The Oxfam data
- This topic has 11 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
http://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/wealth-having-it-all-and-wanting-more-338125
Never mind percentages, according to the Oxfam report in the enws, 92 individuals have as much wealth as the bottom 50% of the World's Population. Never mind the ruddy one percent.
The raw data seems to have come from Credit Suisse:
James O'Brien on LBC radio, is holding a debate live now. http://www.lbc.co.uk/
Nice round figure top 1% owns more than the rest of us put together. Don't need a degree in statistics to comprehend that. Time for a revolution http://www.lbc.co.uk/richest-1-to-own-more-than-other-99—report-103433 edit 80% of the world's population own just 5.5% of wealth – an average of £2,500 ($3,851) each.
I think my earliest political badge i ever wore in the 70s was the 7:84 one based on the theatre groups name , but stemming from 7% owns 84% of the wealth.But isn't the point often made, it's not even the 1% but the 0.1% or the 0.01% who own the most.
The rich counter-attackhttp://www.ibtimes.co.uk/oxfams-global-inequality-report-blasted-very-misleading-by-adam-smith-institute-1484138
Quote:The researcher said by using a measure of net wealth the Oxfam study failed to capture all assets, citing human capital as a missing one.I thought human capital was labour but no, i was apparently wrong
Quote:"When you do a degree, you then gain human capital. You can produce a lot in your life and also earn a lot in your life," he said."For example, someone who's gone to an Ivy League university. They would've accumulated a lot of debt but if you look at the other side of the balance sheet they have a lot of human capital….under Oxfam's methodology, a young investment banker would be deemed one of the poorest people in the world – because of the debt that they have accumulated – but a rural farmer in India would be considered richer if they had saved any money.I really can't understand what the complaint is about except by nitpicking it tries to undermine the reality regardless of some methodolgical statistical flaw and make us feel sorry for a corporate lawyer
Here's some more mad marketeers on this:http://www.adamsmith.org/blog/economics/oxfam-capitalism-and-poverty/
These cannot be real people surely? They are all economic illiterates and plainly missing a few odds and ends in the mental faculty department. But what did I expect from folk who put any credence in The Adam Smith Institutute?
I am sure King Abdullah was one of the 92 people that owns more than half the world's population put together: Parasite. Tony Blair ( Warmonger) mourns the loss. What will the worl do without these two?
Bush, another warmonger, is crying too
Our friend Eamonn Butler has a letter published in the Telegraph about thishttps://twitter.com/ASI/status/557886394434322433What he knows but has chosen to ignore is that £1.30 today, is the equivelent of £0.38 at 1981 prices. Ignoring inflation distorts the picture in favour of showing rising wealth over time… To compare wealth levels in money terms over time you have to adjust for inflation / deflation.EDIT: Unless he's getting the figures from a dataset already adjusted for inflation…
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.