Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Inequality gap widens as ‘world’s richest 1% get 82% of the wealth,’ Oxfam says

Posted 4 weeks ago on Jan. 22, 2018, 5:18 a.m. EST by factsrfun (8752) from Phoenix, AZ
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Just 42 people own the same amount of wealth as the poorest 50 percent worldwide, a new study by global charity Oxfam claimed.

In a report published Monday, Oxfam called for action to tackle the growing gap between the super-rich and the rest of the world. Approximately 82 percent of the money generated last year went to the richest 1 percent of the global population, the report said, while the poorest half saw no increase at all.

The report is timely as the global political and business elite gathers in snow-clad Davos for the World Economic Forum's annual meeting this week, which aims to promote responsive and responsible leadership.

'Increasingly concentrated' Oxfam said its figures, which some observers have criticized, showed economic rewards were "increasingly concentrated" at the top. The charity cited tax evasion, the erosion of worker's rights, cost-cutting and businesses' influence on policy decisions as reasons for the widening inequality gap.

The charity also found the wealth of billionaires had increased by 13 percent a year on average in the decade from 2006 to 2015. Last year, billionaires would have seen an uptick of $762 billion — enough to end extreme poverty seven times over. It also claimed nine out of 10 of the world's 2,043 billionaires were men.

Booming global stock markets were seen as the main driver for a surge in wealth among those holding financial assets last year. The founder of Amazon, Jeff Bezos, saw his wealth balloon by $6 billion in the first 10 days of 2017 — leading to a flood of headlines marking him as "the richest man of all time."

'Something is very wrong' Mark Goldring, chief executive of Oxfam GB, said the statistics signal "something is very wrong with the global economy."

"The concentration of extreme wealth at the top is not a sign of a thriving economy but a symptom of a system that is failing the millions of hard-working people on poverty wages who make our clothes and grow our food," he added.

Oxfam has published similar reports over the past five years. At the start of 2017, Oxfam said eight billionaires from around the globe had as much money as the 3.6 billion people who make up the poorest half of the world's population. Improved data has seen last year's figure revised to 61, but the charity said the trend of widening inequality was still evident.

The report, "Reward Work, Not Health," is based on data from Forbes and the annual Credit Suisse Global Wealth datebook, which has detailed the distribution of global wealth since 2000.

The survey assesses a person's wealth based on the value of an individual's assets — mainly property and land — minus any debts they may hold. The data excludes wages and income to determine what he or she is perceived to own. This methodology has attracted criticism in the past, as a student with high debt levels and a high future earning potential would classify as poor under the current criteria.

Nonetheless, Oxfam said even if the wealth of the poorest half of the population was recalculated to remove the people in net debt, their combined wealth would still be equal to 128 billionaires.




Read the Rules
[-] 4 points by elf3 (3823) 4 weeks ago

Thanks for this post...it is important to remember why this movement exists...I can't say too much more because the suffering around the world almost can't be spoken in words I just get a visual of children starving, of humanity toiling...when the world has so much abundance but so few have taken posession of resources.... something is very wrong here and it is tragically sad.

[-] 1 points by gsw (3121) from Woodbridge Township, NJ 4 weeks ago

None of the new wealth went to the bottom 50 percent .... Welcome to the billionaire economy https://www.cbsnews.com/news/davos-oxfam-report-income-inequality-as-billionaires-rise/ Welcome to the billionaire economy .... "In the last year, there has been a new billionaire created every two days, and of the wealth that got created, the top 1 percent got 82 percent of it, and the poorest half got nothing," said Paul O'Brien, vice president for policy and advocacy at Oxfam America, a nonprofit focused on alleviating poverty. "That means 3.7 billion people got nothing of that new wealth."

The wealth boom tends to reward men, while women are predominately drawing the short straw. Structural issues such as the gender pay gap, a devaluation of women and their contributions, and discrimination are contributing factors to women's weaker economic positions, Oxfam said https://www.cbsnews.com/news/davos-oxfam-report-income-inequality-as-billionaires-rise/

[-] 1 points by elf3 (3823) 3 weeks ago

I can't remember where I read it...but trickle up economics fits. Yes and double whammy male tech engineers are oddly focused on replacing a lot of female dominated jobs with tech...including cashiers and waitressing now as well as administrative office functions with programs and phone app functions. Because we had so much to choose from to begin with. Nursing is like the only thing left...and also flooded and run by greedy hospital monopolies like Lahey who probably have one RN per floor on duty with the rest all just NAs who make 9 bucks an hour...remember the whole tech discrimination stuff I guess these guys really have it in for us even those who aren't in their field...I guess we can move to China and stand in front of the plastic toy ovens with the poor Chinese girls who usually only live a few years before dying slowly and painfully from lung issues and cancers...and forget selling cookies out of your kitchen once Net Netrality ban effects start pushing us out. Guess we can try being mail order brides for wealthy businessmen and tech dicks...that seems like it is their plan and our misogynist president sets a wonderful example for them? let's send tech men to and ws traders to China to work...taste of their own medecine? http://nymag.com/next/2015/04/restaurant-waiters-will-be-replaced-by-apps.html

Women...you're fired from life. The new normal. Make like Russian First Barbie wife.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5092) 3 weeks ago

A potentially simple solution from U-tar-d land is to legalize polygamy so that the wealthy businessmen and tech dicks can emulate The Prophet and own up to four wives, age-six-and-over. Then the eelites can emulate King David and send these girls' former dicks to wars of conquest to get them killed - it's just basic ranching practice with livestocks. Abundant Russian First Barbie widows and potential wives will be free for lubeTube-rubeTube Alone-Gay duties in bulletproof Cadillac armored trucks for NSA U-tar-d moolah productions.

Red China has implemented the King-David solution to solve its sex ratio problem of too many testosterone-intoxicated males having been left over non-conjugated after having enforced its one-child policy for decades. These males, now largely and safely confined to the military barracks, have been urged not to fear death.

Yeah, once the Korean Missile Crisis boils over, our troops must cooperate with our Red China's bankers (I believe that the bankers dig Islam in a deep way, too, understanding why four wives age-six-and-over can be both holy and fun - a man naturally has one head but with two hands and two feet taking the head's orders so 1 to 4 is the perfect ratio for a man's completeness - why man but not woman? Old patriarchy) to help kill off their excess testes' production that is destabilizing the whole region. Macho cleansing - "NO prisoners" - leaves No future Chaos for Chimerica!

We - the pussy targets of NSA's bluTube grabs - are joined hip-to-hip with Red China through kingty FrisCo's Commando-in-Mischief (突击队露底裤).

[-] 1 points by elf3 (3823) 3 weeks ago



It seems they have decided to retaliate on all of female society now for their inner angst about the what they see as an invasion of their clubhouse. As the articles stated they are the ones directing the culture and futures of our labor. And not coincidentally their projects seem very focused on attacking woman's labor options. Of course it is all done on the basis of saving companies money but funny isn't it that the first place they focus is cutting women's positions. Instead of say cutting back on data mining and advertising which is just extreme. Do they really need to spend billions the way they are on this? Maybe if they focused more on making products people actually need or want or on real innovation and societal contributions so much advertisement wouldn't be needed. Of course women hold much of that creativity and also specialize in meeting needs of people and society...cutting us out means an excess of useless products that seem to actually burden the environment overcommercialize and create a disgusting world that seems to be pointless. Where will it lead...to the extinction of all mankind. Society needs balance. Women are thinkers and planners. Men tend to be impulsive and forge ahead without understanding long term consequence or the full implications of their actions. Society needs us at the forefront. it seems when these companies hire women...they choose those that behave similar to men. That won't help or change a thing. It is womens natures and traits like creativity forward thinking and empathy that needs to be embraced and valued. Women are about creating and nurturing life...men or at least those in ws and tech seem intent on dominating and destroying it.

And what is most interesting to me is agressive attack on womens' labor is not even part of the conversation...we talk about women gender pay gap and not enough jobs...even male immigrant employment seems ahead of us...hello yes let us influx even more male labor when women are struggling for opportunities Democrats ( and Republicans) that is really lovely....but we don't talk about the fact that technology is specifically focused on " innovations" that put women permanently out of the work they did have. We don't discuss the reason why this is happening. Because all hail technology and it is " inevitable" unpreventable etc. Etc. But it is very interesting that it is the labor women perform that has been deemed the most unnecessary and replaceable. And replace it they are. It is also funny that when the housing market dropped the government had all kinds of funds and programs to train men for their trouble ...which was temporary while the government is ignoring this administrative tech revolution that is silently and permanently destroying womens employment and their ability to survive and be self reliant. Albeit in wasn't very lucrative to be sure...it was all we had. Not to say male working class employment isn't under attack also...just that the government seems more focused on getting them to work...with infrasructure projects and retraining them for "jobs of tomorrow"...which is probably bs but at least it is being discussed ...women haven't been invited to the party or conversation about the future of our survival and labor.

[-] 1 points by elf3 (3823) 3 weeks ago

And the media wonders and seems mystified why so many white working class women voted for Trump...you have a class of women whose jobs are under attack and they are being replaced not just by cute free millenial interns...but they are seeing an Influx of mostly male immigrants being educated and trained in tech...um we work in payroll (rather we used to before our jobs were replaced) and see the salaries compared to ours. Yes that is very real. So here came Trump...actually discussing an issue that was a very troubling to them. They can't get financial aid for schooling cuz they make too much, yet not making enough to survive and make too little to get loans, and taxes coming out are paying for more men to be educated and advanced ahead of themselves on HB-1 visa from other countries often with incentive funding. (Bill Gates is constantly pressing on about needing more of this). I can certainly see how this could inspire anger. Especially if they have kids to feed and have no or an outdated degree. Although they failed to see the larger picture or that Trump is a liar and flim flam man who was merely tapping into a problem already created by Republicans trickle up economics and blaring sexism combined with corporatism and desperation for scraps. We really don't put two and two together in this country on the right or left...but i think here it is the left that is failing to do so on this issue. Um why did white working women overwhelmingly vote for a man promising to stop insourcing and outsourcing their jobs and competion for the jobs they are now sliding down to....like childcare and housekeeping cashiering and waitressing...duh. The fear is very real for them. America does not have their back and prospects are getting bleaker. They are a divorce away from homelessness if they aren't already supporting their husbands who arent fairing too much better....the whole family is struggling and at risk.

It seems simple from my perspective educated liberal women tend to work as social workers teachers and nurses all programs reliant on government funding typically cut by the right and supported Hillary who would most likely have continued to feed those programs without fixing the economy and thus those areas would be in great demand...uneducated Republican women voted for Trump due to the aforementioned stuff, and uneducated Liberal women voted for Bernie because we can see the larger picture and bigger changes that need to happen including fixing the economy which would free us from reliance on government programs and largely unhelpful non lasting bandaids. This entire election was about jobs ...specifically womens' jobs... Because there is no meaningful lasting employment out here and prospects continue to shrink.

I also see it as interesting that evey time they want to cut government spending Republicans do so in areas that employ mostly women. Teaching, healthcare, social work, government administration...you never see them cut male areas like military, tech, development. They deem those urgently dire while declaring the women dominated services uneeded. Yes we desperately need NSA spying on citizens, more nukes, more drilling..(that was sarcasm) these are not needed and or wanted and already incredibly overfunded. Are they important because we need them? Or because they are dominated by men. What happened to nuclear disarmerment ?

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33408) from Coon Rapids, MN 3 weeks ago

And the media wonders and seems mystified why so many white working class women voted for Trump

Key Word = "SEEMS"

As Main Stream Media has been playing it's own CorpoRAT owned/operated Game of Mis/Disinformation!

The evidence is ample for anyone who looks or knows how to look and then looks = the dem's are nowhere near as toxic as the republicans. Yet the National corpoRat media shows them as being pretty much one and the same - depending on corpoRAT interests of course. As t totally toxic republicans may very well be pushing a point (tax break 4 t wealthy few) that they fully support. Generally one will find corpoRAT media working 2 uplift t dem's when it is in their own best interest to try to reign in the rep's!

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33408) from Coon Rapids, MN 4 weeks ago

Please share that on twitter to any number of republican shitholes that are trying to blame the democrats for this last shutdown. Seriously - the republican toxic swamp turtle tried to blame the democrats for taking the military PAY hostage - when it itself objected to paying the military during the shutdown.

See: https://t.co/D0CTLdP6Bq

[-] 1 points by grapes (5092) 4 weeks ago

Abundance is always relative to the capability to take advantage of resources, usually defined by the desires, motivations, skills, tools, technologies, knowledge, management, capital, etc.

What resources are needed by people is relative to the culture. Scarcity and abundance can exist in the same place at the same time because the means to avail of the resource differs.

When oil was first discovered in Saudi Arabia, it was NOT as desirable as water which was being drilled for at the time. What made Saudi Arabia so wealthy is the oil extraction technology, the trans-shipments to global markets, the refineries, the gasoline stations, the automobile internal combustion engines, airplanes, jet engines, diesel engines, ocean liners, etc. Saudi Arabia knew how to connect to the world oil market through Aramco. Russia's stupid moves in the Baltic Sea, Ukraine, and Crimea shot itself in the foot by triggering sanctions. The idiots had even shot down a civilian airliner (the Dutch were opposing imposing EU sanctions on Russia but killing hundreds of their innocent civilians certainly nailed the case shut for imposing sanctions - I watched with heartache {probably due to its evoking a sad memory from my middle childhood following a wake to bury an elderly relative in a cemetery} the seemingly never-ending parade of black hearses carrying the dead, just like the many carriages of a freight train passing by at a railroad crossing in the U.S.) but still deny Russia's culpability.

Beach sand is NOT a resource for most people but silicon computer chips made from it can be worth far more than their weights in gold. Is beach sand a resource by itself? No! Beach sand near hydro-fracking sites can be a valuable resource, though.

If we could only work together well as a peaceful and helpful species, we can have many abundant resources for most people, if not all. Look at the post-bellum debacle in Libya, for example. There is abundant sunlight. There is a lot of oil (sweet light [the noblest] crude which nearby Europe needs and craves). There is a lot of sand and huge amount of unused desert land. There is water infrastructure and water. It is close to Europe which can use solar electricity for sure. With the right technology, Libya can become a major energy and greenhouse food producer. Why didn't it happen? There's a major security problem. Peace breeds dividends. In a just society, equitably distributed dividends can in turn maintain peace. It's a virtuous cycle. Have no war and live abundantly.

As Alexis de Tocqueville had observed about Anglo-America, it was BLESSED by having NO GOLD, NO SILVER east of the Mississippi so machismo left it in peace. Costa Rica is another similar case, with a fortune distinct from the neighbors which were "blessed [but really cursed]" by their having gold and silver so there were wars and conquests.

Yeah, love and peace and peace and love. Paradise.

Oh yes, fear and peace and peace and fear can also work well, like Hell.

A chain ties a slave to the master and the master to the slave.

[-] 2 points by gsw (3121) from Woodbridge Township, NJ 4 weeks ago

THis news that 82 percent of new wealth created last year went to top 1 percent, this extremely sad fact made the mainstream media nightly news today, 1/22/18 CBS nightly news reported, on evening broadcast, and it was pretty stark pronouncement, that we here appreciate as par for the course.

Is this a democratic society that gives the wealth to top 1 percent Wealth, which they may or may not pay taxes on, hopefully it is taxed, as they can install their corporate fascism to us numbskull working rats and fools. Fix that trump!

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8752) from Phoenix, AZ 2 weeks ago

It is mostly the result of people not paying attention and making a clear choice.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33408) from Coon Rapids, MN 4 weeks ago



The economy is doing so well

if only for the very few

(shhhhhhh - you didn't hear that from me)

[-] 1 points by gsw (3121) from Woodbridge Township, NJ 4 weeks ago

When will they get to work on jobs and infrastructure?

Oh, how can we fix wealth inequality. I'd like a fruits and vegetables food card from my government, I could use for fresh and local fruits, then get an immediate rebate or 100 percent tax rebate for local fresh fruits and vegetables purchased. Good idea. Shift some of tax break for top 1 percent to pay for it. Actually how bout tax on just republicans, as they seem to like to give money to 1 percenters. Please can call it a tax on stupididty. Actually, this sounds like a good idea, would allow for "locally grown" food business to expand, and increase American's health too, with locally grown, healthy fresh foods, that are produced within a few hundred miles of the purchase. Healthy Food cards from the one percent. A good idea for govnt.

While at it, give young people and older people too, some tech and trade skills to build solar roads and high speed trains, and life work experience in construction as such, volunteer rebuilding army, in exchange for tuition credits to college.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33408) from Coon Rapids, MN 4 weeks ago

Taxing stupidity.................... I think I like that But would there be a large enough revenue stream to keep government in operation?

Heh heh - silly me - because insanity could really be included in the stupidity tax and that has ramifications of solid inclusion of the insanely greedy........................Well wouldn't that be pretty much 100% of the wealthy few? as well as those poor dumb racist bastards that vote for thanksgiving (as turkeys) every opportunity?

[-] 1 points by gsw (3121) from Woodbridge Township, NJ 4 weeks ago

Yes, we are 78 percent of us living paycheck to paycheck. Oh, hey, let's give more to the top percent and hold breath till it trickles down. Good Plan. Trump, Fix That!


[-] 1 points by grapes (5092) 4 weeks ago

Much of the apparent wealth seems to have come from the stock market melt-up as described by Jim Cramer. Flip is correct that ownership allows charging higher prices as inflation accelerates. Stocks represent ownership.

The U.S. Dollar seems to have lost some of its solid petro-support from Saudi Arabia. As the petrodollar dies, owning bluechip stocks can save one's own Commando-in-Mischief (突击队露底裤) from inflation imported into the U.S. here due to the weakened U.S. Dollar.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5092) 4 weeks ago

There's always a silver lining to the storm cloud. The 78% of us living paycheck to paycheck have an excellent hedge against rising inflation, eating up our net worth of near-to zero. It's even better for those with negative net worths but sufficient cashflows for covering.

As flip had said, what we owe (such as on home mortgages and that new car in the garage) would be much easier to be paid off by using inflated worth-less dollars as inflation picks up. I think flip will be rejoicing soon with the rising inflation (as turbo-charged by the trillion-dollar tax cut, mostly targeted permanently at the corporations and wealthy people) allowing him to charge higher prices.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33408) from Coon Rapids, MN 4 weeks ago

Yes, we are 78 percent of us living paycheck to paycheck.

& yet - on the local news tonight - one of the squawking heads was having a difficult time wrapping his head around = People who had no savings Well apparently said head never had to worry about having excess money in his pocket - from the cradle to local tv = too wealthy to know how better than 90% of the population live = hand to mouth

OK not 90% - yet - but getting damn close with each wealth care tax break that comes rolling down the pike.

[-] 1 points by gsw (3121) from Woodbridge Township, NJ 4 weeks ago

Let's keep repeating this truth till its fixed, even noted in this news feed https://hellogiggles.com/news/7-facts-about-wealth-inequality-that-will-shock-and-infuriate-you/

Oh, how can we fix wealth inequality. I'd like a fruits and vegetables food card from my government, I could use for fresh and local fruits, then get a 100 percent tax rebate for local fresh fruits and vegetables purchased. Good idea. Shift some of tax break for top 1 percent to pay for it. Actually how bout tax on just republicans, as they seem to like to give money to 1 percenters. Please can call it a tax on stupididty.

Actually, this sounds like a good idea, would allow for "locally grown" food business to expand, and increase American's health too, with locally grown, healthy fresh foods, that are produced within a few hundred miles of the purchase. Healthy Food cards from the one percent. A good idea for govnt.

While at it, give young people some tech and trade skills to build solar roads and high speed trains, in exchange for tuitions to college

[-] 1 points by grapes (5092) 4 weeks ago

Using the stock market for gauging wealth is falling into the trap of the wealthy people. A tiny bit of stocks traded at high prices can make everyone owning these stocks feel vastly richer. It literally "mints" apparent money from thin air because most stocks only have a tiny portion being traded on any given trading day. If 0.1% of a particular stock traded has doubled its traded price, the Remaining 99.9% of the same stock are ALSO figured as if they had DOUBLED in their apparent money worth. However, it will take 999 = 99.9% / 0.1% times more REAL money to have the 99.9% portion of the stock be sold at the same doubled price. The fact is that the "everyone" can rarely sell these stocks at their high last traded prices. Liquidating stocks en masse will certainly depress the trading prices (the 1987 flash crash destroyed nearly a quarter of the apparent wealth of the U.S. stock market - very impressive indeed on paper and computers but it was a nothingburger Salmonella-made by the 9% interest rate at the Fed coupling to programmed trading). Stock market wealth is not completely real wealth. This is the reason why there must be recurrent stock market crashes from time to time to make the simulation (the stock market numbers game) track the reality of stocks' supply and demand in real money such as gold.

Gold is excellent for being real money because it is extremely difficult to produce en masse from mines. Its annual new supply is quite limited relative to the amount already mined. It's almost useless for most industrial purposes aside from coating electrical contacts so it's mostly just held as reserves to calm people's nerves. The U.S. Dollar shares a number of these characteristics with gold so it's also widely used as a reserve currency. It seems that the U.S. tax cut during the smooth-sailing time has indeed upset our apple cart so flip can rejoice because inflation is certainly coming as having been invited by the so-called fiscally "CONservatives" to enrich the 1%. Look forward to paying more for groceries and gasoline. Prices can become unhinged and erratic (much like an untreated diabetic patient's blood sugar level) as our Commando-in-Mischief's antics do.

Stock markets are designed to crash and burn the real wealth of the small investors and move a part of it to the stockbrokers and large investors who can wait for an opportune time to buy and sell (often the more important) because the small investors cannot buy express exit at the onset of a crash. They also don't get the excellent in-time trading information others get.

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (8752) from Phoenix, AZ 5 days ago

Stocks are valued based in part on how much life people feel those companies can squeeze from their workers.

[-] 1 points by agkaiser (1992) from Fredericksburg, TX 4 weeks ago

Approximately 82 percent of the money generated last year went to the richest 1 percent

An economy that allows this disparity is broken beyond repair.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8752) from Phoenix, AZ 2 weeks ago

If only the founders is 2011 hadn't taken the position "there are good people on both sides" when asked about the two major political parties...what might have been....

in case I need to let me explain, it felt the same to me to hear the founders of OWS say there were good people in the Republican Party as it hurt others later to hear POTUS say there were good people among the White Supremacist.