World's 85 richest people

[steven lloyd]

World's 85 richest people have as much wealth as half the population: Oxfam
Daniel Bitonti, January 20, 2014 9:20:00 AM

The richest 85 people on the planet have as much wealth as half the world's population, Oxfam says in a new report that details the "pernicious impact," that widening economic inequality is having worldwide.

The report also says that as inequality widens, citizens across the globe are becoming more and more aware of the divide, and increasingly believe that the political system is rigged in favour of the wealthy.

The report, entitled Working For the Few, has been published ahead of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland which begins Tuesday. The WEF is an independent organization that hosts the summit of business, political and academic leaders.

"It is staggering that in the 21st Century, half of the world's population own no more than a tiny elite whose numbers could all sit comfortably in a single train carriage," Winnie Byanyima, Oxfam's executive director, said in a press release posted on the organization's website.

The Oxfam report describes several situations that vividly illustrate rising global economic inequality.

It estimates that the world's richest individuals and companies are currently hiding $21 trillion in a web of unrecorded and off-shore accounts that governments can't tax.

The reports also says that tax rates for the richest people have fallen in 29 of the 30 countries since the 1970s, "meaning that in many places the rich not only get more money but also pay less tax on it."

"This capture of opportunities by the rich at the expense of the poor and middle classes has helped create a situation where seven out of every ten people in the world live in countries where inequality has increased since the 1980s," the report said.

Oxfam says that in India, for example, the number of billionaires has increased from six to 61 in the last decade. And while the wealthy have exploited India's "regressive tax structure," spending on "the poorest remains remarkably low."

Oxfam also takes aim at global corporations doing business in Africa, saying in the report that they "exploit their influence to avoid taxes and royalties, reducing the resources available to governments to fight poverty."

Byanyima said the fight against global poverty simply can't be won without first 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.

The report, however, shows that paralleling the increase in inequality is a strong awareness of it in most countries. In surveys done for Oxfam in six countries, the organization says the majority of people believe that laws are skewed in favour of the rich. In Brazil, for example, seven out of 10 people agreed with that statement "The rich have too much influence over where this country is headed"; in Spain, eight of ten people agreed with it.

Oxfam is calling on leaders gathered at the WEF to make a number of pledges, including to support progressive taxation, and to also challenge their governments to use tax revenue to provide universal healthcare, education and social protection for citizens.

"Without a concerted effort to tackle inequality, the cascade of privilege and of disadvantage will continue down the generations," Byanyima said. "We will soon live in a world where equality of opportunity is just a dream. In too many countries economic growth already amounts to little more than a 'winner takes all' windfall for the richest."

http://www.theloop.ca/news/ctvnews/arti ... tion-Oxfam

[tgm929]

The title of your thread is completely inaccurate and misleading. Either that or the article you posted is completely wrong since it contradicts your title.

[Captain Awesome]

The title of your thread is completely inaccurate and misleading.

Well, this never happens here! :)

[steven lloyd]

The title of your thread is completely inaccurate and misleading.
Either that or the article you posted is completely wrong since it contradicts your title.

My bad. You’ll note I posted it at 7:26 am – hurrying to get out the door. oops

[Atomoa]

Interesting how a powerful government will start wars/invade/kill to obtain wealth (21 trillion in untaxed money?) but they can't hire some forensic accountants and flex some of that nuclear tipped muscle to shut little tax islands down around the world globally.

It's almost as if these governments had owners that wouldn't allow this to occur. A conflict of interest of sorts?

[LANDM]

So....if they are "hiding" the money in these secret offshore accounts, how is it so easy to determine the wealth of these people?

Probably because it isn't hidden at all. I didn't see anyone named, but I would hazard a guess that these people have their money tied up in publicly held companies and with easily determined investments, not hidden away in cash deposits in "offshore accounts".

Take a quick look at the worlds wealthiest, either in the Forbes or Bloomberg lists.....it's all pretty obvious.

[Captain Awesome]

Oh my. Usually I agree with Kevin, but ...

[Gilchy]

It estimates that the world's richest individuals and companies are currently hiding $21 trillion in a web of unrecorded and off-shore accounts that governments can't tax.

If you include companies, I'm guessing this includes companies like Apple, who hold capital in Ireland. Thing is, it's not as if that money stays there forever. Some comes back to shareholders as dividends (taxed), as income to employees (taxes), bonuses to executives (taxed), etc, etc, etc.

All these claims of totally tax free loopholes, by and large, simply don't exist, or are simpy a temporary status.

[Captain Awesome]

All these claims of totally tax free loopholes, by and large, simply don't exist, or are simpy a temporary status.

Yeah, we already had one poster here famous for exaggerations, stretching and simply lying claim here that Apple paid no taxes last year - until a SEC document was presented with black and white numbers shown of billions of taxes paid.

But doesn't stop people from lying over and over again.

[hobbyguy]

How can you possibly agree with Kevin O'Leery? He is smug, sociopathic, self-serving and proud of it.

[Captain Awesome]

How can you possibly agree with Kevin O'Leery? He is smug, sociopathic, self-serving and proud of it.

That's because you confuse media figure's public image for someone's real personality. Kinda like judging the business world by watching entertaining TV shows - it's entertainment, not business. Kevin does a very good job of getting attention, and this larger than life personality is a good reason for it.

But he still is a fairly successful businessman (although he has some failures under his belt). And sometimes he says smart things - especially when he's not focusing on entertaining the public.

You gotta see past the made up image, my friend - and not to judge books by covers.

[Atomoa]

All these claims of totally tax free loopholes, by and large, simply don't exist, or are simpy a temporary status.

Also known as the illegally hidden in tax shelters trickle down economics theory?

Some comes back to shareholders as dividends (taxed), as income to employees (taxes), bonuses to executives (taxed), etc, etc, etc.

Define "some".

[logicalview]

How can you possibly agree with Kevin O'Leery? He is smug, sociopathic, self-serving and proud of it.

and he's also wayyyyyy smarter than you.

[Gilchy]

Also known as the illegally hidden in tax shelters trickle down economics theory?

If I have money sitting in a holdco, earning nothing, technically it is sheltered, but (a) that's not illegal, and (b) the capital will be taxed when accessed. But sure, go on about the evils of "trickle down", if that helps pass the day.

Define "some".

Anything the company wants to use, distribute, invest, or acces. So essentially all of it, eventually.

I sense we're about to head down a rabbit hole of circular arguments...

[Atomoa]

If I have money sitting in a holdco, earning nothing, technically it is sheltered, but (a) that's not illegal, and (b) the capital will be taxed when accessed.

Anything the company wants to use, distribute, invest, or acces. So essentially all of it, eventually.

I sense we're about to head down a rabbit hole of circular arguments...

We are talking about trillions of illegal money. Money in offshore banks hidden in piles of paperwork. If you don't agree that withholding money from being taxed should be illegal, that's ok - but that's not what we are talking about.

The guy who earned the trillion hides it and doesn't pay a cent on it - but when he pays his employees with it, or buys a luxury car wit hit - they pay taxes on that portion they receive and pay the taxes for the nice man who hid away the trillions.

Don't worry about circular debates here - just wanted you to be clear about what you are suggesting. Not only does trickle down economics work (still waiting for it to work that is...) but eventually every cent of that illegal money will be taxed somehow, by someone, somewhere (200 years? Their great grand-kids need college educations?) - so that makes it ok (just ignore the untaxable first earning it part).

So I have to ask why cant I do that with my paycheque? I'll pay no tax on it. When I buy a cheeseburger I pay tax on that, or if I invest it I pay tax on that or if I hire someone they can pay tax on the paycheques I give them. I'm the calling CRA right now! Score!