Well these are world wide figures. The figures for individual countries will be quite different.
'World's richest 1% get 82% of the wealth', says Oxfam
- Thread starter weekev
- Start date
- Status
To be fair Bezos created the market/business that generated that level of income. If you think what he has accomplished with Amazon is simple to do, feel free to create your own business.
I agree, reality has a lot of shades.
You have people who earn a shitton of money without doing any work, you have people who do nothing and earn no money, you have people who work a shitton and have a shitton of money and every shade inbetween.
Now, what is "fair" and what isn't is another topic.
Your doing the strawman.
My statement was that most CEOs and other entrepreneurs work a lot, probably more than most people who complain about their wealth.
That said, I agree that it's stupid that they get a million times more money for a "dozen" more working hours.
But then again, as I already stated, the problem aren't rich people to me, but the baseline (and other factors) that we establish as a society.
Let's say we distribute the wealth of every American citizen equally. That doesn't stop people from spending more than others or some people to gather more wealth than others, you'd have the same situation in a few years / decades.
What we need is a system that allows people access to shelter, food, clothes, healthcare, education and other basic stuff without the fear to miss out because of the lack of money.
Everything beyond this is just luxury stuff that you get to live a sweet(er) life.
Bezos didn't create the value of Amazon alone. The workers adding their exploited labor to what Amazon became are the ones responsible for it, not Bezos alone.
The only accomplishment Bezos achieved was being able to exploit workers to the extent that it made him the richest person in history.
A bit off topic:
Gates was already richer if you consider inflation, he had probably 150 billion in todays money. He'd still be the richest guy, but transferred >35 billion of his stock value into charity over time.
That said, there are even richer historical figures (like Henry Ford, Rockefeller, etc.): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wealthiest_historical_figures
Oh we are going down this path again, never mind. If it were so easy others with money would have done it. There was plenty of competition early on and there is no lack of competition today. He didn’t just get lucky. Bezos created a formidable company that well established multi billion dollar corporations still haven’t figured out how to beat and they are not particularly shy about exploiting employees. Last I checked Amazon has not neglected paying its employees in a timely fasion. The median hourly wage of a warehouse worker is $13.50 which is above the national average for that type of work. Is Bezos greedy? Sure but that’s like complaining that the founders of a company are walking away having made billions when the guy in manufacturing was making less than 30k a year.
Last edited:
Not really. This is a very western way of thinking.
If you take the whole world into account and looking at people from poorer countries, this is patently false. People slaving away in sweatshops or factories making our designer clothes and phones work a lot harder than most people in the West.
Hunger is for the first time worldwide on the rise due to the many wars.
Now ask who serves in these wars. And who doesn't. And who benefits from them. And who doesn't.
*looks at the long list of capitalistic countries who never supported dictatorships in sake of financial gains*
Oh
Ugh. You're one of those people who thinks that a person getting paid a cent less than the value they earn a business is exploitation, aren't you?
Luck plays a huge part in this. You cannot deny that. If he had been in a different time and place at certain critical points in his life he would be a completely different place right now. Working hard is a (not strictly) necessary but not sufficient quality to become wealthy.
I'm not blaming him for his behavior, the wealth he has obtained is a function of our current economic system. He's not a bad person for being rich, but the fact that the current economic system allows an individual to accrue that much wealth whilst people are on food stamps shows there's a problem.
It's worth pointing out that without the current state of the world's infrastructure, he would not be able to obtain that wealth in the first place. The US is a country with massive infrastructural debt, considering he would be one of the people to benefit the most from improvements to it - it makes sense that he should have that wealth taxes in order to fund it. Furthermore, think about how much money Amazon could save if it didn't have to pay health insurance for its employees, so it makes sense again for richer individuals and companies to be taxed more to pay for a more sensible and efficient healthcare system as they are the ones which will reap the most of the financial benefit of them.
Wow, so the doctors who go to college for 8-10 years and work from 6 AM to 7 PM and make over a million don't work for their income? Really?
Agreed. Although I think that people play up “luck” way too much. Often times if you look at any of these successful entrepreneurs you will find folks that did things to tip “luck” in their favor. Anyhow, it is the government’s job to take care of its constituents. Over the last 50 years we have done a piss poor job of doing this. People should be paid a living wage. It is not Bezos’ job to remedy this situation. The current market dynamics do not dictate this.
The government is failing in its responsibilities precisely because Bezos and other billionaires have lobbied them too. The current situation is a direct result of them buying politicians to control policy.
It is absolutely their fault.
We need to go back to super progressive tax structures. Anything over say $3 million is taxed at 90%. Captial gains over the same amount need to be taxed. You'd provide a huge social net, we could have great universal healthcare, allow corporations to work for people instead of against them.
At this pace we'll be living with a basically on earth Elysium in the next 50 years.
At this pace we'll be living with a basically on earth Elysium in the next 50 years.
We really are incredibly lucky in the USA, despite the massive squeeze on the middle class and how awful our health system is, we really are better off even on low incomes then the vast majority of the world. Its still the worst developed country to be poor in, but thats a big difference from the billions living on a dollar a day. The world needs a revolution. Take the money and assets out of the billionaire's hands and develop fairer economic systems built around UBI and Universal Healthcare for all.
Luck is always there. The myth that the hardest and smartest worker wins is a lie. You do realize that warehouse workers used to make a living wage pre-Reagen fucking it all up right? Most were union workers, and they had territories. They made good money comparably... $13.50 is fucking nothing.
I mean, sure Bezos worked hard and smart... but luck is why he succeeded... right place and right time.
It's like the iPhone. Or Steam. Right place, right time.. and just got lucky people adopted them over others... once you hit a certain point you have enough market share that you competitors don't have a chance.
It's not like online shopping, smartphones or digital game sellers weren't going to be a thing regardless of Apple/Amazon/Steam.
So yes, luck plays a huge part in success.
If every single person on this planet (!) threw $13 into a pot, you would still be below Jeff Bezos' current net worth.
Let that one sink in.
Let that one sink in.
I don't know how it is in the US, but in the UK it's basically impossible to buy a standard 3 bedroom house.
In the old days my eldest brother (he's in his late 40s) just worked in a supermarket his entire life. He was able to afford a 4 bedroom house and has paid off his mortgage when he turned 30.
Nowadays if you were to work in a supermarket as young as 16 and tried to save, you won't be able to ever buy a 3 bedroom house. You will have to rent all your life. Even if you were able to save somehow due to low living costs, you still would be paying off a 30 year mortgage.
Obviously the older generation who were clever enough to purchase multiple properties before the rising house prices are benefitting alot.
What alot of people do in my community due never move out of their parents, buy a house due to not having much living costs, then rent their house out for a few years and have their mortgage paid off without telling the bank. This is extremely common nowadays. By the time the person moves in to their house majority of their mortgage is paid off.
Basically you have to be more careful and live with other people, such as parents, family members etc. Of course if you don't have any family that don't own property then you may be screwed.
In the old days my eldest brother (he's in his late 40s) just worked in a supermarket his entire life. He was able to afford a 4 bedroom house and has paid off his mortgage when he turned 30.
Nowadays if you were to work in a supermarket as young as 16 and tried to save, you won't be able to ever buy a 3 bedroom house. You will have to rent all your life. Even if you were able to save somehow due to low living costs, you still would be paying off a 30 year mortgage.
Obviously the older generation who were clever enough to purchase multiple properties before the rising house prices are benefitting alot.
What alot of people do in my community due never move out of their parents, buy a house due to not having much living costs, then rent their house out for a few years and have their mortgage paid off without telling the bank. This is extremely common nowadays. By the time the person moves in to their house majority of their mortgage is paid off.
Basically you have to be more careful and live with other people, such as parents, family members etc. Of course if you don't have any family that don't own property then you may be screwed.
Well aware of the living wage issue see my previous post. That said, I still don’t buy the argument that success is largely dependent on luck and not human ingenuity or intervention. You might as well say it was their destiny.
So what you are saying is that government is failing to protect its constituents because politicians are greedy bastards who like staying in power? Okay then maybe we should examine how our government is setup and see if we can close the loophole or change the system.
That is how capitalism works. Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Walmart are corporations that operate under such principles. Everyone involved understands their role. If FoxCon is paying above market rate then they must be attracting a highly qualified talent pool. If the work conditions are abhorrent then people are free to go elsewhere but my guess is that the alternative options are worse. So here again is an opportunity for someone to step in and run a competition for business run under collective principles. Ultimately if common/collective ownership is better it will win out.
Last edited:
Bezos didn't add the value to what it became. The people working for Amazon used their labor to add value to it.
"Not neglected paying its employees in a timely fashion" might be the lowest standard I've ever heard. I'm sure FoxConn and other sweatshops likewise pay salaries on time, that doesn't mean it's shit working conditions that allow individuals like Bezos to accrue billions of dollars off the hardworking backs of others. Shit, Amazon would rather have ambulances on the ready near their warehouses than ensure proper working climate for their workers. Fuck Amazon and fuck Bezos.
I'm one of those people who think that individuals should own the means of production. People like Bezos don't deserve the billions of dollars that they're earning off the backs of others work.
No, you are thinking luck is meaning something different then I am.. or others. Luck doesn't mean tripping over a branch and finding a pot of gold. It means despite working harder or being smarter, or having a solid plan... you still need luck to succeed. Luck that the markets right for you, luck that things bounce your way.
Think of it this way, it's luck where you are born and what you are born. You had no choice in that. You have no choice in what class you become born into, or where you grow up. Opportunity is luck. Because you have to be lucky to be in a spot for opportunity.
For every Bezos, how many failed? For every Gates, how many failed? Were they truly the best at what they did, or did they just happen to be in the right place at the right time. Once certain markets are filled to an extent, competition is stifled. Once you have the market, it's not really hard to grow it. Luck is having the market to begin with.
I quite like employee-owned companies. There are a few large, competitive ones in the UK. It's not illegal to form them, so why are there so few?
The answer is fairly obvious.
Nuclear War is coming sooner than later if this kind of ungodly injustice continues. I hope these miserly 1% die first and rot in hell for their utterly disgusting greed.
Getting rich is a combination of circumstances. Right place, right time, being smart enough to exploit right place right time, in most cases coming from a background of wealth already, much easier to make money when already wealthy, having contacts from expensive universities from being wealthy. There are people who build businesses from the ground up and make a fortune, but many of them are sociopaths who crushed everyone on their way up to make it. Getting fantastically wealthy is not some work hard and you will succeed fantasy the USA propaganda advertises. If you happen to be born in a third world country, you never have a chance. Get sick at the wrong time in life, never have a chance. It really does come down to luck, connections and a certain amount of hard work. But hard work alone will never make anyone rich, its just not the way the global economic system is setup. You might be able to provide for yourself with hardwork if you are born in the right country, but for billions of people hard work will never be enough.
As long as you can keep the left busy with infighting and purity tests? As long as you can keep the poor at each others throats with Racism, Nationalism and Conservatism?
Never.
Behind your examples we are essentially talking about the same thing. Luck is what determines winners and losers. Instead of analyzing why the other individual made it people chuck it up to luck. Why did Tesla make it but Fisker fail? The definition you are using in your last couple of paragraphs sounds more akin to privilege than luck. Anyhow, at the end of the day no two people are the same and no two stories of success are the same. As I said in my original post, luck plays a part in it but it is not the determining factor.
I mean if they're measuring wealth by straight up money in USD, the average Turkish minimum wage is $350 or thereabouts right now
I laughed at the second one.
They're literally removing their workers as customers in their new store.
Wow.
The vast of majority businesses fail. The vast majority of businesses require up-front costs to start - to pay staff before sales come in, to create a product, to establish premises etc. These two things - an upfront cost and a high chance of failure - present a large degree of risk, in the same way spending money on a lottery ticket presents risk. Typically the businesses that succeed (certainly in the first place) are those who have adequate initial resources and who plan well for the market place. As such, the person stumping up the money (and often that's the same person as the one coming up with the plan) needs a reasonable expectation that they're not just going to earn back what they've put in, but go beyond that and earn a profit. The staff that work there aren't simply working in a vacuum - they're utilising the resources that this person initially invested (premises, tools, equipment, whatever), they're utilising the business planning from that person, and they're taking on absolutely none of the risk themselves either. A lot of people would rather show up to work, do their work, get their paycheck and go home. But if that's all we had, no one would ever start a business. As such, those who do start businesses - and the majority fail - that succeed end up "winning" big. And just as they couldn't make money without their staff, their staff couldn't make whatever product it is without the investment, planning, infrastructure provided by the company.
Now, none of this means employees can't own the means of production. The reason why it doesn't happen is because most people don't want to take on that risk. They don't want the prospect of their earnings of the profit shrinking if a competitor makes a better product, or if there's some problem that harms their ability to work. And if someone did want that risk, there are practical hurdles to establishing an employee-owned business. How do you find X other employees that also want to start a business? Or do you start it with just a few people and hire the rest? Well, then that's not really employee owned, it just means some of the owners are employees. OK, so maybe everyone you hire has to invest in the business before they can work for you - but that's obviously going to massively prohibit your ability to hire the right people, because not everyone a) wants to invest in a business and b) has the means to do so even if they have the desire. Or maybe your hire people and they share the profits as and whilst they work there - but then where does the initial investment come from?
Like I said, there are a few businesses like this. None of it's illegal - it's market forces that stop them being more common despite the theory that everyone would like to own the means of production; The reality is that most people don't want that risk, because you can't simultaneously own the means of production and guarantee you're going to get paid every month.
Last edited:
Wild prediction: wealthy blood will flow in the streets in the future. History keeps on repeating itself.
It'll be over a lot of dead poor/middle-class bodies though. Militarized police force, increased military spending, mass surveillance, consolidated corporate news media promoting racism/Southern Strategy, etc.
That was before unmanned drones, the eradication of privacy, and militarized police forces. There's not an uprising in America that would ever stand a chance.
We are already there.
To be considered officially unemployed, one must have looked for a job in the past four weeks. That’s the statistician’s sleight of hand: find a reason to exclude the unemployed from the unemployment statistics.
Thats not true. They are powerful tools, but can be overcome. Particularly because they breed complacency.
You need 2 things.
1. A solidified people.
2. People with the knowledge of their doctrine, procedures, and capabilities, as well as the skills to train and teach them to overcome these obstacles.
2 is available in spades with just about every pissed off forgotten veteran with nothing to lose. One of the most important core skills drilled into every soldier, marine etc, is how to effectively teach what they know to others.
Last edited:
Depends on if you own stake in an office you work out. I know ones that do.
I wonder what percent of people calling for the heads of the 1% are actually part of that group themselves and just don’t realize it.
This is a global list. 1% means 32k usd, not millions or bilions
This is a global list. 1% means 32k usd, not millions or bilions
A new thread for this year’s data has been created. Please move this discussion here: https://www.resetera.com/posts/17087128/
- Status