One percent of world's population holds almost half its wealth

And the Clintons and are thier #1 lobbying firm. What better position to lobby from than behind a desk in the Oval Office

And Trump is one of the 1%. What better position to increase his wealth than from behind a desk in the Oval Office.

And he actually works for his.

Well, he works. But he apparently isn't worth much more money than what his dad gave him to start with however many years ago.

Doesn't say much for his investing ability.

If you wok hard and are smart with money you are bad?

No, the point is that the system is designed to funnel money upwards, creating an imbalance where the people at the top have more than they should, and the people at the bottom have less than they should. Severe income disparity is not good for anyone except the super rich, and even they have to live amongst the peasants. It's not right that so little of the population should hold so much of the wealth.

And no, this is not an attack on capitalism - I love capitalism, it's made me comfortable (though nothing like the people at the top). But capitalism needs checks and balances. Unbridled capitalism is destroying our planet and our species.

Just one percent of the world’s population can call themselves millionaires or richer. But together they hold almost half the world’s wealth

That's just laziness on the part of the wealthy.

Trump surely made millions last year but most of it was erased by tax deductions--such as depreciation. When politicians talk about "simplifying" the tax code by eliminating tax deductions, they don't intend to do anything about deductions that benefit the wealthy. Instead, they talk about eliminating the few deductions that benefit the middle class. "Taxes are only paid by little people." John Barron.

”If the 99% are getting richer, then who cares if the 1% are getting richer too?"

Well, they aren't, for this very reason. Our economies are consumption-drive -- not supplier driven -- and the rich hoard large portions of their income in places like Panama. Everyone else uses most of their money to buy cars, houses, consumer products, etc., driving growth and hence prosperity....for everyone.

And Trump is one of the 1%.

Is he? Or does he just pretend to be. We only have his word for how much he makes.

The reason that his wealth is very much in doubt comes from a new report about his property tax bill. An interesting aspect of it is that once again Trump qualifies for a School Tax Relief program deduction, this year for $304. To qualify for this reduction, a property owner has to have an income below $500,000. Apparently Trump qualifies.

-- http://www.electoral-vote.com/#item-6

And who decides when an individual has enough money?

Society has a whole can decide that 1% owning half the world's wealth is way beyond the bounds of reason. And let's not kid ourselves, these people at the top are making their money off the backs of workers that barely make a living, taking advantage of benefits they don't pay for with their tax evasion. And when they screw up, it's the tax payers that bail them out. The money would do much better for the economy spent by the lower 99% than sitting in tax havens of the criminally rich.

fxgai,

If someone owns a million dollar home but has less than a million dollars in non-real estate assets, that person is part of the 99% here.

Well million dollar homes don't contribute substantially to the economy. Also keep in mind that the million dollar homes of the 1% are also excluded.

That's just not true, Mark Zuckerberg for example has made loads of people much more wealthy than would otherwise have been the case.

I didn't mean to imply that all of them are bad. He's one of the few that actually wants to pay more taxes. I have no problem with people working hard and becoming rich as long as they give back to the people and system that allowed them to get there.

No way. That would be just doing what Masuzoe has with other people's money, but on a massive scale, ruining the remaining productive part of the economy.

That's so ridiculous, I don't know where to start, so I won't.

This is simply shocking, time for a better redistribution.

In order to get rich, you typically have to have given a lot in the first place.

Enough of the hagiography, already. Yes there are some wonderful entrepreneurs, but this also rings true:

In order to get rich, you often have to have taken a lot in the first place.

you probably dont just hand your money out to anyone

So it's OK for the poor to pay proportionately more tax than the (so-called) wealth creators paying them minimum wage?

Is he? Or does he just pretend to be. We only have his word for how much he makes.

Well, he's probably top 5% at least.

To qualify for this reduction, a property owner has to have an income below $500,000.

That's income, not assets. And with some creative writing of his finances, he may very well have made below $500,000.

Come on 1%, wet my beak!

Without property, real estate numbers this study presents a rather slanted prepective of the facts. One must also consider the amount of cash squirrelled away in offshore shells then funnelled back into the property market.

pointofview,

That would result in people who contribute nothing in society to most likely voting in favour of themselves getting a good chunk of money.

Anyone who works full-time or the equivalent amount of hours is contributing to society. Even if you're just working long hours at a combini or picking vegetables in a field, society has deemed your job necessary. Anyone who works deserves to live a decently comfortable life. What's the point of working, if not to live?

I'd say a large portion of the world's population falls under this category, but unfortunately many of these people struggle to simply make ends meet. The 1% are usually where they are at the expense of these people in some way or another. It's just not right for so few to be hoarding that much wealth.

All these people whining about the 1% have no clue what they do with their wealth.

http://www.salon.com/2015/06/02/9_obscene_ways_the_rich_spend_their_money_partner/

Not mentioned in the link; bribing politicians to dismantle regulations and keep loopholes open to protect and increase their already ridiculous wealth. Again, this is not everyone in the 1%, but it doesn't have to be when we're talking about this much wealth.

Boycott firms if you think they are being unethical.

Well if you're a low paid worker, you really have no choice but to buy cheap food and goods that are most likely cheap due to unethical practices. There needs to be change in the entire system and culture that condones excessive greed.

When politicians talk about "simplifying" the tax code by eliminating tax deductions, they don't intend to do anything about deductions that benefit the wealthy.

Almost always the case.

Excluding Japan, the Asia-Pacific region will account for more than 40 percent of global wealth growth over the coming half-decade, the report said. Most of that will be in China and India.

LOL @ TPP.

I think the reason it probably doesn't include real estate, is to be accurate, it would need to only include people who own their property outright. There are many people who 'own' properties worth over a million but have taken on loans to acquire them, so only the equity in the property is actually their asset. That would be pretty hard to accurately figure out for a study like this.

FYI SenseNotSoCommon, the poor don't pay much taxes. They get a generous earned income tax credit.

Is this a global phenomenon, or are you talking about your own small part of the world?

Get with it will ya!

If 'it' means decreasing social mobility, no thanks.

Hi fxgai, I wish just a few of Japan quantitative software developers had your motivation, they have the skills, methodologies and design however clients specialist skills are sub zero thanks to the toxic seniority complex.

The lowest of the low are not rich people getting richer, but the poor people defending them.

fxgai,

When we say "the rich" we mean the excessively greedy ones like I mentioned previously. It's just for convenience, and we don't mean all rich people.

As far as government waste, that's just another part of the culture of greed. Politicians greasing the wheels of construction firms and other industries in return for money and the hopes of one day heading these firms. Like I said, the whole system and culture needs a change.

And who decides when an individual has enough money?

Society has a whole can decide that 1% owning half the world's wealth is way beyond the bounds of reason. And let's not kid ourselves, these people at the top are making their money off the backs of workers that barely make a living, taking advantage of benefits they don't pay for with their tax evasion. And when they f#%$ up, it's the tax payers that bail them out. The money would do much better for the economy spent by the lower 99% than sitting in tax havens of the criminally rich.

I didn't mean to imply that all of them are bad.

Fair enough, but I just don't see many examples of evil rich people that fit the Hollywood stereotype.

I have no problem with people working hard and becoming rich as long as they give back to the people and system that allowed them to get there.

In order to get rich, you typically have to have given a lot in the first place. I think it's hard to get rich without others also benefiting from such success along the way, e.g. through creating jobs for others. And in getting rich, taxes are paid. Besides paying more in tax than other people of lesser means, and creating jobs for people, what else are they expected to do to give back sufficiently?

Point blank, if Japan were home to an extra 50,000 billionaires who took risks and employed people and had success, I think the place would be better for the rest of us too, not worse.

Those who defend rich people getting rich are champions.

It is good that people can get rich as reward for taking risks by investing in businesses, which results in people getting employed, and the production of lots of products.

In turn then workers then have money to spend, and critically, products to spend their money on.

All of this economic activity generates tax revenues for government to provide services to the public.

So people should stop pretending that getting rich is bad. It is good.

Conversely, if you have government give people other people's money and in turn those people just need to dig holes (and fill those holes back in again), you are wasting the productive capacity of the people and are on the road to failure.

@fxgai, I've never hated a person for being wealthy. But you have to consider more about how that person either gains their wealth, and how they manage it.

If they manage their money and gain money by doing beneficial things that contribute not only to their own wealth but society/economy as a whole there is no problem. But if they're gaining their wealth by abusing either legal loopholes, underhanded tactics, and stepping on the backs of those less fortunate than they are (and simultaneously destroying opportunities for others to develop their own wealth) there is always a problem due to their greed.

Unfortunately since they're stating that globally the worlds wealth is in half the pockets of the wealthy, and I know in many different countries those that are wealthy have gained it by mostly self-beneficial means without consideration of others. Chinese millionares/Billionaires, East Indian, Middle Eastern, Russian, Korean, etc come from countries where they don't have enough effective laws for protecting their citizens from very greedy people. The US has easily become a cesspool of "greedy rich" as the politicians are corruptible as long as someone lines their pockets. Didn't always used to be that way...

All I can say is this our current system is an upside down pyramid that is going to collapse one day as long as the greedy rich keep being allowed to do what they're doing and holding the majority of wealth-making to themselves.

I don't see ways to get fabulously wealthy by abusing legal loopholes, underhanded tactics, or stepping on the backs of others. None of that pays all so well, does it?

going to collapse one day as long as the greedy rich keep being allowed to do what they're doing and holding the majority of wealth-making to themselves.

But the rich don't have a monopoly on new ideas and innovation. How can they keep wealth-making to themselves? How is it that young entrepreneurs have managed to have fantastic success and become rich despite this supposed grasp on wealth-making by the baddies?

fxgai, I'm sorry to inform you that wealth in capitalism is not endless and not for everybody. Assets are limited, meaning when somebody becomes richer, many other people become relatively poorer in comparison (if just in natural resources or quality of life). So that fairy tale about everybody being able to get rich through hard work is just a convenient myth put forth by... the rich.

"All I can say is this our current system is an upside down pyramid that is going to collapse one day as long as the greedy rich keep being allowed to do what they're doing and holding the majority of wealth-making to themselves." Concept by the poor, envious, and ultimately, ignorant throughout history. In the end, there will always be those that are rich, and those that wish they were rich whose only recourse would be to scourge the wealthy. Deal with it and move on with your lives. You'll be happier and more likely to earn something more for yourself in the process. Here's a tip: you can't buy class, and from most of the posters hating on the rich, you've all clearly not grasped that fact.

@fxgai, I'm amazed at how blind you are to certain aspects of reality and the basis of human nature. Obviously you're the kind that doesn't believe something happens... unless it happens to you. I've been down this road and speak from personal experience, also observation of people that I've either worked with, been friends with, or just had to deal with that shows very well that what I've stated is true.

@Magnet, being arrogant doesn't help. It's not envy, it's not jealousy, it's the abuse and disparity caused by greed that causes these situations. Obviously history has not taught certain people wisdom. Remember why the majority of monarchies and "Upper classes" fell to the "commoners" and "peasants". Remember why revolutions usually happen. When people are already working hard to move forward and keep getting blocked, you're going to end up with the statements you've been seeing. This isn't some, "The poor are only jealous of the rich", It's "The poor are being made poorer by the rich who are too damned greedy to know that they have enough already and don't need more".

The rumored famous last words were, "Let them eat cake." before all hell broke loose right?

I'm quite happy not being wealthy as long as I can earn enough income to keep myself and my family secure and living comfortably. Simple logic. I don't need expensive cars, fancy houses, or extravagant lifestyles. Many people who aren't wealthy would be happy at just being in the same type of situation where they didn't have to worry so much about things and could live their lives comfortably. And yet, rental and housing prices are currently skyrocketing in my state to the point that many people can't afford rent/mortgage even with decent paying employment. I'm currently looking at a lot of employed "homeless" where I live and this has been going on for the past 8 years. And although there are quite a few residential construction projects going on to provide more housing, many of them are aiming at have "luxurious" prices.

Trust me, it's quite easy to notice how I used to be able to set aside $400~500 a month in money I didn't need to use a few years ago, compared to now where I can only save about $200~250 if I'm lucky. And even that amount is being chipped away at. And my lifestyle hasn't really changed at all and my income level is about the same as it was then (estimating inflation as well). Things I used to be able to accomplish sooner financially, are now taking much longer to do so with that big a difference in disposable income.

Corporate wealth has increased quite a bit in the last 7.5 years. The trickle down in the multi tens of millions per year CEO's. Issa sound familiar?

At least Trump has money unlike Hellary who has sold herself to the highest bidder (master) already!!!

Lots of hate for the rich here on JT!

I'm gonna do my best to get as rich as possible, invest my savings and hopefully get even richer, and through those investments also hopefully help create lots of jobs, bettering peoples lives. As well as pay loads more tax than as many people as possible.

Sounds like it will generate hatred, but at least I know I'll be a positive impact on society!

A load of garbage. Governments own and control the wealth and unlike most non governmental billionaires, the political class really does steal it from the people. Even here in America, if you confiscated everything of the people making more than 250k a year, the US government would be funded for about 5 months. So sorry Marxist progressives but your story here is totally false. The political class of the,world everyone from the dictators to us government and all political class members in between, they control 100s of trillions, 75%, 80% who knows or cares because they also have the guns and judges to take it all anytime

MrBum,

That would result in people who contribute nothing in society to most likely voting in favour of themselves getting a good chunk of money. Cant do that if they didnt earn it. All these people whining about the 1% have no clue what they do with their wealth. Boycott firms if you think they are being unethical.

Money sitting in tax havens? Good! Too much tax money is wasted so ya I`d do what I could to avoid ridiculous taxes too.

Lets face it MrBum you probably dont just hand your money out to anyone.

Trump is smart with his taxes. Pay a little as possible. No different than looking for a good deal. Taxes are being wasted.

@Strangerland,

Most large firms pay their staff well. The majority of working people are employed by small business and as a result don`t get paid the big bucks. Taxes too high and being wasted, the rich stay clear of this. And who decides when an individual has enough money?

So much hate for the wealthy, it's almost comical. Have some dignity folks.

amounts to 47 percent of total global wealth—based on holdings of cash, financial accounts, and equities, but not real estate—leaving the rest to be divided by the other 99 percent of the world’s population.

Why wouldn't they include real estate??? Sounds like the study was aiming to come up with a desired number and they fiddle the numbers accordingly.

If the 99% are getting richer, then who cares if the 1% are getting richer too? I'm a 99%er now, but aiming to join the 1%er club, as defined here. Probably won't make it but I'm doing fine despite the "inequality".

Despite efforts by the United States and European countries to crack down on tax evasion, the report said, offshore financial centers remain important to the world’s wealthy.

That's because tax evasion does not equal offshore financial centers.

FYI SenseNotSoCommon, the poor don't pay much taxes. They get a generous earned income tax credit. Get with it will ya!

The middle class is squeezed quite a bit. No handouts at all and taxed at a high percentage considering no loopholes. The wealthy do have it much better with legal evasion options.

This said on wealthy, some are quite generous with their money. I can't comment on the international 1%ers but many in the USA donate very generously to various charities and causes. Without them we would notice a difference.

Our economies are consumption-drive -- not supplier driven --

Consumers can't "consume" without stuff to consume... no supply, no consumption.

That income / wealth offshore doesn't sit around sipping cocktails. It is funneled back onshore as those who own that wealth risk it in investments, which if all goes well results in new jobs and stuff being produced, and ultimately profits.

It is a wonderful public service they are doing for society (that's before they even pay tax on any profits they may make). People employed as a result of those investments have money with which to consume that which was produced. The government can then collect tax revenues via consumption tax to fund public services.

It all starts with excess savings being risked in investments.

Without people producing cars, houses, consumer products in the first place, there can be no consumption of those things, as cars houses and other things (except fruits) do not grow on trees.

Society has a whole can decide that 1% owning half the world's wealth is way beyond the bounds of reason.

These figures are nonsense though, because they excluded real estate, which for a lot of people is a substantial amount of their wealth. If someone owns a million dollar home but has less than a million dollars in non-real estate assets, that person is part of the 99% here. It's nonsense, you don't need to have more than a million dollars in financial assets to be considered rich.

these people at the top are making their money off the backs of workers that barely make a living

That's just not true, Mark Zuckerberg for example has made loads of people much more wealthy than would otherwise have been the case.

The money would do much better for the economy spent by the lower 99% than sitting in tax havens of the criminally rich.

No way. That would be just doing what Masuzoe has with other people's money, but on a massive scale, ruining the remaining productive part of the economy.

We need LESS of the crap that Masuzoe has been doing, and more people risking money on productive investments with the potential reward of generating further wealth. New businesses, like what Zuckerberg built up.

Trump says he will close loopholes for the wealthy. And he actually works for his. The Clintons on the other hand are under scrutiny with the Clinton Foundation. And the give. Speach for $1/2M for a couple hours is robbery. Especially to universities.

And the Clintons and are thier #1 lobbying firm. What better position to lobby from than behind a desk in the Oval Office.

What`s the point of the article? If you wok hard and are smart with money you are bad?