Richest 2% own more than half the world

[shapeshifter]

HELSINKI (Reuters) - Two percent of adults have more than half of the world's wealth, including property and financial assets, according to a study by the U.N. development research institute published on Tuesday.

While global income is distributed unequally, the spread of wealth is even more skewed, the study by the World Institute for Development Economics Research of the U.N. University said.

"Wealth is heavily concentrated in North America, Europe and high income Asia-Pacific countries. People in these countries collectively hold almost 90 percent of total world wealth," the survey showed.

The Helsinki-based institute said its study was the first global research on the topic, for which there is only limited data.

"We've estimated that the richest 2 percent of adults own more than half of global wealth, while the bottom half own 1 percent," said institute director Anthony Shorrocks.

He likened the situation to that where, in a group of 10 people, one person has $99, while the remaining nine share $1.

"If you think income has been distributed unequally, wealth has been distributed even more unequally," Shorrocks said.

According to the study, in 2000 a couple needed capital of $1 million to be among the top 1 percent on the wealth list -- the richest 37 million people in the world.

More than one in every two of those people lives in the United States or Japan.

And it found that net assets of $2,200 per adult would put a household in the top half of the world wealth distribution.

 

[chilli]

Somehow this doesn't surprise me, from what I understand the gap is only getting wider.

 

[slow__hand]

Make's one feel fortunate and a little guilty at the same time.

Too bad Christmas is such a trough we all dine at for the benefit of the 1%

 

[luckydog71]

Is the gap between rich and poor widening or narrowing? Or is it staying the same?

I have no facts to base my opinion… but I believe the middle class is growing and most of the new arrivals to the middle class are coming from the lower call (is that politically correct?).

If you look at the history of man…. In the middle ages .. how much of the wealth was owned by the top 2%?

If you look at the great depression….. how much of the wealth was owned by the top 2%?

Is the lower class (PC?) better off today than they were in 1929? In 1959? In 1979? My gut reaction is yes.

Is the upper class better off? Actually who cares…. In all of history they could always have anything money could buy… they still can….. so what?

So many people in our society measure their progress by comparing themselves to others… I think that is a false analysis…. I measure myself against myself… where am I in comparison to where I want to be? If I am close I am happy…. I am not I need to figure out what I need to do to meet my expectations of myself…..

Will I ever be as rich as Bill Gates or Warren Buffet? Not in terns of purchasing power, I will never be their equals and it is not my goal. Do you know what? I can drive down to McDonalds.. walk inside with my family… and not have any fear… Bill G can not do that… neither can many of the people you have placed in the top 2%....

Are they better off than me? I think not. Would I trade them places… I can honestly answer no.

 

[stickdoctor]

the middle class is considered to be shrinking in both canada and the us.

 

[slow__hand]

There is a place for a rant rather than blaming one person....this is not it.

search and go from there

 

[HankQuinlan]

On the other hand, the middle class is increasing in percentage in China and India.

 

[chilli]

LuckyDog its been proven the middle class is shrinking.

Also we (especially Americans) tend to be very insultated from what is really happening in other parts of the world.

Not to take a knock at you (I'm not) its responses like yours that show where the real problem is "Attitudes" and Ignorance.

 

[luckydog71]

LuckyDog its been proven the middle class is shrinking.

Also we (especially Americans) tend to be very insultated from what is really happening in other parts of the world.

Not to take a knock at you (I'm not) its responses like yours that show where the real problem is "Attitudes" and Ignorance.

Chilli, no offense taken.

I trust you are using the word ignorance in its real meaning “lack of knowledge”. I accept that I may lack knowledge but your response did not provide any enlightenment.

Who has proven the middle class is shrinking?
Please define middle class and then tell me how many people fit that definition 100 years ago, 50 years ago and today.

It is my opinion (not based on a factual data) that there fewer people in the world who would fit the definition of poor as it was defined in 1900. The standard of living in Canada and the US of “poor people” is much higher today than it was in 1900.

As far as the “poor people” in the rest of the world, do you believe there are more of them today than there was in 1900? Of those “poor people” are they even worse off today than they were in 1900?

Here is a quote from the president of the World Bank.
The proportion of people living on less than $1 a day decreased from 40 to 21 per cent of the global population between 1981 and 2001, says the World Bank's latest annual report.
The president of the bank, James Wolfensohn, said in his overall review that the past year had brought with it signs of hope and progress, but it had also brought signs of concern in the fight against global poverty.
Here is the link http://www.rediff.com/money/2004/sep/30wbank.htm

So is poverty in the world a problem? Yes.

Is poverty more pervasive today? No.

In either case the bigger question is what do you do about it?
Liberals (the small l) think wealth distribution is the answer. If you took the entire wealth of the world and spread it evenly over the population, we would solve poverty. A noble idea and I am waiting for the limousine liberals to show me the way. After you Ted Kennedy.

Conservatives (small c) think providing opportunity is the answer. Not everyone can or will take advantage of the opportunities, but that is life. I am in this camp.

 

[sdw]

HELSINKI (Reuters) - Two percent of adults have more than half of the world's wealth, including property and financial assets, according to a study by the U.N. development research institute published on Tuesday.

While global income is distributed unequally, the spread of wealth is even more skewed, the study by the World Institute for Development Economics Research of the U.N. University said.

"Wealth is heavily concentrated in North America, Europe and high income Asia-Pacific countries. People in these countries collectively hold almost 90 percent of total world wealth," the survey showed.

The Helsinki-based institute said its study was the first global research on the topic, for which there is only limited data.

"We've estimated that the richest 2 percent of adults own more than half of global wealth, while the bottom half own 1 percent," said institute director Anthony Shorrocks.

He likened the situation to that where, in a group of 10 people, one person has $99, while the remaining nine share $1.

"If you think income has been distributed unequally, wealth has been distributed even more unequally," Shorrocks said.

According to the study, in 2000 a couple needed capital of $1 million to be among the top 1 percent on the wealth list -- the richest 37 million people in the world.

More than one in every two of those people lives in the United States or Japan.

And it found that net assets of $2,200 per adult would put a household in the top half of the world wealth distribution.

This study is one more example of how to misinterpert data.

How many of these 37 million people that are worth 1 million or more have their net worth tied up in their home?
Is this gross wealth or net wealth? In other words, how big of a mortgage are these people carrying?

On the top half of the world's wealth distribution.
How many of these people's net assets of 2,200 is the equity in their 3 year old car?
How many of these people's net assets is tied up in their company pension plan?

 

[PuntMeister]

Progress

2% is great progress, up from < 0.01% when nobody but the king or pharoah decided upon your life. At least now I get to decide if I want to buy their fucking software or gasoline or soda pop. The rich have never added more value to society then they do now. Plus these rich dudes in the western world either get to give it all back through philanthropy or taxes, so in a generation or two it gets re-distributed. Ain't progress wonderful?

Fucking alarmists trying to tell us it is suddenly evil to get rich, when the rich just end up starting new libraries and buying goods and services, like exotic cars that support small Italian industry. It's no longer about the rich getting rich as long as they carry a few hundred thousand of us along to a better life on their coat-tails.

 

[lovinithard]

Man oh man, you guys have really sucked it all down, every drop. The friggin' nonsense spewed out by corporate media has brainwashed you all. Yeah, so there are fewer people living on under a dollar a day today as opposed to 20 years ago. Big whup. They're living on under 2 dollars a day. A 100 percent increase.

Here's something you should all get your brains around: the billions of people living in Asia now want same as what we got here in N America. Unfortunately we're gonna need four planet earths to obtain the resources to achieve that standard for everyone in the world.

Aint gonna happen. Especially when a friggen' 2 percent are hoggin' half the planet right now.

Better prepare yourselves, things are gonna get nasty.

 

[dirtydan]

This study is one more example of how to misinterpert data.

How many of these 37 million people that are worth 1 million or more have their net worth tied up in their home?
Is this gross wealth or net wealth? In other words, how big of a mortgage are these people carrying?

On the top half of the world's wealth distribution.
How many of these people's net assets of 2,200 is the equity in their 3 year old car?
How many of these people's net assets is tied up in their company pension plan?

Ok then. How much power and influence does the top 2% have?

 

[dirtydan]

Is the gap between rich and poor widening or narrowing? Or is it staying the same?

Likely widening.

I have no facts to base my opinion…

That's never stopped you before LD!

but I believe the middle class is growing and most of the new arrivals to the middle class are coming from the lower call (is that politically correct?).

For some one that has heaped scorn on political correctness before, why now are you concerned about it?

If you look at the history of man…. In the middle ages .. how much of the wealth was owned by the top 2%?

If you look at the great depression….. how much of the wealth was owned by the top 2%?

Depends on what was needed for people to get by in day to day life and the cost of it.

Is the lower class (PC?) better off today than they were in 1929? In 1959? In 1979? My gut reaction is yes.

And this means exactly what?

Is the upper class better off? Actually who cares…. In all of history they could always have anything money could buy… they still can….. so what?

So many people in our society measure their progress by comparing themselves to others… I think that is a false analysis…. I measure myself against myself… where am I in comparison to where I want to be? If I am close I am happy…. I am not I need to figure out what I need to do to meet my expectations of myself…..

Sounds like empty rhetoric to deny the obvious.

Will I ever be as rich as Bill Gates or Warren Buffet? Not in terns of purchasing power, I will never be their equals and it is not my goal. Do you know what? I can drive down to McDonalds.. walk inside with my family… and not have any fear… Bill G can not do that… neither can many of the people you have placed in the top 2%....

Oh my the dreadful plight of the superwealthy.

Is
Are they better off than me? I think not. Would I trade them places… I can honestly answer no.

What does that have to with 2% of the world's population controlling 90% of the world's wealth?

 

[dirtydan]

On the other hand, the middle class is increasing in percentage in China and India.

Indeed, a burgeoning middle class is perhaps one of the best factors to point to a country that it has a good deal of economic power. Take the US for example, it's power grew as its middle class did. Now that it's middle class is on the decline there are question surrounding the economic might of the US. Especially when the REPUBLICAN administration is BORROWING money from China.

 

[Dionysus]

U.S./China and definitions re wealth and middle class

Yes, the U.S. is borrowing from China. Here's how it works:1) The U.S. has a huge trade deficit with China because China exports to the U.S. far more than the U.S. exports to China. So, China has to decide what to do with all the USD they end up with. To date, they buy U.S. government bonds. Hence they are lending money to the U.S. They also buy Canadian bonds, Japanese bonds, Euro bonds, etc. 2) The U.S. is the world's largest debtor nation. Hence, USD debt (U.S. gov't. bonds) is easily purchased, easily sold, and (so far) is in big demand. 3)The USD is the world's major reserve currency, so the demand for USD and USD debt (still) is huge.

The discussion to date re the top 2% in interesting, Here are my views:
1) It's not new news. It's been that way since the Industrial Revolution. Prior to that, more wealth was concentrated in the hands of even fewer people.
2) The gap between the poor and the rich (industrialized) nations has widened and will likely continue to do so. Only education and access to capital (in that order) will change that. Microcredit lending to women has led to some huge successes and is a bright spot.

 

[Dionysus]

And..........

It's not about Republican/Democrat, it's about a nation living beyond its means. Re definitions, the term middle class has no meaning unless it is defined. An income of $10,000 USD per year would certainly put an Indian or Chinese family in their middle class - not in developed Asia, Europe or North America though. Globally, the middle class (as defined by the countries themselves) is increasing as a percentage of the population). Canada too - not sure re the U.S.

 

[Sonny]

Ok then. How much power and influence does the top 2% have?

Well, those on this planet who are absolutely destitute, such as those in third world countries like a number in Africa, like Cambodia, Burma, etc. etc. etc. including all the bottom socio-economic strata in first and second world countries.... all of these have no influence at all; that much is very obvious else they would not be suffering in their present conditions.

Then for those who have relative wealth, but are not the very wealthy, these folks are brainwashed into consumerism whereby their life meaning is defined by what possessions, lifestyle, position etc they "enjoy". The lower strata of this group pursue these goals to the point of massive personal debt. By chasing after addictive hollowness these folks keep the very wealthy in power, who are those who provide this opiate to the masses, so those with so-called relative wealth have very little influence.

As long as the very wealthy can deflect the needs of the very poor, can provide the life basics and opiates of confusion to the rest, and can maintain a variety of sources of distraction, then, while not absolute, they have an enormous amount of influence.

From all the corruption in political circles, worse in 3rd world but certainly heavily present in modern nations, we can see the hand of influence manipulating politicians to support the current ways. In many countries it is control of wealth that keeps despotic leaders in power - e.g., in Burma (I refuse to use the modern name) the people are next to starving while the military is by comparison well-paid.

Does this mean that the very wealthy have some kind of divine entitlement? It is completely due to the lack of insight that infests them and everyone else in a position of relative privilege all along the scale that is the cause of all needless suffering on this planet.

Are there exceptions that show others having influence? Of course. One only need look at extreme religious leaders, whose power mainly arises from the masses of dispossessed. Still, without the wealth of those that provide them with a constant stream of weapons, this power, while able to be noisy, would be blunted.

 

[sdw]

I'd be surprised if the US was borrowing money from China..

Much more likely that they are borrowing money from the big oil producers, like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait etc...

But one thing that is happening is that chinese companies (and wealthy citizens) are buying lots of land, office buildings, etc... in North America.

Three parts of a powerpoint presentation on how much the US has borrowed from China. http://www.rgemonitor.com/blog/setser/122822 It's by Martin Wolf of the Financial Times.

 

[sdw]

Ok then. How much power and influence does the top 2% have?

It's more to the point to ask how much power and influence the top .002% have.

The vast majority of the 37 million that the study reports are in the top 2% don't have the ability to effect changes in government policy.

What needs to be looked at is the multinationals who used your pension money to support Bush II. The people who are running things are the fund managers who use our savings to ensure that the world is pushed in the direction they want.