Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Eight billionaires 'as rich as world's poorest half' Watch

    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Captain Haddock)
    The standard defense of this situation is circular - they're rich because they deserve it, and they must deserve it because look! They're rich! Simply put they exist within a system that's rigged to benefit them. It's a system where capital accumulates toward the top, and money begets more money. The crucial point being, there's nothing remotely 'natural' or inherently correct or moral about such a system. You can't tell me they deserve their obscene fortunes simply because capitalism allows these circumstances to exist.
    Please correct me if I am wrong as I'm only here to learn however I thought the money has always been in business whether that is in technology, entertainment etc. Isn't it all due to demand? The reason why these men are so rich is because everyone in one way or shape/form uses or needs Microsoft whether that is its gadgets or softwares such as powerpoint then approximately 1 billion of humans on this planet has facebook. I mean, if everyone stopped using these then they wouldn't be as rich anymore unless they become shareholders in another business that gains ridiculous hype. This is going to sound unfair but today we are seeing Youtubers making more than your average doctors, lawyers and engineers combined.

    A youtuber named Mr.Gear has these 4/5 minute videos of him doing all sorts of experiments- gains millions of views, I mean on one of his videos he gained 60 million views and in that month alone made approx $50,000 and he only began his channel a year ago. His average views per video is 2 million/3 million so say he makes 28,000 a month from his daily videos with these amounts of views..so annually that's $336,000. KSI has a similar viewing range though he has more subscribers and he could afford a new house, plus a lamborghini but why is this? It's because of the demand, viewers and advertisements. More views, more money. It's how facebook makes its money too with the advertisements and endorsements. So if anyone is to blame, I think it's us because we make these people rich.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    The world benefits tremendously from the profit motive a truth the left never understands.

    Four of those guys, pilloried by the loony lefty ideologues who run Oxfam founded Amazon, Microsoft, Oeacle and Facebook.

    They single handedly made the modern world pretty much. Can you imagine a world without consumer technology?

    Non of us would be here, talking like this at all.

    Do you think people found tech companies so they can go and buy a Corsa??

    No it is the profit motive. The dream of riches. And when they actually get rich thy give it away. Win win for the world.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 999tigger)
    Its not every two weeks. have you ever bothered to look what the objectives of Oxfam is? It could be seomthing to do with tackling poverty?

    Do you only ever talk about a subject once? Does poverty still exist in the world?
    Poverty: the thing falling rather rapidly ever as the defined income (sorry, what's oxfam talking about again) to not be in poverty is going up, while the population in areas with high poverty also rapidly increases.

    And remind me where the poverty is, last I checked it wasn't the 8 at the top, it's the 15% (and falling) at the bottom

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    Because people on minimum wage doing multiple jobs don't work hard?

    I seriously wonder how people think such equality is "deserved" because those at the top obviously "work hard".
    Read one of my previous replies. Your worth is not determined by working hard and I probably should have specified this in the original post. Your worth, or how much you earn is determined by how many people you help. For example:

    If you are working minimum wage jobs you are ultimately working for 3 people (your 3 bosses). They pay you for the 120 hours of work you do because you provide 120 hours worth of value to them.

    If you are a CEO, entrepreneur or whatever working 120 hours a week and you've built something that provides some sort of value to 100,000 people then you've helped 100,000 people, not 3 like our minimum wage worker. If for example you spend those 120 hours a week making a 2 hour video that 100,000 watch. You've provided 200,000 hours of value. Meanwhile our minimum wage worker is still providing 120 hours. Comparatively that's 1666x more value for the same amount of work.

    That's not quite the whole story, because how much money you earn is not just determined by how many people use your stuff. You also need to consider the money aspect. So our minimum wage worker is working 120 hours at lets say £7.50 per hour (which will be minimum wage for over 25's starting April). That's £900 per week.

    Now look at our entrepreneur or CEO. You work 120 hours, build a product that 100,000 people are willing to pay £1 for. You make £100,000. Maybe you're selling your product for £5000 and only 200 people buy it. Still £100,000. The amount of people you help and the money they pay are multiplied to get your income.

    And this is why people end up staying poor. They think that by working more hours they earn more money. The problem is they are stuck in a 1 to 1 ratio and have limted amounts to energy and time to actually work. It's also fairly common that some action or choice has landed them in that position. The people making money on the other hand are in 1 to many relationships, where they either help loads of people or offer expensive products. Entrepreneurs can go from minimum wage to rich because they understand this. They know that working 120 hours a week will never make them rich. The people that got themselves stuck in a position where they need to work 120 hour weeks don't get this and think the answer is to work more hours.

    And before you say poor people can't do what rich people do, that's ********. Every skill you need to get rich can be learned and implemented. Most just choose not to. Most people are happy doing 40 hours a week for 50 years rather than doing 120 hours a week for 5 years before they are self sustaining and can retire. Everyone has the potential but 99% of people do nothing about it. Those same people then complain when the 1% does.

    Obviously this works differently in third world countries where you may be living in a warzone or being oppressed by a government. But those certainly don't represent the people working multiple minimum wage jobs.
    • TSR Community Team
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Danny Dorito)
    A new report released by Oxfam has shown that the 8 richest individuals in the world have as much wealth as the 3.6bn people who make up the poorest half of the world, according to Oxfam.

    Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg and Amancia Ortega are 3 of the billionaires that make up the list.

    There have subsequently been calls for a "fair share of tax" to try and reduce the gap. You can read more on the story here.

    Gates and Zuckerberg have been rather philanthropic with their money, but do you think more could be done? Or do you think they've worked are for their money and the gap is out of their control?

    What would you do to close the gap?
    The 3.6bn people could arrest the top 200ish richest people, take all of their wealth away, distribute it equally among everyone else in the world (including the billionaires so they at least have some money).
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    It doesn't work like that in practise. The economy distorts into providing luxury services for a few at high prices. These sectors do not generate many well paid jobs. There is a marked contraction in the widespread well paid jobs in other sectors that used to mass produce quality goods and services for the mass of well paid people. The very rich are taking a larger and larger share of incomes and with low growth and zero or declining real wages, the ability of ordinary wage earners to buy goods and services goes down.

    Neoliberalism 'fixed' this gap over the last 20 years via a wave of easy credit - they basically pushed the ordinary wage earners into massive debt. This bubble crashed in 2008 and since then it has become incredibly clear that we can no longer have a viable system when most of the benefits of the economic growth goes to less than a thousand people globally because they have rigged the tax system and purchased the politicians.
    In the last 20 years, market orientated policies have lifted 600 million people out of poverty in China and more in India, Malaysia, Thailand etc, thanks to people like Bill Gates creating jobs for them. Whilst that doesn't benefit us, they are awfully grateful

    The wealth inequality is because of government intervention in the economy, not a lack of it. Government mandating mortgage providers to provide loans to minorities and the poor caused the bubble to burst in 2008, because banks had to make loans to people who couldn't pay them off. Government intervention gave us the obscene debt. The Federal Reserve (a government creation) kept printing money to artificially inflate the stock market too in the name of stimulating consumer demand. This is not the free market. The fact that billionaires have pocketed politicians, means we get rid of politicians who have authority rather than billionaires who at are at least productive.

    The economy does not distort into making luxury goods. If there is demand for cheaper goods, somebody will always be willing to make them because there is profit incentive. This is why free market capitalism is the only altruistic system.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Captain Jack)
    The 3.6bn people could arrest the top 200ish richest people, take all of their wealth away, distribute it equally among everyone else in the world (including the billionaires so they at least have some money).
    I hope you're trolling
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Not like I've seen a statistic on how a few billionaires have the same combined wealth as the poorest half... MORE THAN TWENTY TIMES. They've earned their money and some of them are doing a lot to help others with it, they deserve it and they aren't the ones causing world hunger and poverty. Several of the poorest countries are remaining the poorest because they can't develop since they are being blocked with trade and have internal issues like corruption, war, famines etc. not because some people set up businesses and earned a lot of money outside of these countries. Taxing Bill Gates more isn't going to result in wars or drought seasons to end.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    When the CEO makes in a day what his workers make in a year, I would argue that the gap is too wide.
    Some CEO's have added literally billions of dollars worth of value to companies, they've been the difference between a business being liquidated and thousands of people in gainful employment. I would never be the sort of guy to mock working class people or the sort of guy who totally worships wealthy accomplished people, we're not our money, our jobs, our clothes or even our names but the only objective measure of value is what someone is willing to pay for whatever the good or service is.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Captain Jack)
    The 3.6bn people could arrest the top 200ish richest people, take all of their wealth away, distribute it equally among everyone else in the world (including the billionaires so they at least have some money).
    Arrest them for what crime? Mark Zuckerberg for example made billions of dollars as a businessman and computer scientist and has since pledged to give almost all of his wealth to good causes when he dies, in addition to funding health care and research projects across the globe, what the left needs to learn is that the sum total of global wealth is not constant and that it's perfectly possible to get rich without hurting others and with a few exceptions, most rich people are rich precisely because they improved the world.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by l'etranger)
    Arrest them for what crime? Mark Zuckerberg for example made billions of dollars as a businessman and computer scientist and has since pledged to give almost all of his wealth to good causes when he dies, in addition to funding health care and research projects across the globe, what the left needs to learn is that the sum total of global wealth is not constant and that it's perfectly possible to get rich without hurting others and with a few exceptions, most rich people are rich precisely because they improved the world.
    People seem to have some inane view that everyone who's super rich got there because of some sort of fraud or corruption and is a bad person.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pikachū)
    People seem to have some inane view that everyone who's super rich got there because of some sort of fraud or corruption and is a bad person.
    It astonishes me, the global GDP is not a constant. If you're making money, it doesn't mean that someone else somewhere is losing money and this fact is the reason I reject the left-wing worldview.


    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    We don't have to go to a Soviet system to have more fairness and a better, more productive, more growthful economy. The United States and Europe managed it quite happily for 50 years in the postwar consensus until neoliberalism took hold and the rich stopped paying their taxes. The marginal tax rate on the very wealthy was 70 and 80 percent in all western countries and it worked very well, recycling money into important social goals, pushing forwards technology and social progress and making the west inconceivably stronger than the Communist states.

    Now we are trapped in low growth and high social dislocation with falling tax revenues and most western governments facing major crises across the board in healthcare and numerous other basic goods for humanity about which there used to be little dispute. Only now, under the weirdo extremism of the neoliberals are we dumping all of the things that made life worthwhile in our countries - everything from public amenities to good roads, from decent schools to proper healthcare free at the point of use - in favour of the right of some billionaires to have bigger and bigger yachts.
    You're utterly delusion if you think things are worse now compared with how they were in the 1970's, when I was a kid I was taught I should laugh at the blue collar reactionaries who claim that the 1950's were the best of times before multiculturalism and liberalism took over, oh how the tables have turned. We now have leftists and their myths about better times, when the lights would go out every week, men worked 14 hour days down mines and the ghettos were filled with crack.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by l'etranger)
    It astonishes me, the global GDP is not a constant. If you're making money, it doesn't mean that someone else somewhere is losing money and this fact is the reason I reject the left-wing worldview.




    You're utterly delusion if you think things are worse now compared with how they were in the 1970's, when I was a kid I was taught I should laugh at the blue collar reactionaries who claim that the 1950's were the best of times before multiculturalism and liberalism took over, oh how the tables have turned. We now have leftists and their myths about better times, when the lights would go out every week, men worked 14 hour days down mines and the ghettos were filled with crack.
    Absolutely this. Why do people think there's a pool of finite amount of money in the world? Someone earning a billion isn't taking wealth away from a regular worker. If he stopped working the regular worker would still earn the same.

    It's quite annoying trying to explain this to people over and over. The most common thing you hear is "soldiers should earn more than footballers!!!" well, no. There are millions of soldiers in around the world but there are only a few hundered people who are skilled enough to play top league football.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pikachū)
    Absolutely this. Why do people think there's a pool of finite amount of money in the world? Someone earning a billion isn't taking wealth away from a regular worker. If he stopped working the regular worker would still earn the same.
    It's Zimbabwenomics. Kill the productive people who ''stole'' the wealth, wonder why everyone is poorer.

    It shows a great hypocrisy too, if you said to a leftist yes you're right, there is a finite pool of wealth, surely they would also have us stop immigration because if immigrants come, we'll have to share with more people. Obviously I don't subscribe to such a retarded worldview because I understand that immigrants can actually add value to society. It shows how confused and internally inconsistent their entire worldview is.

    (Original post by Pikachū)
    It's quite annoying trying to explain this to people over and over. The most common thing you hear is "soldiers should earn more than footballers!!!" well, no. There are millions of soldiers in around the world but there are only a few hundered people who are skilled enough to play top league football.
    ****ing retards :rofl: Footballers are paid by private companies.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Not really. Their wealth is tied up in shares and assets which are based on predictable value rather than tangible wealth. Say for example, you seized Gates money. You would get virtually nothing of tangible use beyond his house and a few items he owns. What good is a jet to the poor?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pikachū)
    People seem to have some inane view that everyone who's super rich got there because of some sort of fraud or corruption and is a bad person.
    Not all of them did. However, you only have to read about the ways in which Russian and Chinese and Nigerian (to pick a few out) billionaires made their money to realise that there are incredible levels of corruption at work and that many of those billions were made by redirecting government spending to rich individuals in various illegal, corrupt or semi-legal ways.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheExtrovertGod)
    What good is a jet to the poor?
    It could be used to spray the tax havens with disgusting odours.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    It could be used to spray the tax havens with disgusting odours.
    A worthy effort. I think if you use public services and you don't pay tax you're a complete hypocrite. If you don't, well, fair play, why you should be forced to pay a bunch of muppets to squander your hard earned wealth when there are easy alternatives available?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    Not all of them did. However, you only have to read about the ways in which Russian and Chinese and Nigerian (to pick a few out) billionaires made their money to realise that there are incredible levels of corruption at work and that many of those billions were made by redirecting government spending to rich individuals in various illegal, corrupt or semi-legal ways.
    it's just the minority, stop stereotyping
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by l'etranger)
    It's Zimbabwenomics. Kill the productive people who ''stole'' the wealth, wonder why everyone is poorer.

    It shows a great hypocrisy too, if you said to a leftist yes you're right, there is a finite pool of wealth, surely they would also have us stop immigration because if immigrants come, we'll have to share with more people. Obviously I don't subscribe to such a retarded worldview because I understand that immigrants can actually add value to society. It shows how confused and internally inconsistent their entire worldview is.



    ****ing retards :rofl: Footballers are paid by private companies.
    This is the type of **** you see being shared on Facebook and it's utterly enraging. I remember once this was a discussion in my secondary school and the teacher was for paying soldiers more :facepalm: (surprise surprise it was an English 'teacher')

 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.