Wealthiest one percent ...

[explanade]

For the Davos World Economic Forum, Oxfam is highlighting that the wealthiest 1% of the world will own more than 50% of global wealth, based on data from the Credit Suisse Global Wealth datebook.

In the BBC article about this announcement, a demarcation of how much wealth it takes to be in that 1% is estimated:

Oxfam based its prediction on data from the annual Credit Suisse Global Wealth datebook, which gives the distribution of global wealth going back to 2000. It uses the value of an individual's financial and non-financial assets, mainly property and land, minus their debts to determine what individuals "own".

The data excludes wages or income.

The BBC's head of statistics, Anthony Reuben, said in order to be part of the wealthiest 1% of the world's population, an individual would need to be worth just over half a million pounds.

"So it is not necessarily talking about people who own yachts and ski chalets. Owning an average house in London (without a mortgage) would just about put you in the 1%. "

He also noted that Oxfam had chosen to use figures which showed the disparity between the 1% and the rest of the world in the worst light.

"From 2000 until 2009, the proportion of wealth held by the wealthiest 1% fell every year. From 2010 until 2014 it rose every year. Oxfam has taken the figures since 2010 and used them to extrapolate what will happen in the coming years. Clearly, that is the methodology that will make inequality look the most severe," he added.

BBC News - Richest 1% to own more than rest of world, Oxfam says

 

[ls99]

I certainly would not mind being filthy rich. Alas I do not make the category.

 

[NW-Bound]

... to be part of the wealthiest 1% of the world's population, an individual would need to be worth just over half a million pounds...

Some people at the bottom of the scale collectively own vast land with untapped resources. Look at Africa specifically. They should be rich. How do we help?

 

[GrayHare]

There was no mention of how much of the change is driven by reproduction rates. I would suspect the wealthier have fewer children per capita than do the poorer. Continue that for decades and wealth inequality grows.

 

[marko]

"...He also noted that Oxfam had chosen to use figures which showed the disparity between the 1% and the rest of the world in the worst light..."
"So it is not necessarily talking about people who own yachts and ski chalets. Owning an average house in London (without a mortgage) would just about put you in the 1%. "

So now the middle class (more or less) are part of the 'evil 1%' and income inequality?

Are they trying to make me feel guilty?
Sorry bub, can't lose sleep over that one. Don't people realize that the more extreme they make their argument the less people care?

Who said: "there are lies, damn lies and statistics"?

 

[Independent]

The interesting thing is that, as an American, I hear "richest 1%" and think "richest 1% of Americans". I'm not in that group.

If I thought "richest 1% of world population", I am in that group.

Of course, I typically hear that phrase when someone is talking about US tax policy. So I suppose the first is more appropriate in that context.

But, if I happen to be thinking about how lucky I am, the second seems more relevant.

 

[Dash man]

There is an inaccurate assumption that the wealth of the rich sits idle once they buy enough yachts and such. Who do they think provides money for investments in new businesses and growth of existing companies?


Sent from my iPhone using Early Retirement Forum

 

[MichaelB]

Who said: "there are lies, damn lies and statistics"?

Porky Pig?

 

[HF63]

I am rich, I can do everything I want or do nothing.


I value my time more than the monopoly currency or hard assets.

 

[Walt34]

Who said: "there are lies, damn lies and statistics"?

It was popularized by Mark Twain but who said it originally seems to be unknown: Lies, damned lies, and statistics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[haha]

There is an inaccurate assumption that the wealth of the rich sits idle once they buy enough yachts and such. Who do they think provides money for investments in new businesses and growth of existing companies?

Uh, welfare recipients?

 

[Rick_Head]

The interesting thing is that, as an American, I hear "richest 1%" and think "richest 1% of Americans". I'm not in that group.

If I thought "richest 1% of world population", I am in that group.

If you heard "richest 10% of world population" I suspect nearly 100% of North Americans would be in that group.

 

[Walt34]

If you heard "richest 10% of world population" I suspect nearly 100% of North Americans would be in that group.

Pretty close. According to this site $14k/year puts you in the top 9.52%.

Note: it is intended to make you feel wealthy so you'll make a donation to their charity so there might be a credibility issue. But I have no reason to doubt the numbers.

 

[target2019]

I am the 22,776,713th richest person on earth.
Global Rich List

 

[Winemaker]

As I mentioned on another forum, if we work/invest a little harder/smarter, we will reach 60%.


As an aside, Americans and Canadians ( and a few others) enjoy the God-given right of Personal Property. We can purchase, swap, separate, sell, rent, borrow against and enjoy these rights. The other countries own their own real estate and bar their citizens from these rights. It is the greatest gift our founding fathers recognized when our country was formed, and is the reason that the US and Canada have the wealthiest citizens of the world. I am most thankful for this insight.

 

[Midpack]

I am the 22,776,713th richest person on earth.
Global Rich List

I was 22,776,712th -

 

[explanade]

There is an inaccurate assumption that the wealth of the rich sits idle once they buy enough yachts and such. Who do they think provides money for investments in new businesses and growth of existing companies?


Sent from my iPhone using Early Retirement Forum

If you look at some billionaires buying sports teams and other discretionary purchases which necessarily don't have an expected ROI, you have to wonder if they're not like the proverbial lottery winners who blow money on frivolous things.

You expect someone who's amassed such fortunes to be wise with money, always extracting every last cent out of the capital, but this is probably a bit of idolatry.

 

[ls99]

The calculator is comparing me to [-]Rhodesia[/-] Zimbabwe. Then wants a bloody donation.

A slick attempt at laying guilt.

 

[MooreBonds]

So how do they factor in the old-school Soviet Czars and other world dictators (past and present)? Stalin may not have had a bank account in his name that had a $10B ledger....but he sure had control over a ton of things, and lived quite the elite lifestyle. Same with other dictators over the years that have taken advantage of their citizens. Are they conveniently left out and forgotten in the rankings and calculations, just so people who accumulate wealth today in the US are targeted for being 'selfish'?

 

[meierlde]

So how do they factor in the old-school Soviet Czars and other world dictators (past and present)? Stalin may not have had a bank account in his name that had a $10B ledger....but he sure had control over a ton of things, and lived quite the elite lifestyle. Same with other dictators over the years that have taken advantage of their citizens. Are they conveniently left out and forgotten in the rankings and calculations, just so people who accumulate wealth today in the US are targeted for being 'selfish'?

But how does one value the art work subsidized by the rulers in the past, the popes, the Kings of France (Louis XIV for example), etc. Of course in one sense the private art collections of rulers were the National Institute for Humanities of the time. Add to that the wars they liked to engage in and most were broke off and on or if the father was good in finance the son blew the fathers savings.

 

[Amethyst]

Smoley hokes - even adding in what I hope is the equity in our house, plus the purported "value" of pensions, we are only

63,549,207th

I don't even want to report what we'd be if it was just based on investments.

You guys are too rich for us.

Amethyst

I was 22,776,712th -

 

[bingybear]

I ran some numbers on Global Richlist. annual income of $19330 puts you in the top 4%... so minimum wage should get you there. However, it can be tight to live on that in many places in the US.
Part of the need for higher incomes in much of the developed word is things cost more, but also expectations of what one needs to live are inflated compared to the rest of the world.

Yes... these studies are done to pull at you heart strings. Note that xofam did not note where their employees and leaders fall into the 1%.

Do some good in the world. Give back... money or time to make the world a better place. And ... enjoy your time here while you have it. And most importantly... Throw out that measuring stick... who cares which one of you is bigger... you just have to live with what you got.

 

[jollystomper]

As an aside, Americans and Canadians ( and a few others) enjoy the God-given right of Personal Property. We can purchase, swap, separate, sell, rent, borrow against and enjoy these rights. The other countries own their own real estate and bar their citizens from these rights. It is the greatest gift our founding fathers recognized when our country was formed, and is the reason that the US and Canada have the wealthiest citizens of the world. I am most thankful for this insight.

+1000

In many countries the rulers see personal property ownership as a threat to their power, so it is either not allowed, or not protected.

 

[target2019]

Smoley hokes - even adding in what I hope is the equity in our house, plus the purported "value" of pensions, we are only

63,549,207th

I don't even want to report what we'd be if it was just based on investments.

You guys are too rich for us.

I rechecked my numbers, and must have mis-typed something.
Come to find out I am only #63,549,208.

 

[bingybear]

I rechecked my numbers, and must have mis-typed something.
Come to find out I am only #63,549,208.

still measuring yourself