« prev   random   next »

1
4

Richest 1% now owns half the world's wealth

By Strategist following x   2017 Nov 26, 6:20pm 8,371 views   116 comments   watch   sfw   quote     share    


#money
Richest 1% now owns half the world's wealth - CNBC.com
https://www.cnbc.com/.../11/14/richest-1-percent-now-own-half-the-worlds-wealth.ht...
Nov 14, 2017 - The wealthiest 1 percent of the world's population now owns more than half of the world's wealth, according a Credit Suisse report. The total ...

http://www.businessinsider.com/richest-1-own-over-half-the-worlds-wealth-2017-11

« First    « Previous    Comments 57 - 96 of 96    Last »

77   bob2356   ignore (3)   2017 Nov 29, 3:02pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
bob2356 says

Very clever. We all know how biased the media can be. The graph does not address the long term affect capital gains tax has on investment. Throw it away.


Now you are really grasping for straws. Forbes exists to be the mouthpiece of the ultra rich libertarian set.

Why don't you provide something showing the long term effect capital gains has on investment. Back to it's true because I say it's true. But that's all you post anyway.


You want too much evidence for little things that no one will bother reading. What's the point?


If it's a little thing that no one will bother reading then why is it such a big part of your argument? You can't have it both ways. Too much evidence? You have provided zero evidence. But you always provide zero evidence. Only it's true because I say it's true.
78   Strategist   ignore (3)   2017 Nov 29, 5:53pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

anon_8f378 says
Sniper says
You mean like Bill Gates


Are you implying that Bill Gates was born poor? The Bill Gates who went to a private Preparatory School?


Sniper says
Steve Jobs


And Steve Jobs? He grew up in Mountain View and Los Altos, CA. Not exactly poor...


Bill Gates and Steve Jobs were self made billionaires. If they were born in Venezuela, they would both be looking for food in dumpsters.
79   Strategist   ignore (3)   2017 Nov 29, 6:01pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Patrick says

Consider that the guy with $10,000 is in fact objectively poorer if everyone else on earth except him gets, say, $1 million. Prices will rise, and he will be fucked.

Yes, he would be fucked. The rich who have lots of money would get fucked too. Hyper inflation fucks all.

Patrick says
Or think of it this way: the economy is entirely about control over labor. There is a fixed amount of labor available in the short term. That means that the total amount of money is really just a representation of that labor. If you create money and give it to the very rich, they get a larger share of that labor to work for themselves and not for anyone else.

I presume you mean they would get a larger share of the labor to work in the businesses the rich own. That is not a bad thing. We want more jobs.
80   Strategist   ignore (3)   2017 Nov 29, 6:07pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

errc says
You do know that many of the rich once started out working for minimum wage. The difference between the rich and you now is, that the rich worked hard to climb the ladder to success, while you just sit and complain that you're not getting your share.

Big Difference. You should take that hint and change your ways.


I’d ask you to prove this, but you cannot, so I won’t


Sure he can prove it. Here goes.

https://www.theclever.com/15-extremely-successful-people-who-started-from-nothing/ 15 Extremely Successful People Who Started From Nothing
81   Strategist   ignore (3)   2017 Nov 29, 6:15pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

errc says
Here are the problems that would surface:
1. Stock market would crash.
2. Real Estate would crash.
3. No one would save in their 401K's, becoming dependent on the state for retirement.
4. The poor who don't want to work, still won't work, because they would not be paying taxes anyway.
5. New investment in companies would dry up, and go overseas.


In real or nominal terms?

Why do you think this would happen?


Both in real and nominal terms.
"Capital moves to the highest rates of return" If the returns on capital are cut, it goes where the grass is greener. (adjusting for risk)
eg. If Bank of America cuts it's CD rates from 2% to 1%, but Wells Fargo cuts it from 2% to 1.5%, where would you advise granny to put her money, if she was not interested in any other investment?
82   Strategist   ignore (3)   2017 Nov 29, 6:23pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Heraclitusstudent says
I agree with Strategist: Any inheritance above $5 millions should be taxed 95%.


Sniper says
How many people in the country will that affect?


Too many would be needlessly affected. $5 million is not a fortune like it used to be.
I would go with 20% for those with $50 million, all the way to 70% for those with $1 billion or more.
The dead don't need incentives, and their spoilt rotten brats don't need the 3rd Lamborghini.
83   Strategist   ignore (3)   2017 Nov 29, 6:37pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

bob2356 says
You want too much evidence for little things that no one will bother reading. What's the point?


If it's a little thing that no one will bother reading then why is it such a big part of your argument? You can't have it both ways. Too much evidence? You have provided zero evidence. But you always provide zero evidence. Only it's true because I say it's true.


I provide lots of evidence, but it just isn't practical to dig through mountains of data for each and every opinion I have.
I never lie. My opinions are based on facts I have read and come come across over time, and therefore have no need to even lie. Sure, I can be wrong at times because I am not perfect. Just ask my wife of 30 years, and she'll tell you how perfect my driving is. I think my driving is perfect.
84   MrMagic   ignore (11)   2017 Nov 29, 6:43pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
Too many would be needlessly affected. $5 million is not a fortune like it used to be.


$5 million might not be a fortune, but when almost 70% of the population lives paycheck to paycheck, and the average retiree is entering retirement with $120K saved up for retirement, there really won't be that many in that +$5 million category.
85   bob2356   ignore (3)   2017 Nov 29, 6:55pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

Strategist says


Here are the problems that would surface:
1. Stock market would crash.
2. Real Estate would crash.
3. No one would save in their 401K's, becoming dependent on the state for retirement.
4. The poor who don't want to work, still won't work, because they would not be paying taxes anyway.
5. New investment in companies would dry up, and go overseas.


Strategist says

I provide lots of evidence,


Where? You evidence seems to be like bigfoot, no one ever actually sees it. Show a posting you made on this entire thread showing "evidence" that anything in your list has any credence. Other than it's true because I say it's true.
86   Strategist   ignore (3)   2017 Nov 29, 7:01pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

bob2356 says
Strategist says


Here are the problems that would surface:
1. Stock market would crash.
2. Real Estate would crash.
3. No one would save in their 401K's, becoming dependent on the state for retirement.
4. The poor who don't want to work, still won't work, because they would not be paying taxes anyway.
5. New investment in companies would dry up, and go overseas.


Strategist says

I provide lots of evidence,


Where? You evidence seems to be like bigfoot, no one ever actually sees it. Show a posting you made on this entire thread showing "evidence" that anything in your list has any credence. Other than it's true because I say it's true.


My dear friend Bob,
Showing only part of statements is very deceptive.
Thanks
Strategist
87   bob2356   ignore (3)   2017 Nov 29, 7:03pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
errc says
You do know that many of the rich once started out working for minimum wage. The difference between the rich and you now is, that the rich worked hard to climb the ladder to success, while you just sit and complain that you're not getting your share.

Big Difference. You should take that hint and change your ways.


I’d ask you to prove this, but you cannot, so I won’t


Sure he can prove it. Here goes.

https://www.theclever.com/15-extremely-successful-people-who-started-from-nothing/ 15 Extremely Successful People Who Started From Nothing


A whole 15 people represents many of the rich? Seriously? What exactly is your definition of the word prove or for that matter how do you define many? Only 30% of the rich ( or at least the forbes 400 richest) start at less than upper class or wealthy.
88   Strategist   ignore (3)   2017 Nov 29, 7:07pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Sniper says
Strategist says
Too many would be needlessly affected. $5 million is not a fortune like it used to be.


$5 million might not be a fortune, but when almost 70% of the population lives paycheck to paycheck, and the average retiree is entering retirement with $120K saved up for retirement, there really won't be that many in that +$5 million category.


Yes, I agree there won't be many. You still have to draw the line somewhere, so why draw the line that would affect lots of small businesses and their employees? We want to encourage small businesses to get successful, big, and hire lots of people. Almost all big corporations started off small, many in the garage.
89   Strategist   ignore (3)   2017 Nov 29, 8:05pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

bob2356 says
Sure he can prove it. Here goes.

https://www.theclever.com/15-extremely-successful-people-who-started-from-nothing/ 15 Extremely Successful People Who Started From Nothing


A whole 15 people represents many of the rich? Seriously? What exactly is your definition of the word prove or for that matter how do you define many? Only 30% of the rich ( or at least the forbes 400 richest) start at less than upper class or wealthy.


These are just some of the well known ones. Very successful people are a minority to begin with.
Most people consider being rich as having a net worth of $5 million. Some think it's $10 million.
http://www.newsweek.com/millionaires-us-wealth-charles-schwab-rich-poor-627893
WHO IS RICH IN AMERICA? WEALTH NOW STARTS AT $2.4 MILLION
BY TOM PORTER ON 6/21/17 AT 12:03 PM
Mercedes Benz polo challenge
People enjoy an afternoon at the Mercedes-Benz Polo Challenge July 21, 2001 in Bridgehampton, New York. Americans now put a cash value of $2.4 million on what they consider "wealthy."
SPENCER PLATT/GETTY IMAGES
SHARE
U.S.
It was once the case that with $1 million in the bank, you’d be considered wealthy by most. But no longer.

According to research by American bank Charles Schwab, that benchmark has risen, and you now need at least $2.4 million to be considered wealthy.

In its survey of Americans aged 21 to 75 the bank asked how much people felt you needed to be considered "wealthy," and found that people believed that having $1 million only makes a person "financially comfortable" rather than well-off.

Keep Up With This Story And More By Subscribing Now

Though there are now a record number of millionaires in the U.S., according to the Spectrum Group’s 2017 Market Insight report, they still only make up around 10 percent of the country's population.

The $2.4 million required to be considered wealthy is 30 times the $80,000 net worth of the average American household, according to the latest figures from the U.S. Census Bureau.

Though the number of American millionaires is growing, the number of Americans in the middle is shrinking—suggesting the split between rich and poor is growing. According to a 2016 study by Pew Research Center, the number of Americans considered to be in the middle income bracket in 2000 stood at 55 percent, but by 2014 this number had shrunk to 55 percent.

However, the Schwab survey also found that Americans view other aspects of life as making a person wealthy. While 27 percent defined wealth in cash terms, 24 percent defined it as gained through experiences, and 19 percent as "peace of mind." When asked about their priorities, most said they would rather have good health and gratitude than a lot of cash.

“Wealth is often thought of as a lofty, unattainable number that doesn’t apply to most of us, but that’s an old-fashioned notion that needs to be retired,” Terri Kallsen, head of Schwab Investor Services, said in a statement released with the findings.
90   MrMagic   ignore (11)   2017 Nov 29, 8:28pm   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
Sniper says
Strategist says
Too many would be needlessly affected. $5 million is not a fortune like it used to be.


$5 million might not be a fortune, but when almost 70% of the population lives paycheck to paycheck, and the average retiree is entering retirement with $120K saved up for retirement, there really won't be that many in that +$5 million category.


Yes, I agree there won't be many.


That's my point:

In 2016, there were 9.4 million individuals with net worth between $1 million and $5 million, 1.3 million individuals with net worth between $5 million and $25 million,
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/24/a-record-number-of-americans-are-now-millionaires-new-study-shows.html

So, everyone is getting their panties in a bundle about the inheritance tax threshold of $5 million? We're going to worry about 0.3% of the population and say the new tax bill should tax the "rich" more? How much more can be extracted from this 0.3% to make a difference in total taxes?

"Needles" versus "Haystacks" again.
91   Strategist   ignore (3)   2017 Nov 29, 8:53pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Sniper says
Yes, I agree there won't be many.


That's my point:

In 2016, there were 9.4 million individuals with net worth between $1 million and $5 million, 1.3 million individuals with net worth between $5 million and $25 million,
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/24/a-record-number-of-americans-are-now-millionaires-new-study-shows.html


These are individuals, not households. Nevertheless, I would divide the numbers by 2.25 or whatever the average household is.
92   bob2356   ignore (3)   2017 Nov 29, 8:56pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
bob2356 says
Sure he can prove it. Here goes.

https://www.theclever.com/15-extremely-successful-people-who-started-from-nothing/ 15 Extremely Successful People Who Started From Nothing


A whole 15 people represents many of the rich? Seriously? What exactly is your definition of the word prove or for that matter how do you define many? Only 30% of the rich ( or at least the forbes 400 richest) start at less than upper class or wealthy.


These are just some of the well known ones. Very successful people are a minority to begin with.
Most people consider being rich as having a net worth of $5 million. Some think it's $10 million.
http://www.newsweek.com/millionai...


This has what relevance of any kind to your contention that many of the rich started poor?
93   Strategist   ignore (3)   2017 Nov 29, 9:24pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

bob2356 says
Strategist says
bob2356 says
Sure he can prove it. Here goes.

https://www.theclever.com/15-extremely-successful-people-who-started-from-nothing/ 15 Extremely Successful People Who Started From Nothing


A whole 15 people represents many of the rich? Seriously? What exactly is your definition of the word prove or for that matter how do you define many? Only 30% of the rich ( or at least the forbes 400 richest) start at less than upper class or wealthy.


These are just some of the well known ones. Very successful people are a minority to begin with.
Most people consider being rich as having a net worth of $5 million. Some think it's $10 million.
94   MrMagic   ignore (11)   2017 Nov 29, 9:56pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
In 2016, there were 9.4 million individuals with net worth between $1 million and $5 million, 1.3 million individuals with net worth between $5 million and $25 million,
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/24/a-record-number-of-americans-are-now-millionaires-new-study-shows.html


These are individuals, not households. Nevertheless, I would divide the numbers by 2.25 or whatever the average household is.


Huh?? It didn't say households?

The article said "individuals" and there are approx. 320 million "individuals" in the country. So, if 1.3 million are in the $5m to $25m bracket, isn't that 0.3% of the population?
95   Strategist   ignore (3)   2017 Nov 30, 12:34am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Sniper says
Strategist says
In 2016, there were 9.4 million individuals with net worth between $1 million and $5 million, 1.3 million individuals with net worth between $5 million and $25 million,
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/24/a-record-number-of-americans-are-now-millionaires-new-study-shows.html


These are individuals, not households. Nevertheless, I would divide the numbers by 2.25 or whatever the average household is.


Huh?? It didn't say households?

The article said "individuals" and there are approx. 320 million "individuals" in the country. So, if 1.3 million are in the $5m to $25m bracket, isn't that 0.3% of the population?


Yes, that is 0.3% of the population. However, household wealth could be a more accurate indicator. When Bill Gates had his first child, it would be the poorest child on the planet, born to the richest man on the child. The poor kid just has a used diaper to it's name. Something does not make sense there.
96   MrMagic   ignore (11)   2017 Nov 30, 7:30am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
However, household wealth could be a more accurate indicator. When Bill Gates had his first child, it would be the poorest child on the planet, born to the richest man on the child. The poor kid just has a used diaper to it's name. Something does not make sense there.


Why use a household indicator, it's usually the individual that's produced the wealth. In the case of Bill Gates, even at 5 years old, the kid will still be dirt poor. He won't gain wealth until Gates takes a dirt nap and he inherits his share (assuming Gates gives it to him in his will).

« First    « Previous    Comments 57 - 96 of 96    Last »





The Housing Trap
You're being set up to spend your life paying off a debt you don't need to take on, for a house that costs far more than it should. The conspirators are all around you, smiling to lure you in, carefully choosing their words and watching your reactions as they push your buttons, anxiously waiting for the moment when you sign the papers that will trap you and guarantee their payoff. Don't be just another victim of the housing market. Use this book to defend your freedom and defeat their schemes. You can win the game, but first you have to learn how to play it.
115 pages, $12.50

Kindle version available


about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions