Richest 1 percent will own more than rest combined by 2016: report

[rdean]

The richest 80 individuals in the world had the same wealth as the poorest 50 percent of the entire population, some 3.5 billion people, Oxfam said. This was an even bigger concentration at the top than a year ago, when half the world's wealth was in the hands of 85 of the ultra rich.

Richest 1 percent will own more than rest combined by 2016 report Al Jazeera America

Rich getting richer Wealth increasingly concentrated in hands of few Oxfam says CTV News

At the same time, one in nine people don't have enough to eat and more than a billion people live on less than $1.25 a day, Oxfam said, ticking off statistics that paint a grim picture for all but the world's richest.

The charity is calling for a crackdown on tax avoidance by corporations and rich people, as well as increased investment in health and education and equal pay legislation.

-----------------------------------

Republicans think inherited wealth is earned and everyone has an equal opportunity. They see this as a "job well done".

 

[Porker]

At least that 1% will manage the money better than the U.S. government. And al Jazeera? No thanks.

 

[martybegan]

You do know you only need an income of $34k a year per person to be in the top 1% worldwide, right?

So a family of 4 is in the top 1% if they make a combined income of $136,000 a year, which is basically middle to upper middle class depending on your region.

We are the 1 You need 34k income to be in the global elite... and half the world s richest live in the U.S. Daily Mail Online

 

[Edgetho]

Another lie from the pathological lying scum on the left.

Typical. How incredibly typical of the sociopaths in the dimocrap scum party.

 

[Flash]

Greed and envy from the Left.

Newsflash for the Moon Bat. You are not poorer because somebody else is richer.

If you want to be richer yourself then stop voting for Left Wingers that screw up the economy with failed policies. Vote for somebody that will stimulate capitalism so we all can prosper and get the government off our backs.

We are all poorer because the filthy ass combined government in the US (fed, state and local) takes over 40% of the GNP. No wonder we don't have much.

 

[rdean]

Look at the right wing nutters. Red States are the poorest filled with food stampers living in trailers and they think wealthy Blue States are full of greed and envy. Well, if poor, uneducated Republicans are satisfied with mobile homes, who am I to try and help them? I say stop wasting money trying to get them into school and stop giving them food stamps. Grits and gravy are cheap.

 

[Flash]

Look at the right wing nutters. Red States are the poorest filled with food stampers living in trailers and they think wealthy Blue States are full of greed and envy. Well, if poor, uneducated Republicans are satisfied with mobile homes, who am I to try and help them? I say stop wasting money trying to get them into school and stop giving them food stamps. Grits and gravy are cheap.

Typical Libtard bigotry.

Two of the three wealthiest states are southern and the third western one is living off the wealth created decades ago when it wasn't so Left Wing.

It really sucks to be a Libtard and know that everything you believe in has failed, doesn't it?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Look at the right wing nutters. Red States are the poorest filled with food stampers living in trailers and they think wealthy Blue States are full of greed and envy. Well, if poor, uneducated Republicans are satisfied with mobile homes, who am I to try and help them? I say stop wasting money trying to get them into school and stop giving them food stamps. Grits and gravy are cheap.

Maybe if you didn't spend 24/7 on this board whining you might be able to achieve something in life...

 

[IlarMeilyr]

The entire monotonous droning from the far left modern American liberals about "income inequality" is premised on some empty undefined basic premises and some very odd notions.

If income Income inequality is "bad," somehow, then is "income equality" the goal?

No. They deny that. (They kind of HAVE to deny it since it is so clearly stupid as to be a non-starter.)

Well, then if income equality is NOT the goal, is it the case that SOME income inequality is ok?

They commence to mumbling and hemming and hawing and deflecting at this juncture because even THEY have to be dimly aware that if "some" is ok, then additional questions are promptly raised. Questions such as:

• "What degree of income inequality is ok?"
  
• "On what basis is it determined how much income inequality is ok?"
  
• "Who makes these decisions?"

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Even if there existed some rational basis for making such decisions about 'how much' income inequality is 'permissible' and how much is too much, what are the proposals for rectifying this alleged "problem?"

Will those on the far left stand up and state their position, clearly and directly? I doubt it. But all the same, I'll ask some of the questions.

• IF there is some defined point at which income inequality is intolerable, how do you leftists propose to "correct" it?
• 
  
• Might it involve (possibly) some more heavily weighted "progressive" income tax levels?
• 
  
• Is this why we are seeing so much present day rhetoric designed to incite divisions in society based on wealth and income? Mr. Alinsky, was that you?
  
• 
  
• Doesn't this explain the rhetorical nonsense about the "1%"?
• 
  
• Aren't you leftists really, in the end, simply making the tired old argument once again clamoring for redistribution of wealth and socialism?

 

[Flash]

• IF there is some defined point at which income inequality is intolerable, how do you leftists propose to "correct" it?

That is pretty obvious. The Libtards want to use the force of government to steal from those that have it and give to those that make less.

Of course they never define "the rich" as anybody making as much money as they do. It is always somebody else making more.

 

[ClosedCaption]

From this thread I can tell Oligarchies are good..No one seems to really know why tho

 

[IlarMeilyr]

From this thread I can tell Oligarchies are good..No one seems to really know why tho

^ from that post I can see that ClosedMinded likes to pretend that we have an "oligarchy" in America.

Silly stuff.

 

[ClosedCaption]

From this thread I can tell Oligarchies are good..No one seems to really know why tho

^ from that post I can see that ClosedMinded likes to pretend that we have an "oligarchy" in America.

Silly stuff.

Pretty silly except I havent heard of any reasons why less people having more of the wealth is a bad thing

 

[Flash]

There are advantages of being in that 1%.

For instance, if you are George Soros you can buy yourself a trained monkey and put him in the White House.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

From this thread I can tell Oligarchies are good..No one seems to really know why tho

^ from that post I can see that ClosedMinded likes to pretend that we have an "oligarchy" in America.

Silly stuff.

Pretty silly except I havent heard of any reasons why less people having more of the wealth is a bad thing

I haven't heard any reason for why fewer people having more wealth is a bad thing either.

And none of that has anything to do with "oligarchy."

 

[Flash]

George Soros is quite a bit richer than Rush Limbaugh.

According to the way these Libtards the force of government should be used to make Soros give some of his money to Lmibaugh so that their incomes are more equal.

 

[ClosedCaption]

From this thread I can tell Oligarchies are good..No one seems to really know why tho

^ from that post I can see that ClosedMinded likes to pretend that we have an "oligarchy" in America.

Silly stuff.

Pretty silly except I havent heard of any reasons why less people having more of the wealth is a bad thing

I haven't heard any reason for why fewer people having more wealth is a bad thing either.

And none of that has anything to do with "oligarchy."

Sorry I was under the impression that money is power

 

[Vandalshandle]

Greed and envy from the Left.

Newsflash for the Moon Bat. You are not poorer because somebody else is richer.

If you want to be richer yourself then stop voting for Left Wingers that screw up the economy with failed policies. Vote for somebody that will stimulate capitalism so we all can prosper and get the government off our backs.

We are all poorer because the filthy ass combined government in the US (fed, state and local) takes over 40% of the GNP. No wonder we don't have much.

I sure hope that you are getting a check from the Koch brothers every month. I would hate to think that you are doing this for them for free!!

 

[Billy000]

Lol I love how RWs denied this issue was even true when the Occupied protests were happening. Nowadays they acknowledge it but say "so what?" or they just it's all Obama's fault.

Ah you gotta love republicans.