http://www.theguardian.com/money/2015/oct/13/half-world-wealth-in-hands-populati...



Half of world's wealth now in hands of 1% of population –

report Inequality growing globally and in the UK, which has third most ‘ultra-high net worth individuals’, household wealth study finds.

Global inequality is growing, with half the world’s wealth now in the hands of just 1% of the population, according to a new report.

The middle classes have been squeezed at the expense of the very rich, according to research by Credit Suisse, which also finds that for the first time, there are more individuals in the middle classes in China – 109m – than the 92m in the US.

Tidjane Thiam, the chief executive of Credit Suisse, said: “Middle class wealth has grown at a slower pace than wealth at the top end. This has reversed the pre-crisis trend which saw the share of middle-class wealth remaining fairly stable over time.”

The report shows that a person needs only $3,210 (£2,100) to be in the wealthiest 50% of world citizens. About $68,800 secures a place in the top 10%, while the top 1% have more than $759,900. The report defines wealth as the value of assets including property and stock market investments, but excludes debt.

About 3.4 bn people – just over 70% of the global adult population – have wealth of less than $10,000. A further 1bn – a fifth of the world’s population – are in the $10,000-$100,000 range.

Each of the remaining 383m adults – 8% of the population – has wealth of more than $100,000. This number includes about 34m US dollar millionaires. About 123,800 individuals of these have more than $50m, and nearly 45,000 have more than $100m. The UK has the third-highest number of these “ultra-high net worth” individuals.

Redmond Neck wrote on Dec 25^th, 2015 at 9:14am:



Yes - the rich think the world should be mostly for their benefit only.

freediver wrote on Dec 25^th, 2015 at 8:58am:


Asking me "how far do you take the socialism thing" wasn't particularly useful. What answer did you expect - a score out of 10?

I believe in redistributing wealth in society, and I believe government has a duty to take an active part in that. But I also believe in freedoms and democracy. And yes, there's probably a lot of clashes there. To be honest I haven't formulated a particularly coherent position on it. It would probably be more useful to clarify my position on an issue by issue basis The most helpful thing I can say broadly is that I find very little, if anything, I disagree with with the Greens.

freediver wrote on Dec 25^th, 2015 at 4:30pm:


No

But all should have an equal share of political ears.

Bring on (CIR) Citizen Initiated Referendums in Australia

freediver wrote on Dec 25^th, 2015 at 4:30pm:


no. That would amount to seizing all private assets and property, make them state owned and distributing it to everyone equally. Thats communism.

Most socialists, including myself, understand the need for free enterprise and so forth - to allow for people to benefit and prosper through entrepreneurship. But there is also a social duty incumbent upon all individuals to contribute towards state-owned social services. And those who are the most well off should contribute the most (eg progressive tax system)

Bobby. wrote on Dec 25^th, 2015 at 9:28am:



Whereas the lazy and profligate, believe that what the rich have, should at every turn, be transferred into their hands [for consuming].


Dictionary;
profligate = = recklessly extravagant or wasteful.       licentious; dissolute.




My own opinion is that;

Taking the property or wealth, that was created by another person, without their consent and full agreement, is still a crime.

It is called stealing.

And even when a government [of men] makes the claim that such [actual] theft is being done in a noble cause, such an act, is still stealing     [...i.e. confiscating other peoples property/wealth].


IMO, those who have lawfully created wealth [for themselves] and have the means [the excess] to do so, should be encouraged to help their fellow men,         ....but imo, it should remain the firm right [in law], of the person who created that wealth, to decide how and when he/she chooses to disperse that wealth [if they so choose to do].




.




Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.
- Winston Churchill


"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."
- Margaret Thatcher



If you want more of something, subsidize it; if you want less of something, tax it.
- Ronald Reagan



'The nearest thing to eternal life we will ever see on this earth is a government program.'
- Ronald Reagan



'The taxpayer:
That's someone who works
For the federal government
But doesn't have to take the
Civil service examination.'
- Ronald Reagan



'Government is like a baby:
An alimentary canal with a
Big appetite at one end and
No sense of responsibility
At the other'
- Ronald Reagan



"Socialism only works
In two places:
Heaven where they don't
Need it and hell where they already have it."
-Ronald Reagan



.



Not related to the subject matter, but a damn fine quote!         

--------- >

'Here's my strategy on
The Cold War:
We win, they lose.'
- Ronald Reagan

Economics is about spreading the greatest good to the greatest number, FD. It tries to capture economic realities to do that.