Of the world's ADULT population, 0.5% own 8.5% of the world's wealth while 91.2% of the adult population own 17.8%. Time for a realignment of wealth. Unregulated capitalism works only for the wealthy and not for the poor. Even Adam Smith realized that and worried many times throughout his famous book that without government keeping a firm grip on things, the results would be what we see today.
If businesses the world over market products or services that fill a need (the purpose of business) and make their owners rich, that is good; PROVIDED the business does not destroy the environment, treats its employees fairly and equitably and puts back into the community. IF the business/owners use their money and power to monopolize, to beat down their employees, to co-opt governments into passing regulations that favour them and not passing those that would hold them to account, it is called in economic terms "rent-seeking". (That also includes the activities of the powerful at the tops of planned economies too). Rent-Seeking is the chief cause of the disproportionate distribution of wealth and the seething discontent of the 99%.
It seems odd that they would lump everyone together who was making between $10,000 and $100,000, given that the lower number is below the poverty level, here in the U.S. anyway, whereas the higher number would suggest a rather affluent household.
ReplyDeleteMy guess is that it is as close to "middle class" as they can calculate on a global basis. The bottom end is pretty poor in USA, Canada or Europe but in a great many countries one would be low end of middle class with $10,000 annual income. Even in Ukraine.
ReplyDeleteMy biggest concern other than making it through these economic times is that there are now 7 billion people on this planet and growing. It's estimated that the planet can comfortably support 5 billion. As we approach 10 billion we will not be able to produce enough food to feed that many.
ReplyDeleteDemeur, the world can likely support 10 billion if we bring all the sustainably arable land into production, reduce losses in food grown AND, more importantly, solve the political problems of distribution, which has more to do with hunger than lack of actual food on this planet. We need fewer people concerned about GMOs and "chemicals" and a lot more concerned about good governance. The 99% must win. Or you are right, likely 5 billion is tops and we have 2 extra now.
ReplyDelete