Posted on 11/14/2017 1:32:58 PM PST by fwdude
The richest 1 percent of the world’s population owns more than half of household wealth, with their share skyrocketing since the global financial crisis, a new report says.
The annual Global Wealth Report, published Tuesday by Credit Suisse, points out that while the top 1 percent and 10 percent of the world’s richest saw their share of wealth decline between 2001 and 2008, the trend swung the other way after the financial crisis.
“From 2013 onwards, the share of the top 5 percent has been above the level observed at the start of the century, and the share of the top 1 percent is now significantly above what we estimate for 2000,” the report said.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.com ...
key word, ‘Net’. Most Kalifornians’ wealth is negative because of debt.
And they are probably all leftists.
The fact your response to the “goose” is worth what it gets paid shows just how out of touch you are.. I really think you need to go re-read the golden goose parable, because, any further discussion, if that’s where you are mentally is pointless
. . . and guess what percentile of the world’s population you, fellow middle-class American, fall into???
Among many others, including that activist homo Tim Gill.
but 1% of 7 billion people is 70 million people. That’s a lot of people.
DING DING DING!!! EXACTLY... The assumption among the right is that these 1% are all wealth creators... when if act they are in no small part, engaging in wealth capture... and laying a long term path or destruction in their wake....
George Soros is an excellent example of this...
This isn’t a right v left problem, this is a major issue, that will eventually not only destabilize economies, but entire societies, and the fact zealots on both sides can’t seem to get past the ideological blinders is what is going to allow this to happen
The wealthy are in control and assure that status quo is maintained
Always as been, always will be
“Can we dance with your dates”
“To be in the World’s top 1% of net worth, it is $770,000 (usd)”
Thanks for that reminder. Also note that $50 in India or Indonesia will go a lot further there than here.
We give to World Vision. Last Christmas we sent $100 extra to “our boy” in Ethiopia. He sent a photo back showing the things he had purchased with the $100. A goat, a chicken, new sneakers, and I think new pants and shirt too.
So a goat for milk and a chicken for eggs for several years I imagine - for $100!
Funny. I never got close to being in the 1%. But the corporations they owned hired me and made me well enough off to buy a house, have a family and have enough money for a nice retirement.
Those evil creeps.
The issue is that like physics, capitalism breaks down once you hit a certain level. When you have global, government sanctioned, international conglomerate monoplies owned by a handful of people who view their positions of power as a vehicle to enforce their leftist worldview, capitalism dies. You get paid what Amazon or Google decide you’re worth. Pick one or the other. While we’re at it, these same people decide how long you get to live, what care you’re entitled, what you’re allowed to eat, what you can drive...
Anyone think that the 1% are satisfied? They’ll find ways to decrease the percent in the upper tier (to 1/2 % or so?) and to increase their power and wealth.
Steyer
This is actually a real problem. This is not being done via capitalism, but by a select group of super wealthy, exerting control of politicians globally. These are the new Robber Barons. They create a legal system that makes them wealthier and prevents legitimate competition.
Obama’s fault.
and with the Global Warming Redistribution of Wealth they’ll have the other half
“The left is absolutely gnashing their teeth over this report, as if someone having wealth means that others necessarily don’t. What idiots. “
Most of the the leftists are too stupid to realize that this is exactly what they want, the destruction of the middle class.
The left always worries about who has it, but they never ever think about who created it, and how humanity benefits from that.
. . . and income, and especially net worth, tend to go up with age. If you earn more than $32,400 annually but you are nearing retirement and your savings are less than $770,000, your position isn’t as secure as it might be.That is, in practical terms wealth is a function of prospects - especially youth, but including pension and social security prospects- as well as savings.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.