Top 100 Richest People Now $241 Billion Richer | |
| By: DSWright Thursday January 3, 2013 5:20 am | |
Sometimes it seems like the system is rigged and the rich just keep getting richer – it seems that way for a reason, it’s true.
From the Los Angeles Times:
And while they may be claiming burdensome regulation and Obama’s “socialist policies” are destroying wealth our old friends the Koch Brothers got a nice boost.The richest people on the planet got even richer in 2012, adding $241 billion to their collective net worth, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, a daily ranking of the world’s 100 wealthiest individuals.
The aggregate net worth of the world’s top 100 stood at $1.9 trillion at the market close Dec. 31, according to the index. Of the people who appeared on the final ranking of 2012, only 16 registered a net loss for the 12-month period.
Yeah, we live under a socialist regime – socialism for the rich (capitalism for the poor). That’s probably why in America the richest 1 percent have more financial wealth than the bottom 95 percent combined.Koch Industries’ two other shareholders, the brothers Charles and David Koch, are each worth $40.9 billion, up $7.1 billion, or 20.9%, for the year.
21 Comments21 Responses to “Top 100 Richest People Now $241 Billion Richer”
PublicLobbyistJanuary 3rd, 2013 at 2:18 pm
Ron Paul, most of whose ideas are admirable, has made contradictory statements with regard to the Rich. On the one hand he states that financial interventionists are motivated by envy but also says that one of the causes of our financial political crisis is a “gross discrepancy in wealth distribution going from the middle class to the rich.” So, if there is a problem in distribution, why do we need to interject envy into the matter? Which is it, Libertarians, envy or injustice? I say if you correct the injustice, you’ll assuage envy considerably.
Of the people who appeared on the final ranking of 2012, only 16 registered a net loss for the 12-month period.I wonder if they’ll be able to derive any tax benefit from those losses that will sorta, you know, wipe out the losses over time? Um…duh…I dunno…
In response to PublicLobbyist @ 3
Ron Paul is (how do I state this delicately) vastly overrated. He sounds sane for the first several minutes, after which his rhetoric and logic break down into the most infantile and unimaginable gibberish.
RetirinInFiveJanuary 3rd, 2013 at 2:46 pm
And the card reads, “Advance to Go. Collect $2.41 billion.”
- According to the IRS, which recently released 2009 data from the 400 richest individual income tax returns, the real runaway growth in wealth has come from capital gains. In the last years of the bubble, the “Fortunate 400″ made nearly half their income from capital gains (a.k.a.: profit from the rising value of an investment, such as stocks or property) and less than 10% of their income from old-fashioned wages.
- The average income of a top-400 earner grew by 650% between 1992 and 2007 to a whopping $344 million. Over that time, the average salary didn’t even double. But the average capital gains haul increased by 1,200%. So how do the richest get richer? Not from their wages. From their investments.http://finance.yahoo.com/news/richest-400-people-america-got-201519751.html
And those “investments” are safeguarded by hedge fund crooks and their bankster partners scamming from The Street. Ben and Timmy stand arms crossed at the vault, while the “50 or 60 far right extremists” that Schumer is bitching about are turning the hallowed halls of Congress(choke) into a Delta Chi remake, the irony.
The shoe that is yet to drop is the one where we stop Quantitavingly Easing those capital gains with our stimulatin’ free money. Supporting their Versailles lifestyle, job creators, what bullshit. Going broke.
Deflation bitches, then depression, socialism! Kenya wins! Keep prepping preppers. We are ruled by fools.
- The average income of a top-400 earner grew by 650% between 1992 and 2007 to a whopping $344 million. Over that time, the average salary didn’t even double. But the average capital gains haul increased by 1,200%. So how do the richest get richer? Not from their wages. From their investments.http://finance.yahoo.com/news/richest-400-people-america-got-201519751.html
And those “investments” are safeguarded by hedge fund crooks and their bankster partners scamming from The Street. Ben and Timmy stand arms crossed at the vault, while the “50 or 60 far right extremists” that Schumer is bitching about are turning the hallowed halls of Congress(choke) into a Delta Chi remake, the irony.
The shoe that is yet to drop is the one where we stop Quantitavingly Easing those capital gains with our stimulatin’ free money. Supporting their Versailles lifestyle, job creators, what bullshit. Going broke.
Deflation bitches, then depression, socialism! Kenya wins! Keep prepping preppers. We are ruled by fools.
It’s time for titles again so we can identify our new Masters. Lord Trump sounds about right or Charles Koch Earl of Manhattan etc. et al. Whose fooling who anymore we lost the Revolution against the Monarchist and the aristocrats, time to seal the deal. Let these pukes buy titles from the Gov’t that they need to pay for every yr. to maintain say for a miserly 50 mil. and they can’t pass it on to their kids. ( only the money to keep up the title.) They’ll love it. Oh and lets have an elected King or even Emperor as well.
Emmanuel Saez at the University of Berklee has done extensive work on income and wealth inequality. The former leads to the latter, of course.
You can find him and an excellent excel spreadsheet here.
I don’t have the latest version of excel installed so I can’t go through all of the current information.
In numbers I previously understood from several years ago, the top twenty per cent of holders of wealth in the US had eighty five per cent together. This could be divided into to 34 per cent for the top 1% and 51% for the remainder of the top quintile.
The middle two quintiles (forty percent of the population) had the remaining 15% of wealth. The bottom forty per cent had no net wealth at all. Most wealth there is in their houses. They have been plundered there.
That is net wealth.
The quote from Michael Moore’s film regards financial wealth. In other words, holding stocks, bonds, debt derivatives (things that the lower quintiles have unfortunately bought into with their pension plans, etc.
), what have you and the complexity there is endless.
But financial wealth is the basis of capitalism and that is basis of inequality.
Capitalism is about inequality.
Financial holdings income comes in capital gains which makes the recent ‘fiscal cliff’ fraud even more appalling.
It would take some analysis to verify Moore’s number. It would not surprise me if it were close. But the inequality of wealth is very complex and simple statements can be somewhat misleading.
You can find him and an excellent excel spreadsheet here.
I don’t have the latest version of excel installed so I can’t go through all of the current information.
In numbers I previously understood from several years ago, the top twenty per cent of holders of wealth in the US had eighty five per cent together. This could be divided into to 34 per cent for the top 1% and 51% for the remainder of the top quintile.
The middle two quintiles (forty percent of the population) had the remaining 15% of wealth. The bottom forty per cent had no net wealth at all. Most wealth there is in their houses. They have been plundered there.
That is net wealth.
The quote from Michael Moore’s film regards financial wealth. In other words, holding stocks, bonds, debt derivatives (things that the lower quintiles have unfortunately bought into with their pension plans, etc.
), what have you and the complexity there is endless.
But financial wealth is the basis of capitalism and that is basis of inequality.
Capitalism is about inequality.
Financial holdings income comes in capital gains which makes the recent ‘fiscal cliff’ fraud even more appalling.
It would take some analysis to verify Moore’s number. It would not surprise me if it were close. But the inequality of wealth is very complex and simple statements can be somewhat misleading.
Where are the Jobs, from these “Job Creators.”
If the “Job Creator” meme be true, than this $241 Billion should have created at least 4.8 Million new jobs (at $25,000 to $50,000 pr job).
Where are the jobs?
Alternatively at 50% tax rate, we could have see about 4.8 Million new infrastructure jobs world wide.
If the “Job Creator” meme be true, than this $241 Billion should have created at least 4.8 Million new jobs (at $25,000 to $50,000 pr job).
Where are the jobs?
Alternatively at 50% tax rate, we could have see about 4.8 Million new infrastructure jobs world wide.
If Obama’s a “socialist,” then perhaps we need to elect a “capitalist” next time around… at least in terms of the Orwellian-speak that our corp-owned propoganda media engages in.
Any time I hear conservatives I know vetching and whiiiing about teh poorz “ruining” everything I point out how the “wealth” is being re-distibuted upwards, NOT downwards. And that my mostly-entrepreneurial, truly small bus. owner conservative pals are being screwed over royally by both parties. In other words, neither the Republicans or Democrats are their friends.
I am starting to get a few looks in my direction that show a possibilty that a penny is beginning to drop & they might be seeing the truth from fantasy fiction… but I won’t hold my breath. Too many citizens continue to engage in the fantasy that they, too, are really truly part of the 1%, and therein lies the rub.
Any time I hear conservatives I know vetching and whiiiing about teh poorz “ruining” everything I point out how the “wealth” is being re-distibuted upwards, NOT downwards. And that my mostly-entrepreneurial, truly small bus. owner conservative pals are being screwed over royally by both parties. In other words, neither the Republicans or Democrats are their friends.
I am starting to get a few looks in my direction that show a possibilty that a penny is beginning to drop & they might be seeing the truth from fantasy fiction… but I won’t hold my breath. Too many citizens continue to engage in the fantasy that they, too, are really truly part of the 1%, and therein lies the rub.
In response to Synoia @ 10
Funny, I don’t have the numbers in front of me, but that 4.8 million is almost exactly how many lost jobs we still have from the Wall St TBTF banks implosion.
Just a coincidence I’m sure.
Just a coincidence I’m sure.
In response to onitgoes @ 11
If Obama’s a “socialist,” then perhaps we need to elect a “capitalist” next time around… at least in terms of the Orwellian-speak that our corp-owned propoganda media engages in.Ah, but no. Here’s a snippet I cut from The New Orwellian Dictionary:
“Socialist” = conservative capitalist
“Capitalist” = fascist.
-stewartm
I musta read a different book ‘cuz this scenario doesn’t fit my understanding of “socialism”.
Did I miss a memo???
Did I miss a memo???
In response to stewartm @ 13
Apparently I missed a WHOLE dictionary.
In response to GlenJo @ 12
Remember what Yogi said:
“That’s too much of a coincidence to BE a coincidence.”
Berra, not “the bear”.
“That’s too much of a coincidence to BE a coincidence.”
Berra, not “the bear”.
In response to Shoto @ 5
INdeed, his “window of sanity” is quite small. Actually, quite a shame.”A mind is a terrible thing to waste.” Rick Perry among others.
In response to bluedot12 @ 2
SOMEBODY has to have the MOST money. Makes sense if you think about it. /s
Tell how old I am. I remembner when $200 MILLION was a lot of money. THese guys don’t eve USE the “M” word.
In response to newcarguy @ 15
Dicktionary.
New type of book.
New type of book.
raisedbywolvesJanuary 3rd, 2013 at 4:52 pm
The very wealthy have as much of a character disorder as serial killers or mass murderers do. None of them are “crazy” – but they are addicted to control; they just express their addiction to control in a different way.
What is similar between serial killers, mass murderers, and the ultra-wealthy is that they all have an obsession with control – and a total lack of empathy for other human beings. In fact, they don’t see other human beings as beings at all, but as objects to be used at their pleasure. That’s what the whole trophy wife thing is about. Even they see that their sole function in the world is taking from others without being made to pay for it.
While serial killers prefer to be directly involved in their killing, and mass murderers give the orders to kill and then distance themselves from the carnage, the very wealthy are more like bloodless vampires. They suck the life out of everyone and everything around them, but it’s not done with drama. It’s dreary sweatshops and slave wages, it’s buying the law so that they can make their own policies, take people’s resources and avoid accountability. Just because they don’t have actual firing squads at their disposal doesn’t mean they don’t fantasize about having them and using them.
What is similar between serial killers, mass murderers, and the ultra-wealthy is that they all have an obsession with control – and a total lack of empathy for other human beings. In fact, they don’t see other human beings as beings at all, but as objects to be used at their pleasure. That’s what the whole trophy wife thing is about. Even they see that their sole function in the world is taking from others without being made to pay for it.
While serial killers prefer to be directly involved in their killing, and mass murderers give the orders to kill and then distance themselves from the carnage, the very wealthy are more like bloodless vampires. They suck the life out of everyone and everything around them, but it’s not done with drama. It’s dreary sweatshops and slave wages, it’s buying the law so that they can make their own policies, take people’s resources and avoid accountability. Just because they don’t have actual firing squads at their disposal doesn’t mean they don’t fantasize about having them and using them.
No comments:
Post a Comment