Myhand, I was looking at your photo .... did you say something?....

More whiney people.

I agree with Pulsey mostly; some countries are better than some countries. The Nordic Countries and North Korea are great with income equalities.

But...China, Eastern Europe are certainly well above the poverty line, the only European country I think of that is third world is Kosova, and that is barely. Eastern Europe holds some of the most welloff countries in Europe.


In South America, the only thirdworld country is Paraguay.

Edited 1/20/2015 18:19:34

North Korea with income equalities? are you serious man? the worst nation in this world, where a ruling cast owns everything. North Koreans barely survive (millions of N.Koreans are suffering of famine and starvations...).
And this dickhead of Kim Jong Un... if terrorists were useful somewhere it would be in North Korea, just kill him!

It's equally terrible.

I, for one, welcome this new age of Feudalism that Myhand is talking about. Especially if it means I can marry into a king's family, assassinate that king, become king myself, and declare war on other kings.

I do not think it's surprising, was the time it was not like that?

Just give a short answer that'd show us what is the path from the statistic you have shown to whatever is the point you are making.

kill the rich and expropriate their property :)

And here come the socialists...

Nnnooooo!

Unless i am mistaken, around 10 years ago, 20% of population owns 80% of financial resourse. I recently read a study that basically claimed that the financial crisis occured in last years increases the gap between rich and poorest, and in next 10 years, only 0,3% of rich will own more than 90%. It is really sad and wrong in my opinion.

This study is stupid as fuck and is rigged. Actually if you look closely, 10% of the poorest people in the world are...american.

This study actually calculate how rich people are by substracting a people's debt from his mobile and immobile posessions. Meaning seomeone living in New York earning 50k a year but having a mortgage of 900k (pretty standard for NY) is actually considered to be poorer than an ethiopian kid dying of hunger in the desert.

It also only takes into account net worth, not relative to the place of living. When I lived alone in Brussels and earned 3k/month, I had a "poorer" way of life than my brother living in El Salvador who has less than 1,5k/month for his whole family.

Oh and that fabled "1%" of awefull rich people? If your grandpa is freshly retired and finished paying the mortgage of his house, he's probably part of that "1%"

Get your facts straight for god's sake. Yes poverty is a plague, and wealth gap is one of the biggest challenge of our time, but manipulating numbers like that is criminal and stupid.

Bottom line. Oxfam sucks.

Edited 1/22/2015 15:45:34

oh really? i would like to see some proof, but if its true, i applaud you

It's all logical assumptions, not statistics. No proof needed.

Storman, which study are you refering to? Im impressed that you found it and read it. I couldnt find any sources for the claims in the oxfam video. Reading between the lines, I presume that the study is not calculating how rich people in new york or african deserts are, it also isnt making a comment about quality of life. Infact myhands title is quite specific, its about how much of the resources in the world are owned by what % of the population. Dont you think the net worth of the bottom 99% Vs the top 1%s net worth is a valid way to measure ownership distribution? I cant think of a better way.

Your hypothetical grandpa owns more resources than me, and all of my 98 closest school friends put together. He has a house and a huge chunk of savings, and we have debt and pocket change. why is counting him among the top 1% of resource owners wrong?

The "study" of Oxfam is here http://www.oxfamfrance.org/sites/default/files/file_attachments/rapport_oxfam_insatiable_richesse_0.pdf (albeit in french)

It's based on a true study from a swiss bank the "Crédit Suisse" whose methodology has also been since criticized.

So here are a few numbers if you want them.

30% of the world's population has more debts than possessions. Meaning if you have no debts and living on the street, you're technically richer than 30% of persons.

To be considered part of the 50% of richest people in the plant, you need to have 3000 euros of active worth. meaning if you own a 2002 toyota corolla and live in it, you're a rich bastard.

As for the 1%, to be in it you need to have a net worth of 650 000 euros. So yeah, if your grandpa lives near a city, chances are his house is not far from that value. I'm not saying all retired people are part of that 1%, far from it, just that the "1% of richest person on earth" is not a bilionaire living on his yacht. It's a normal dude who spend his life working a good enough job, bought a house, a car and a nice tv.

Now, again, I'm not saying that there is'nt a problem. The wealth gap is at its highest in...well ever, and some of the problems pointed out there are quite valid. But for the most part, it completely miss the point.

Shhhh, stop bringing logic into discussion. It's not welcome here.

Storman, hush. I want to have a good enough reason to become a Viking Lord and invade England.

if you own a 2002 toyota corolla and live in it, you're a rich bastard.

WHY... DID... YOU... HAVE... TO... BUY... SUCH... A... STUPID... CAR...

YOU... ARE... SO... DAMN... POOR... IN... THE... HEAD...


SO in conclusion, owning a top-of-the-line laptop makes you one of the 50% rich? I have been given 5 bucks a week to be put in an account since i was born and now i am apparently rich?

"It's a normal dude who spend his life working a good enough job, bought a house, a car and a nice tv." You are completely misunderstanding what is normal. people like you think that owning $half a million+ of real estate is a normal outcome in life and its not, if thats the only thing the study shows you, then it was worthwhile. How many chinese and indian people do you think see that as normal? People who can 'work a good enough job' are not normal they are incredibly lucky. The 1% is not russian oil barrons and wall st bankers, its people you see every day. when looked at from the point of view of the entire world, you live in an incredibly privlieged position.

The research did not measure how rich people are. its being used to assess concentration of control of resources. How would you do that? I think youre criticising the study for failing to do something it never set out to do. It set out to show that 50% of peoples net worth is less than a 2002 toyota. And the implication is that thats unacceptable, everyone posting in this thread agrees, so lets do something about it.

What is wrong with 1% of the world owning more than 99%??