Eight billionaires own same as poorest half of the world

[Panmisiek]

https://uk.yahoo.com/finance/news/eight-billionaires-own-same-poorest-060000057.html


When I hear people saying "come on dude, your action matters, you can make a difference"

No

This 8 rich cunts can make a difference. Not me, not you reading this, not any person below and above this thread.

World hunger could be eradicated for 10% of their wealth. For another % of their wealth they could create enough windmills in the world and solar panels so no one have to ever pay for electricity again. Shutting down nuclear plants in the process.

And they will still have lots of cash left for other humanity ideas.


I can see someone asking "why they should contribute towards all that? Just because they rich and they worked they ass off entire life doesn't mean they have to do it so others can just sit on their ass"

Well I agree with you.

All I am saying is that there are people out there that can truly make a difference.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Feel free to patent some intellectual property that you created, brand it, capitalize on it and then use your fortune to do whatever you want.

Gates has donated about 26 billion dollars to philanthropic causes and ear marked 95% of his wealth to be distributed to charitable causes upon his death...but, yeah, he's a total cunt.

 

[CableandThanos]

https://uk.yahoo.com/finance/news/eight-billionaires-own-same-poorest-060000057.html


When I hear people saying "come on dude, your action matters, you can make a difference"

No

This 8 rich cunts can make a difference. Not me, not you reading this, not any person below and above this thread.

World hunger could be eradicated for 10% of their wealth. For another % of their wealth they could create enough windmills in the world and solar panels so no one have to ever pay for electricity again. Shutting down nuclear plants in the process.

And they will still have lots of cash left for other humanity ideas.


I can see someone asking "why they should contribute towards all that? Just because they rich and they worked they ass off entire life doesn't mean they have to do it so others can just sit on their ass"

Well I agree with you.

All I am saying is that there are people out there that can truly make a difference.

LOL, I love it when articles come out with these BIG numbers AND PEOPLE FREAK OUT.

Because most people can't do math it seams. If you took their entire net worth and split it up amongst the 4 billion poor people, that would equal a one time payment of $106. Sorry but the poor are still poor even if they were to all get $106 once in their life.

 

[M3t4tr0n]

LOL, I love it when articles come out with these BIG numbers AND PEOPLE FREAK OUT.

Because most people can't do math it seams. If you took their entire net worth and split it up amongst the 4 billion poor people, that would equal a one time payment of $106. Sorry but the poor are still poor even if they were to all get $106 once in their life.

I could use $106 dollars

 

[choke you]

Sign me up for that 106 bucks too. Goodbye work boots!

 

[Mike]

Feel free to patent some intellectual property that you created, brand it, capitalize on it and then use your fortune to do whatever you want.

Gates has donated about 26 billion dollars to philanthropic causes and ear marked 95% of his wealth to be distributed to charitable causes upon his death...but, yeah, he's a total cunt.

Tbf Gates is really an exception to the rule, and has always been extremely generous with his wealth. If all the billionaires were like Gates we'd all be a LOT better off.

 

[Mike]

LOL, I love it when articles come out with these BIG numbers AND PEOPLE FREAK OUT.

Because most people can't do math it seams. If you took their entire net worth and split it up amongst the 4 billion poor people, that would equal a one time payment of $106. Sorry but the poor are still poor even if they were to all get $106 once in their life.

Well, obviously, it's not about something idiotic like just giving each person a share. It's about using such a huge accumulation of wealth in productive ways that help humanity, instead of hoarding it like a D&D dragon.


it's about the collective buying power you have with billions of dollars, not buying everyone a pair of Air Jordans.

 

[M3t4tr0n]

Sign me up for that 106 bucks too. Goodbye work boots!

Selfish billionaires want you to work barefooted! Lets get a lynch mob together!

 

[choke you]

Selfish billionaires want you to work barefooted! Lets get a lynch mob together!

Those clever bastard are always one step ahead.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Tbf Gates is really an exception to the rule, and has always been extremely generous with his wealth. If all the billionaires were like Gates we'd all be a LOT better off.

Well Zuckerberg is also pretty charitable and has huge global influence in developing tech start up capabilities in 3rd world nations (paying and training coders and developers in Nigeria) and spending 200 million to grant parts of Africa with satellite data connections (well, the satellite blew up in Sept, but the rebuild is happening)

Bezo I think was the 3rd American on that list and yeah, he's not as charitable - but still has a decent foundation.

Buffett would have to be on that list and hes donated over 20 billion.

Kaiser, bloomberg and Allen have all also donated over a billion dollars each.

I think most people LOVE to armchair quarterback on how others should spend their money -- the difference being, people who judge how others spend their wealth are generally not very good at acquiring themselves.

 

[irish_thug]

Sign me up for that 106 bucks too. Goodbye work boots!

Or, hello new pair of work boots.

 

[choke you]

Or, hello new pair of work boots.

Ya maybe 10 years ago. All 106 bucks these days will get you is blisters.

 

[irish_thug]

Ya maybe 10 years ago. All 106 bucks these days will get you is blisters.

Down payment?

 

[Mike]

Well Zuckerberg is also pretty charitable and has huge global influence in developing tech start up capabilities in 3rd world nations (paying and training coders and developers in Nigeria) and spending 200 million to grant parts of Africa with satellite data connections (well, the satellite blew up in Sept, but the rebuild is happening)

Bezo I think was the 3rd American on that list and yeah, he's not as charitable - but still has a decent foundation.

I think most people LOVE to armchair quarterback on how others should spend their money -- the difference being, people who judge how others spend their wealth are generally not very good at acquiring themselves.

Sure that's true but it's worth looking into it. The very idea of having billionaires isn't really a good thing. We used to have laws in place for the purpose of preventing massive monopilies and vast consolidation of wealth.


Generations ago before the governents of the world completely sold out, they were very worried about exactly the situation we have now. Private citizens should not have that level of wealth and power. I think some people do assume they are all just hoarding the money, and that's not true.


But there are certainly a lot of these people that do sit on massive amount of wealth, which is ultimately irresponsible and terrible for the economy.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Sure that's true but it's worth looking into it. The very idea of having billionaires isn't really a good thing. We used to have laws in place for the purpose of preventing massive monopilies and vast consolidation of wealth.


Generations ago before the governents of the world completely sold out, they were very worried about exactly the situation we have now. Private citizens should not have that level of wealth and power. I think some people do assume they are all just hoarding the money, and that's not true.


But there are certainly a lot of these people that do sit on massive amount of wealth, which is ultimately irresponsible and terrible for the economy.

I find that a completely perfunctory and ridiculous statement -- these people are establishing a market need, developing IP that people want and are producing products that are successful based on free market purchase. Out of those listed, who owns a monopoly in the US? Just because you feel like there should be a cap on success, does not make it a worthwhile notion. But, to each their own.

 

[Mike]

I find that a completely perfunctory and ridiculous statement -- these people are establishing a market need, developing IP that people want and are producing products that are successful based on free market purchase. Out of those listed, who owns a monopoly in the US? Just because you feel like there should be a cap on success, does not make it a worthwhile notion. But, to each their own.

tt's not my personal opinion though. Their are all kinds of quotes going back decades and even centuries with world leaders saying monopolies are terrible for citizens. we USED to have a lot of laws and government oversight in place to make sure the free market is properly regulated.


Without that protection you end up with what we have now. Huge monopolies using coercion and blatantly illegal business practices to run smaller businesses out.


Look how much of our food supply is under the control of a couple of enormous companies instead of a huge network of independent ranchrs and farmers.


That didn't happen organically. It happened because corporations were able to use things like price fixing on commodities to slowly drown independents. We have huge tracts of formely privately owned farming and ranching land, where the original owners are basically sharecroppers now.


You see that same type of thing in basically every industry. It's not about hating on someone for being successful, its about ensuring a level playing field. Because the guy with all the resources will just crush everyone else by any mean necessary. It's human nature.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

tt's not my personal opinion though. Their are all kinds of quotes going back decades and even centuries with world leaders saying monopolies are terrible for citizens. we USED to have a lot of laws and government oversight in place to make sure the free market is properly regulated.


Without that protection you end up with what we have now. Huge monopolies using coercion and blatantly illegal business practices to run smaller businesses out.


Look how much of our food supply is under the control of a couple of enormous companies instead of a huge network of independent ranchrs and farmers.


That didn't happen organically. It happened because corporations were able to use things like price fixing on commodities to slowly drown independents. We have huge tracts of formely privately owned farming and ranching land, where the original owners are basically sharecroppers now.


You see that same type of thing in basically every industry. It's not about hating on someone for being successful, its about ensuring a level playing field. Because the guy with all the resources will just crush everyone else by any mean necessary. It's human nature.

We have monopoly laws in place -- give me actual case studies that prove your point. Demonstrate that independent farmers can not compete (i just bought $300 worth of meat from a local farmer) And those farmers who sell to conglomerates do so under the security of knowing their products will always be sold, regardless of market competition. They are more than free to compete on the open market -- but because one company changes the paradigm to take a strategic advantage, does not make them a monopoly

Theres 10 major food production companies operating the US -- how is that a monopoly

Apple, Linux, Oracle all compete with MS

Walmart competes with Amazon.

Aside, this is thread is geared toward Billionaires -- so why should there be a cap on market success, when the it is the people purchasing in the market that establishes the monetary gains by demanding a product.

 

[CableandThanos]

Well, obviously, it's not about something idiotic like just giving each person a share. It's about using such a huge accumulation of wealth in productive ways that help humanity, instead of hoarding it like a D&D dragon.


it's about the collective buying power you have with billions of dollars, not buying everyone a pair of Air Jordans.

Ok so show me the system where you can get food to billions of people thousands of miles apart everyday? Plan for it getting there and getting it distributed without the gov of those areas coming in and taking 60% of it for themselves.

 

[MusterX]

LOL, I love it when articles come out with these BIG numbers AND PEOPLE FREAK OUT.

Because most people can't do math it seams. If you took their entire net worth and split it up amongst the 4 billion poor people, that would equal a one time payment of $106. Sorry but the poor are still poor even if they were to all get $106 once in their life.

The way you summarize the problem shows how little you have actually thought about it. First off there isn't 8 billion people in the world, its around 7.3, half being about 3.65 billion. The problem to begin with is that you don't see a problem with 8 people have the same wealth as 3,600,000,000. It used to be the world's 62 richest had as much as 3.5 billion but now that number is down to 8.

What's worse is that the top 1% have more than everyone else combined. The top 1% have more than the other 99% combined.

The wealthiest have seen their net worth soar over the five years ending in 2015. Back in 2010, it took 388 mega-rich people to own as much as half the world.


And the Top 1% own more than everyone else combined -- a milestone reached in 2015, a year earlier than Oxfam had predicted.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/01/17/news/economy/oxfam-wealth/index.html

What this stuff illustrates is what you blatantly missed and that is that the bottom half of the world is so poor that the payment would only be a hundred bucks. The bottom half of the entire world is so poor they mostly live on dollars or pennies a day.

Before it was 8 billionaires it was 62 billionaires and before it was 62, it was 388, but when it was still an embarrassing 62 billionaires with more money than 3.6 billion people, they saw their wealth rise by a half trillion dollars from 2010-2015 while the bottom 3.6 billion human beings on the planet lost a trillion dollars more.

The anti-poverty group, whose leader co-chaired the forum last year, wants to call even more attention to the widening wealth divide. The top 62 saw their net worth rise by more half a trillion dollars between 2010 and 2015, while the 3.6 billion people in the bottom half of the heap lost a trillion dollars.


Each group has $1.76 trillion.

 

[CableandThanos]

Its the same as people complaining about CEO pay. They should take that money and give it to the workers.


By the time you do the math the average worker would receive 3 cents an hour.