Worlds 85 richest people hav as much as poorest 3.5 billion

[Charnwood]

Surely this is morally so wrong;

The 85 richest people on the planet have accumulated as much wealth between them as half of the world’s population, political and financial leaders have been warned ahead of their annual gathering in the Swiss resort of Davos.

The tiny elite of multibillionaires, who could fit into a double-decker bus, have piled up fortunes equivalent to the wealth of the world’s poorest 3.5bn people, according to a new analysis by Oxfam. The charity condemned the “pernicious” impact of the steadily growing gap between a small group of the super-rich and hundreds of millions of their fellow citizens, arguing it could trigger social unrest.

It released the research on the eve of the World Economic Forum, starting on Wednesday this week, which brings together many of the most influential figures in international trade, business, finance and politics including David Cameron and George Osborne. Disparities in income and wealth will be high on its agenda, along with driving up international health standards and mitigating the impact of climate change.

Oxfam said the world’s richest 85 people boast a collective worth of $1.7trn (£1trn). Top of the pile is Carlos Slim Helu, the Mexican telecommunications mogul, whose family’s net wealth is estimated by Forbes business magazine at $73bn. He is followed by Bill Gates, the Microsoft founder and philanthropist, whose worth is put at $67bn and is one of 31 Americans on the list.

Other well known names include the business magnate Warren Buffett, whose estimated worth is $53.5bn, and Larry Page, the co-founder of Google, with $23bn.

The world’s richest woman, Liliane Bettencourt, sits on a family fortune of $30bn derived from L’Oréal, the cosmetics company. According to Forbes, the richest person in the UK (and 89th in the world) is the Duke of Westminster, whose property empire has boosted his wealth to $11.4bn.

Oxfam calculated that almost half the world’s wealth – $110trn – is owned by just 1 per cent of its population. It said that 70 per cent of people live in countries where the gap between the rich and poor has widened in the last 30 years.

“This massive concentration of economic resources in the hands of fewer people presents a significant threat to inclusive political and economic systems,” the charity said. “People are increasingly separated by economic and political power, inevitably heightening social tensions and increasing the risk of societal breakdown.”

Winnie Byanyima, Oxfam’s executive director, who will attend Davos, described the gulf between sectors of society as staggering. “We cannot hope to win the fight against poverty without tackling inequality. Widening inequality is creating a vicious circle where wealth and power are increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few, leaving the rest of us to fight over crumbs from the top table,” she said.

Oxfam is calling on the business chiefs gathering at Davos to promise to support progressive taxation and not dodge their own taxes, refrain from using their wealth to seek political favours and demand that companies they own or control pay a living wage. In a report last week the forum warned that income disparity leading to social unrest could have a significant impact on the world economy over the next 12 months.

There was a “lost” generation of young people coming of age who lacked jobs and the skills for work, the report said. This could easily boil over into protests over inequality and corruption. Jennifer Blanke, the forum’s chief economist, said: “Disgruntlement can lead to the dissolution of the fabric of society, especially if young people feel they don’t have a future. This is something that affects everybody.”

[Herbivore]

That's capitalism for you.

[Charnwood]

I don't have an issue with Capitalism and feel it's a necessary evil to encourage innovation and economic development. Also when extreme wealth is in the hands of the right people they use their assets to benefit others as does both Warren Buffett & Bill Gates, maybe others too.

I just feel a little uncomfortable when so many laws and in particular those relating to taxation are skewed in favour of the extreme rich. Also I detest people like Abramovich and others like him have done nothing to earn their wealth, and many others who may well have amassed fortunes through illegal means and at the expense of others.

I certainly wouldn't want to see any expansion of socialism or state ownership which could potentially take the world backwards by 50 years, and I'm not sure what the answer is.... but if it's true that 85 individuals have the same wealth as the poorest half of the population of The World something is morally wrong.

[Number 9]

Who is responsible? Governments? The rich? The poor? Society? What is the solution?...pass.

[Herbivore]

I don't have an issue with Capitalism and feel it's a necessary evil to encourage innovation and economic development. Also when extreme wealth is in the hands of the right people they use their assets to benefit others as does both Warren Buffett & Bill Gates, maybe others too.

I just feel a little uncomfortable when so many laws and in particular those relating to taxation are skewed in favour of the extreme rich. Also I detest people like Abramovich and others like him have done nothing to earn their wealth, and many others who may well have amassed fortunes through illegal means and at the expense of others.

I certainly wouldn't want to see any expansion of socialism or state ownership which could potentially take the world backwards by 50 years, and I'm not sure what the answer is.... but if it's true that 85 individuals have the same wealth as the poorest half of the population of The World something is morally wrong.

If you don't have an issue with capitalism then you shouldn't have an issue with this. This is the inevitable result of western capitalism.

[Charnwood]

I'm not sure anyone has an acceptable or workable answer which is why nothing much is likely to change.

It will however be interesting to read what the consensus is amongst the political and financial leaders meeting in Switzerland on Wednesday (tomorrow).

[Charnwood]

I don't have an issue with Capitalism and feel it's a necessary evil to encourage innovation and economic development. Also when extreme wealth is in the hands of the right people they use their assets to benefit others as does both Warren Buffett & Bill Gates, maybe others too.

I just feel a little uncomfortable when so many laws and in particular those relating to taxation are skewed in favour of the extreme rich. Also I detest people like Abramovich and others like him have done nothing to earn their wealth, and many others who may well have amassed fortunes through illegal means and at the expense of others.

I certainly wouldn't want to see any expansion of socialism or state ownership which could potentially take the world backwards by 50 years, and I'm not sure what the answer is.... but if it's true that 85 individuals have the same wealth as the poorest half of the population of The World something is morally wrong.

If you don't have an issue with capitalism then you shouldn't have an issue with this. This is the inevitable result of western capitalism.

Yes, and if you went to the other extreme and applied communism or socialism to it's extreme, stripped the 85 of all their wealth and shared it out equally to give everyone in The World £1500, what good do you think that would do.

[Herbivore]

I don't have an issue with Capitalism and feel it's a necessary evil to encourage innovation and economic development. Also when extreme wealth is in the hands of the right people they use their assets to benefit others as does both Warren Buffett & Bill Gates, maybe others too.

I just feel a little uncomfortable when so many laws and in particular those relating to taxation are skewed in favour of the extreme rich. Also I detest people like Abramovich and others like him have done nothing to earn their wealth, and many others who may well have amassed fortunes through illegal means and at the expense of others.

I certainly wouldn't want to see any expansion of socialism or state ownership which could potentially take the world backwards by 50 years, and I'm not sure what the answer is.... but if it's true that 85 individuals have the same wealth as the poorest half of the population of The World something is morally wrong.

If you don't have an issue with capitalism then you shouldn't have an issue with this. This is the inevitable result of western capitalism.

Yes, and if you went to the other extreme and applied communism or socialism to it's extreme, stripped the 85 of all their wealth and shared it out equally to give everyone in The World £1500, what good do you think that would do.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make there to be honest. The present situation is what capitalism has produced with a measure of social responsibility (welfare state, foreign aid). Imagine what it'd be like totally unfettered. I think you misunderstand what communism is if you think it'd entail just giving everyone £1500.

[Charnwood]

The point I'm trying to make Herbie is that if you don't like Capitalism it's opposite is Socialism and exterme Socialism is Communism.

I'm trying to keep it simplistic and maybe I've slightly exaggerated to illustrate my point, but in simple terms, if 85 of the worlds richest Billionaires had their wealth transferred to the state and then redistributed it to the rest of the population it wouldn't actually go very far.

I guess under a Communist Regime the people would get even less because the sum available would be top sliced for the benefit of the corrupt leaders in charge.

I don't know what the answer is, but most definitely it's not replacing Capitalism with State Ownership.

[Number 9]

Further, imagine the human rights lost under a communist system. I don't think capitalism is responsible for world poverty. Capitalism certainly creates an evironment for disparity in wealth, but governments are responsible for wide-spread poverty. It will take innovators like the man who discovered water deep under the Kenyan dessert, and the governing and implementation of policies to even begin to help the poor. First and foremost, human rights should be protected.

[Herbivore]

Further, imagine the human rights lost under a communist system. I don't think capitalism is responsible for world poverty. Capitalism certainly creates an evironment for disparity in wealth, but governments are responsible for wide-spread poverty. It will take innovators like the man who discovered water deep under the Kenyan dessert, and the governing and implementation of policies that help the poor. First and formost, human rights should be protected.

No, it's definitely capitalism that's responsible. Things would be even worse without government intervention, as relatively minimal as it is.

[Charnwood]

Further, imagine the human rights lost under a communist system. I don't think capitalism is responsible for world poverty. Capitalism certainly creates an evironment for disparity in wealth, but governments are responsible for wide-spread poverty. It will take innovators like the man who discovered water deep under the Kenyan dessert, and the governing and implementation of policies that help the poor. First and formost, human rights should be protected.

No, it's definitely capitalism that's responsible. Things would be even worse without government intervention, as relatively minimal as it is.

Although I have to accept it's your view Herbie it's nice to see that even you can be wrong sometimes.

There are many factors that contribute to poverty and greed is certainly one of them, but there are many others including corruption (often within governments), civil wars, power, indifference and predjudice. I guess there are many more but my point is to make clear it's not just capitalism. In fact capitalism could have the opposite efffect and is what's needed for some of the poorest countries, not least in post-apartheid South Africa which has a huge pool of undeveloped labour desperate for work which could take millions out of poverty.

As for government intervention, I don't even want to go there as most governments in the poorer nations are run by totally corrupt people who live luxurious lives in palacial palaces set behind gated complexes whilst ignoring the needs of their people often seen suffering within yards of their homes.

As I said earlier Herb I don't have all the answers but what I do know is that Capitalism isn't the sole or even main reason for poverty across the world.

[Number 9]

Further, imagine the human rights lost under a communist system. I don't think capitalism is responsible for world poverty. Capitalism certainly creates an evironment for disparity in wealth, but governments are responsible for wide-spread poverty. It will take innovators like the man who discovered water deep under the Kenyan dessert, and the governing and implementation of policies that help the poor. First and formost, human rights should be protected.

No, it's definitely capitalism that's responsible. Things would be even worse without government intervention, as relatively minimal as it is.

Although I have to accept it's your view Herbie it's nice to see that even you can be wrong sometimes.

There are many factors that contribute to poverty and greed is certainly one of them, but there are many others including corruption (often within governments), civil wars, power, indifference and predjudice. I guess there are many more but my point is to make clear it's not just capitalism. In fact capitalism could have the opposite efffect and is what's needed for some of the poorest countries, not least in post-apartheid South Africa which has a huge pool of undeveloped labour desperate for work which could take millions out of poverty.

As for government intervention, I don't even want to go there as most governments in the poorer nations are run by totally corrupt people who live luxurious lives in palacial palaces set behind gated complexes whilst ignoring the needs of their people often seen suffering within yards of their homes.
As I said earlier Herb I don't have all the answers but what I do know is that Capitalism isn't the sole or even main reason for poverty across the world.

My point exactly...but apparently my view doesn't count in this debate.

[Charnwood]

I thought we were in agreement No 9.

[Number 9]

I thought we were in agreement No 9.

Oh right, sorry just waking up.

[Herbivore]

Further, imagine the human rights lost under a communist system. I don't think capitalism is responsible for world poverty. Capitalism certainly creates an evironment for disparity in wealth, but governments are responsible for wide-spread poverty. It will take innovators like the man who discovered water deep under the Kenyan dessert, and the governing and implementation of policies that help the poor. First and formost, human rights should be protected.

No, it's definitely capitalism that's responsible. Things would be even worse without government intervention, as relatively minimal as it is.

Although I have to accept it's your view Herbie it's nice to see that even you can be wrong sometimes.

There are many factors that contribute to poverty and greed is certainly one of them, but there are many others including corruption (often within governments), civil wars, power, indifference and predjudice. I guess there are many more but my point is to make clear it's not just capitalism. In fact capitalism could have the opposite efffect and is what's needed for some of the poorest countries, not least in post-apartheid South Africa which has a huge pool of undeveloped labour desperate for work which could take millions out of poverty.

As for government intervention, I don't even want to go there as most governments in the poorer nations are run by totally corrupt people who live luxurious lives in palacial palaces set behind gated complexes whilst ignoring the needs of their people often seen suffering within yards of their homes.

As I said earlier Herb I don't have all the answers but what I do know is that Capitalism isn't the sole or even main reason for poverty across the world.

I didn't say it was responsible for poverty, I said it's responsible for the kind of massive inequalities that you highlighted in this thread, which it is.

[Charnwood]

Blimey Herbie we all agree....

mmmmmm... well that was a bit of a wasted debate.

[Number 9]

Further, imagine the human rights lost under a communist system. I don't think capitalism is responsible for world poverty. Capitalism certainly creates an evironment for disparity in wealth, but governments are responsible for wide-spread poverty. It will take innovators like the man who discovered water deep under the Kenyan dessert, and the governing and implementation of policies that help the poor. First and formost, human rights should be protected.

No, it's definitely capitalism that's responsible. Things would be even worse without government intervention, as relatively minimal as it is.

Actually Herb, you did say capitalism is responsible for wide-spread poverty...

[Charnwood]

Further, imagine the human rights lost under a communist system. I don't think capitalism is responsible for world poverty. Capitalism certainly creates an evironment for disparity in wealth, but governments are responsible for wide-spread poverty. It will take innovators like the man who discovered water deep under the Kenyan dessert, and the governing and implementation of policies that help the poor. First and formost, human rights should be protected.

No, it's definitely capitalism that's responsible. Things would be even worse without government intervention, as relatively minimal as it is.

Actually Herb, you did say capitalism is responsible for wide-spread poverty...

Well spotted No 9, I thought it was strange we suddenly all agreed...

Herbie, you're wrong!

[Herbivore]

It's mainly capitalisms fault, inequalities between nations are as much a necessity for capitalism as inequalities between individuals.

[Floors]

Maybe one of those 85 will make an offer to ME.

[Number 9]

Maybe one of those 85 will make an offer to ME.

Ha Ha that would be helping out the poor!

[Charnwood]

Maybe one of those 85 will make an offer to ME.

Ha Ha that would be helping out the poor!

My Son-in-Law works for Warren Buffett I'll get him to ask next time he see's him, having said that he'll be after some cash for his beloved St Mirren first.

[Herbivore]

I think we should get the half the world's population to have a whip-round for us so we can make some new signings, more chance of that than getting anything out of the 85.

[Frosty]

Ownership of the player could be quite a challenge with 'crowd funding' Herb