The 62 richest people have as much wealth as half the world

CNN Money - The 62 richest people have as much wealth as half the world

The world's 62 richest billionaires have as much wealth as the bottom half of the world's population, according to a new report from Oxfam International.

The wealthiest have seen their net worth soar over the five years ending in 2015. Back in 2010, it took 388 mega-rich people to own as much as half the world.

Oxfam released its annual report ahead of the World Economic Forum in the Swiss city of Davos, a yearly gathering of political and financial leaders. The study draws from the Forbes annual list of billionaires and Credit Suisse's Global Wealth Databook.

To help counter inequality, Oxfam is renewing its call for global leaders to crack down on tax havens, where the rich have socked away $7.6 trillion, the group estimates.

Let that sink in for a minute. In 2010, the richest 388 people had as much as the bottom half of the world's population and over the past five years, so much wealth has been amassed at the top that now 62 billionaires at the top have as much wealth as the 3.5 billion people at the bottom. If rumors about Putin's secret fortune are true, that number is actually lower and possibly closer to 50 than 60.

Doesn't seem like a trend that bodes well for the future of the global economy does it?

Seems like there is a lot more of us then them.

a reply to: theantediluvian

And they are what keeps us all going. Without them and their money there would be no us. No food, no business, no cloths, no health care, nothing!

This may sound ignorant, so help me deny it...


I have billions upon billions that I wipe my arse on...
I put it into a tax haven nation...

What's the perks for the nation itself, aside from me, being so very rich, using their bank?
& don't they also pay interest on what I stock as well?


Seems like a lose-lose for the haven nations.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
So help me deny ignorance here.

originally posted by: Staroth
a reply to: theantediluvian

And they are what keeps us all going. Without them and their money there would be no us. No food, no business, no cloths, no health care, nothing!

People ate and worked long before there was a single billionaire.

It is they that need us.

originally posted by: Staroth
a reply to: theantediluvian

And they are what keeps us all going. Without them and their money there would be no us. No food, no business, no cloths, no health care, nothing!

You've mistaken the elite with the working class & 3rd world slaves.

It's an easy mistake to make.

Now if only enough people could wake up and see that our current economic climate and capitalism in general is nothing more than a disease and does nothing good for humanity

a reply to: theantediluvian

What is never said in these sorts of oversimplifications is that these figures are certainly net worth, not cash under the mattress.

That means that when face boob guy has X billions, it is distributed throughout his investment empire, not held back from use. Bill Gates and the late Steve Jobs didn't withhold that capital. Indeed, the reason they accumulated that net worth was being very good stewards of that capital.

They are the directors of capital, not the squanderers or hoarders of it. Those companies have employees, perhaps one of you guys. They make stuff, perhaps you bought something from them because it was useful.

It's kind of like saying that the US possesses a gigantic portion of the wealth in the world so we should kill it and feast on its dead carcass like mindless zombies.

a reply to: onequestion

Total wealth of the richest 62 (and the poorest 3.5 billion): 1.76 trillion

If you crunch the numbers, it works out that Bill Gates, the current richest person in the world ( $79.2 B), is worth about as much as 160 million people in the bottom economic half of the world's population and the 62nd richest person, Robin Li, has the wealth of about 30 million ($15.3 B).

a reply to: Staroth

I hope everyone realizes you're being sarcastic!

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Their banks make money the same way all banks do. The more money they get, the more they can invest.

Savings accounts pay measly returns.(let's say 1%) If you open a bank account in the Cayman Islands, you would get a dividend, but they will loan that money out at 6% to a business for example.

But.. people go to tax havens to set up investment accounts. They can own stocks, bonds, mutual funds, other currencies to make income. These accounts have fees and account managers like a typical bank or investment firm. The more money they handle the more they make.

These nations are getting small percentages of big money. There is no down side for the tax haven country.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Doesn't seem like a trend that bodes well for the future of the global economy does it?

Considering the quote below is looking like the general direction it is headed, it does not look good at all...

The income gap between the richest and poorest is also growing. The poorest 20% of the world -- who live below the extreme poverty line, living on less than $1.90 a day -- barely saw their incomes budge between 1988 and 2011, while the most prosperous 10% enjoyed a 46% jump.

originally posted by: Staroth
a reply to: theantediluvian

And they are what keeps us all going. Without them and their money there would be no us. No food, no business, no cloths, no health care, nothing!

No, they are the ones removing money from the economy, avoiding paying tax back in and then stashing it. It sickens me to the core when you see poeple fighting for survival every day because they have nothing.

a reply to: HighFive

Thanks, HighFive.

I knew someone here could teach me.

originally posted by: Staroth
a reply to: theantediluvian

And they are what keeps us all going. Without them and their money there would be no us. No food, no business, no cloths, no health care, nothing!

Care to explain how hoarding and hiding billions of dollars provides others with food, business, clothes, and healthcare?

Do you think they printed the money themselves and their wealth will disappear once they are dead? All their wealth was already here before they arrived and it will be here when they depart. Wealth being concentrated into a handful of people does nothing but drive up resource scarcity for the rest of the planet.

Why are you convinced that removing capital from circulation helps the global economy?


ps edit - I'm starting to think your post was sarcasm and I just retorted for no reason. If so, I'm sorry.

I wonder what would happen if all that wealth was shunted down to the poor and middle class? What effect would it have upon the world?

All I know is that I want a future where the wealth distribution chart doesn't look like a helicopter landing pad sitting on top of a toothpick.

Take note that the 62 billionaires listed are the ones that are 'LISTED'.

These are the business men and bank owners, but there are also 'hidden' elite that could potentionally hold more than the top 62.

I recall a topic on ATS a while back where this anonymous individual allegedly was moving trillions of dollars around to avoid taxation.

The world is far more split when it comes to income and finances than what is depicted even here.

Something to consider

a reply to: greencmp

What is never said in these sorts of oversimplifications is that these figures are certainly net worth, not cash under the mattress.

That means that when face boob guy has X billions, it is distributed throughout his investment empire, not held back from use. Bill Gates and the late Steve Jobs didn't withhold that capital. Indeed, the reason they accumulated that net worth was being very good stewards of that capital.

In 2010, Bill Gates was worth $53 B. He is now worth $79.2 B. That's an increase of 50% in 5 years.

They are the directors of capital, not the squanderers or hoarders of it. Those companies have employees, perhaps one of you guys. They make stuff, perhaps you bought something from them because it was useful.

Yes, about 20% of his wealth is in MSFT stock and a far larger chunk in the assets of his holding company, Cascade Investments (partial list of holdings here).

While I love this idea that Bill Gates is a "steward of capital" I think you're giving him far too much credit. Look at his investments. Did he start Four Seasons? No. Does he even sit on the board? Nope. Has his ownership of Four Seasons stock somehow resulted in Four Seasons employing more people? Maybe Four Seasons is actually employing less people? Perhaps they're employing the same number of people and paying them less?

You're basically just retelling the "job creators" myth.

Which is the worse oversimplification? The figures or that outmoded axiom?

a reply to: theantediluvian

This set of figures is interesting of course, but do you know what I would like to see?

A cost breakdown of the money that the richest 62 people in the world, spent on personal things, non-business expenditure over a given period. That would be a very informative bit of data, perhaps more so than their raw "worth".

a reply to: TrueBrit

Once you have such obscene wealth, the only thing left to spend it on is obtaining more. And thus, the cycle continues.

Ahh the fruits of socialism and centralization grow and grow.

Most of that increase is from central bank debt monetization.

Little folks don't get the money so as to keep inflation down.