Which doesn't keep pace with world GDP. Something the article doesn't want you to know.
IE, the rich are getting poorer compared to the rate of world growth.
The cost of inequality: how wealth and income extremes hurt us all
Who’s more to blame, the rich who earn the fiat money, the bankers who create the fiat money out of nothing, or hte politicians, who confiscate and spend more and drag us and future generations into massive debt?
“Tax the rich, Feed the poor,
til there are, Rich no more”
Repeat.......ooops !!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzrUqAtUcpU
The irony of this classic remains.
Shortsighted feel good polices that get votes and leave disaster in their wake.
The Gov’t is like a drug company that has a cure but no disease. The only way to use the cure is to create the disease.
Bull crap. It's unethical to work hard for yourself and reap the rewards? It's inefficient to be productive and earn more than someone who is not productive? It's politically corrosive...perhaps, but only because politicians take the money and use it to their own benefit. Socially divisive? Really? Only if you believe that everyone should be paid the same regardless of effort. Obozo has made it divisive by saying that the rich should pay their fair share, yet fails to point out that the richest 10% foot 71% of the tax burden. Environmentally destructive? England almost denuded itself in the Middle Ages because trees were chopped down for heating. It's only because of an entrepreneurial spirit that alternative heating sources have been developed. Without the work of those "rich guys", we'd all be ice cubes by now.
Environmentally destructive? This piece of research and the paper used to write it, represents an unnecessary denuding of the nation's forest. It's pure political crap.
Bookmark.
Wealth invested in the means of production is not the same thing as wealth pissed-away on bling and Air Jordans and Escalades.
I’m not falling for this..... obama administration is again pitting one group against the other.
Do the math.
$240B / world population = $35.
The article describes “extreme poverty” as living on less than $1.25/day.
Another $35 per year won’t help.
Relegating that money to just 10% of the population at best raises them to about $2.25/day (or less). That still doesn’t help much: twice dang near zero is still dang near zero.
Not sure how they take that to ending global poverty 4 times over.
And I don’t see the author(s) giving up most of their income to others.
OPRAH already proved you CANNOT END POVERTY BY GIVING PEOPLE MONEY! The big Lottery winners as a rule usually prove it true, also!
I am too worried about my family sinking into poverty to be concerned about global poverty, idiots!
Which doesn't keep pace with world GDP. Something the article doesn't want you to know.
IE, the rich are getting poorer compared to the rate of world growth.
Of course, you know the REAL solution that the Proggies have for the “excess poor”.
A bullet to the head and a ditch, some lime, and a bulldozer.
They could probably achieve THAT for $240 billion. . .
The rich could do LOTS of things if they wanted. But is this THEIR problem? Are they responsible fo the bad decisions of others? Hardly.
The taxpayers of the U.S. have been bilked out of BILLIONS of dollars for the war on poverty, drugs, etc,etc,etc.
Has it helped? You be the judge.
Hey!
LBJ’s war on poverty” has spent $9 trillion and counting.
Yes, $9 trillion - those are tax dollars.
So let’s see if I understand this correctly.
$240 Billion can wipe out global proverty four times over.
So when Pelosi, PigNose Waxman, and Zer0 spend four times as much on stimulous, that should wipe out global poverty sixteen times over!
Yet the wasted almost $900 billion stimulous didn’t do diddly-squat for nobody, nowhere, nohow, noway!
I call this bull-sh!t!
To hell with the poor, everyone make it on their own or quit taking up space on this planet.
You don’t end poverty by distributing capital, it happens through wealth creation.
Giving a million bucks to a poor farmer in Ethiopia means nothing in the long run because private ownership of land is illegal there—meaning they can’t even advance to an industrial stage. Handouts to peasants in Peru means nothing in the long run if it takes five years and a hundred government-mandated steps to open a business there. Good look having a hiring expansion under those conditions.
We suffer from an unequal distribution of capitalism, not capital.
You don’t end poverty by distributing capital, it happens through wealth creation.
Giving a million bucks to a poor farmer in Ethiopia means nothing in the long run because private ownership of land is illegal there—meaning they can’t even advance to an industrial stage. Handouts to peasants in Peru means nothing in the long run if it takes five years and a hundred government-mandated steps to open a business there. Good look having a hiring expansion under those conditions.
We suffer from an unequal distribution of capitalism, not capital.
Before you get too excited by this ridiculous claim: “enough money to end extreme poverty worldwide four times over”, please consider that the population control crowd would never let the rich feed the poor.
It’s the same reason they won’t let the 3rd world develop meaning sources of electricity, or teach them effective farming techniques.
“They” are afraid this self sufficiency will lead to higher population growth, and competition for the valuable resources in those areas.
Ask the bleeding hearts for a few details and you’ll find they rather prescribe crippling Depo-Provera, anal sex, and abortion than allow them to thrive.
These eugenicists are truly the scourge they charge “the rich” with being.
The operative word, here, is "earned". They went out and worked to earn that money, it wasn't a gift (which leftist money-grabbers believe should be theirs to use for buying votes and spending frivolously).