself "entitled" to his annual overseas holiday.
• He deems himself "entitled" to his multiple garages full of sports cars.

But there's nothing wrong with his sense of entitlement?

Goes to show you how corrupt the economical system really is.

lmao christ, what a terrible post even for you. Yeah let's just hand wave the seriousness of income inequality and pin it on the "entitlement generation" (whatever that is supposed to mean).

It's amazing how the rich have brainwashed the masses so badly that you have people on the lower rungs fighting among themselves to defend those poor, helpless, billionaires.

Hmm where did I even say taking away their money? Oh that's right I didn't.. Where are we even talking about fairly? And what? I am all favor of taking money out of politics in the United States.. But we are talking about the world economy.. And not just the US government.. I am more pointing out the ridiculous behavior that people shouldn't be concerned about this.. When they most definitely should be.

Near omnipotence.

Presumably omniscient with every major thing happening in the world.

Its power being invisible to most people.

Monotheists are wrong. It seems like there are 62 gods.

Half the people in this country don'e even pay federal income taxes, they are the ones who are NOT wealthy. The super wealthy pay almost 75% of the total federal income tax.

Just playing devil's advocate here. I don't think this is quite as black and white as people think.

And in a capitalist world, they deserve every penny of it.

Isn't the wealthy paying 75% of the total income tax a symptom, in part, of the inequality present in that income? I see that statement as more of a supporting argument than a rebuttal.

Good thing then that I specifically pointed out that you were not proposing that.

Then follow a life path that leads you towards such influence. Just because someone else was smart enough to build wealth without going to prison doesn't mean they should just hand it all over to people like you. Some of you here sound like spoiled children with this crying game.

Why can't some of you just be happy for the success of others instead of wanting to see everyone fail? So if your friends strike it rich, you would be all butthurt if they didn't hand over some money to you I suppose?

Money should be a virtual currency and lost at death. These rich people don't spend all that money they have and just keep it for generations inflating our economy.