Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is actually a good thing, because the potential for all of that wealth to eventually find it's way into the hands of the 3.5 billion poorest can occur through the power of trickle down economics.
And it is inspiring for the 3.5 billion poorest, because it shows that someday, if they all just work hard enough and start saving and investing wisely that they too can join the ranks of the richest 85 people.
Since it would be virtually impossible to give all 3.5 billion people a single fish everyday, it is the job of those that control all of that wealth to teach them how to fish so they can take care of themselves. (Not literally since that would deplete the oceans of all of the remaining fish on the planet) But the point is, if the poorest and of course laziest 3.5 billion of the world would just all start working harder, maybe 'go to college' and start spending their money more wisely, then they can become like the top 85 richest too.
And, like. . . .Shouldn't the 3.5 billion start investing and saving their money instead of wasting it all on things like food, shelter and medical care. Come on people! That 3.5 billion is half of the world's population. They can do better than only having about as much combined wealth as 85 people.
Last edited by Skydive Outlaw; 01-20-2014 at 07:54 AM..
Well, the most interesting trend that has occurred in the past twenty years that no one has publicized is that the worldwide poverty rate has plunged by 50%. And has done so without soaking the rich.
The problem with the populist arguments? Their image of the superrich is confined to old Richie Rich comic book stereotypes of entitled layabouts diving into swimming pools filled with $100 bills. Yet the truth is almost exactly the opposite. Those people who are that rich are typically so because they have done something, whether create an operating system that runs computers worldwide or run a huge retail chain or invent something.
There's no way I will ever be that rich, and I'm totally cool with that. However, my wife and I have worked hard, tried to make good decisions, lived below our means, and took the occasional calculated risk. And we're looking at retiring early as a result.
The problem with the populist arguments? Their image of the superrich is confined to old Richie Rich comic book stereotypes of entitled layabouts diving into swimming pools filled with $100 bills. Yet the truth is almost exactly the opposite. Those people who are that rich are typically so because they have done something, whether create an operating system that runs computers worldwide or run a huge retail chain or invent something.
Totally. Political access and neo-corporatism along with manipulation of financial sectors has nothing to do with it.
From the article:
"Oxfam said that India's billionaires acquired their wealth in 'rent thick' sectors – industries where profits are dependent on access to scarce resources – 'made available exclusively through government permissions and therefore susceptible to corruption by powerful actors, as opposed to creation of wealth.'
Totally. Political access and neo-corporatism along with manipulation of financial sectors has nothing to do with it.
From the article:
"Oxfam said that India's billionaires acquired their wealth in 'rent thick' sectors – industries where profits are dependent on access to scarce resources – 'made available exclusively through government permissions and therefore susceptible to corruption by powerful actors, as opposed to creation of wealth.'
- -
Of course that only happens in India.
Well, do you think Warren Buffett made his fortune in Omaha, Nebraska, because of insider connections? How about the Waltons emerging from backwoods Arkansas as a retailing juggernaut? Or Bill Gates coming out of Seattle, Washington, with a better alternative to IBMs clunky operating system? The list goes on and on. They were all far removed from the centers of power and came out of nowhere to create enormous fortunes.
I really can't control what goes on in developing countries. But I can combat the rather lazy attitude of the populists in this country who basically are using the language of moral outrage to camouflage their envy.
This is the link to the actual article, which is fascinating. Pages 12 and 22 talk about the U.S. specifically. The chart on page 23 says it all.
An excerpt: "In the U.S. the wealthiest one percent captured 95 percent of post-financial crisis growth since 2009, while the bottom 90% became poorer." No wonder so many of us don't feel like the recession ever ended, no matter that the stock market has reached new highs, etc.!
I really can't control what goes on in developing countries. But I can combat the rather lazy attitude of the populists in this country who basically are using the language of moral outrage to camouflage their envy.
Alinsky tactic to gain control: use moral outrage to camouflage their true intent.
Keep reaching for those rainbows. The answer to your question is an emphatic 'yes'. Entrepreneurial drive certainly played a role in their rising above the froth. But the megafortunes were made precisely in the manner you so snarkily state. Both Warren Buffet and Gates (his dad anyway) have basically said as much. A lot of Americans believe as you do, however. That's the sound we make as we are circling the drain.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpg35223
Well, do you think Warren Buffett made his fortune in Omaha, Nebraska, because of insider connections? How about the Waltons emerging from backwoods Arkansas as a retailing juggernaut? Or Bill Gates coming out of Seattle, Washington, with a better alternative to IBMs clunky operating system? The list goes on and on. They were all far removed from the centers of power and came out of nowhere to create enormous fortunes.
I really can't control what goes on in developing countries. But I can combat the rather lazy attitude of the populists in this country who basically are using the language of moral outrage to camouflage their envy.
Alinsky tactic to gain control: use moral outrage to camouflage their true intent.
Outrage is not an argument.
And if one is going to level outrage at the question of global poverty, then level it at the leadership of those countries where those 3.5 billion poorest live, not people like Bill Gates or Warren Buffett. The true cause of the endemic poverty you see in those developing nations is the corrupt and repressive oligarchs that rule.
I'll give you a case in point. Pretty much all of Africa gained its independence within a very short period of time. Many of these nations such as Congo, have immense mineral wealth. Yet places such as Congo have GDPPP of around $3,000 per person. Why? Because of the failure of those societies. Then if you look at countries such as Botswana, and the GDPPP is closer to $14,000 per person, despite having fewer real natural resources. Why? Because Botswana committed to a representative democracy. This is especially striking due to the fact that Botswana is due to surpass South Africa in terms of GDPPP in the near future. And Zimbabwe, once a rather wealthy country, is now an economic basket case after decades of misrule under Mugabe.
THAT is the true cause of global poverty. Not the fact that a handful of people have manage to earn (Note the use of the term 'earn' there) billions of dollars because they managed to do the right thing.
Keep reaching for those rainbows. The answer to your question is an emphatic 'yes'. Entrepreneurial drive certainly played a role in their rising above the froth. But the megafortunes were made precisely in the manner you so snarkily state. Both Warren Buffet and Gates (his dad anyway) have basically said as much. A lot of Americans believe as you do, however. That's the sound we make as we are circling the drain.
Oh. So Bill Gates didn't write code? Bill Gates just schmoozed his way into being a billionaire? Bill Gates just kind of stumbled into his business models and kind of met his core team down at the local bar and said, "Hey, let's start a computer company"? What color is the sky in your world?
Yes, these guys had the advantage of college degrees and a host of things. So? I see a lot of college graduates who are working as barristas at coffee shops because they either didn't bother to apply themselves in college or didn't take advantage of opportunities. I have one of those as a client right now. She had a world-beater of an idea that she just was either too lazy or too afraid to put it into motion. She took a swat at it, decided it was too hard to do on her own, and didn't call the several contacts I provided who could have given her the funding and the expertise she needed to make it work. So she'll spend the rest of her days wondering why she's not wealthy, when the truth is that the world gave her an opportunity she failed to take.
What's more, if you're railing at Bill Gates because of his immense fortune, then you really don't understand money in the first place. Bill Gates couldn't write a check for billions of dollars right now, because that's what his assets are worth. It's not as if he has stacks of money sitting in his bank account. Instead, that fortune is counted in the form of his ownership in MicroSoft, his real estate, and whatever other investments he might have. Of course, none of this means squat to someone intent on whining about their station in life. Because people who complain aren't really interested in addressing their own lives. Rather they'd prefer to envy others and strip those people of what they rightfully earned.
I mean, hey, my first job out of college had a salary that was below the poverty line. You heard right. Below the poverty line. I had to work a second job just to keep the wolf at the door. But rather than whine about it, I learned everything I could in my business. I attended industry meetings even though I was a nobody. Asked questions relentlessly. Put in extra hours. Today, I'm semi-retired at 51 with clients around the country. My wife has followed a similar path, busting her ass to become a VP of Finance at a very large real estate company. We didn't have our path to success by backstabbing or taking ethical shortcuts or neglecting our personal lives. We just worked really hard and gained the trust of people in the industry. That's how you succeed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
