1% of the world owns 50% of the wealth

In the top 10% but not the 1%.

>16% of millionaires inherited their wealth (officially)
>1/3 don’t work
>most invest in stocks and bonds and cash out to build their portfolios instead of creating new businesses and hiring more people
>nepotism and connections

>fair
lmao poorcucks we're gonna kill you when we get robots to replace you

Is that before tax? And do you rent or lease a car?

I read online today that if you own a computer you are in the top 5% of world wealth. To the ancient Kings and Queens of Europe, the average middle class or even poorfag American looks way way way richer than them!

The important thing is what you do with your money. This is something I am struggling with because on the one hand I can make a savings and save for retirement. But is it fair to do that when others are starving right now?

I’m gonna fuck your sister yuppie.

>bro that's not fair you can't just live luxuriously on your yacht and fly to different resort location 10 times a year on your private jet while I work 8 hours per day and watch my greenhouse gas emissions

Attached: 1555183935615.png (785x1000, 254K)

>pic
big think

Because their ancestors were smart guys, unlike fucking plebeians.

% of millionaires inherited their wealth (officially)
What's wrong with it? I'm sureyour father will leave you something too.

I don’t have a problem but a lot of millionaires aren’t self-made.

You believe it's not fair when 1% of the world owns 50% of the wealth. Why?

Because is that not feudalism?

Literally because of the definition of "fair"
You could argue that life isn't supposed to be fair, but you can't argue that it is in fact fair

>hurrrrr humans deserve equal money!!!!
>muh human rights! Are you a fucking fascist? YOU CAN'T JUST LET PEOPLE STARVE! GIVE ME RICH PEOPLE'S MONEY. THEY DONT HAVE A RIGHT TO THEIR OWN STUFF!
>well of course the market should decide who has sexual partners and friends, what kind of freakish social engineering do you support!?!?!? Some people are just more attractive than others. And you're not *entitled* to MY body.

Euthanize the bottom half 50%, wealth inequality solved.

If the bottom half of the world is so unproductive so as to be so worthless, they're better off death than leeching resources

Attached: 5cbc5d7.jpg (737x960, 86K)

this

rarted post
If you'd said the bottom 10% or so I'd agree, but the world is built on the backs of that ~50% of cheap laborers, literally
At least wait until automation is sufficiently developed

Based. It would also be beneficial to murder low IQs aka niggers

No, the world is built upon the productive intellect of industry titans, why do you think Jeff Bezos has over 100 Billion dollars and earns over 100k every second? It's because he and his work is worth 1 billion times more than some Bangladeshi slave. Nothing of value would be lost if all the unproductive laborers died in this instant.

Attached: 64ca4de.jpg (750x1334, 105K)

>wtf noo you thirdies can't just cut down all the trees and kill all the animals, we got rich doing that and ruined the environment but you can't because it's the current year

Attached: 1551601697921.jpg (201x250, 7K)

Someone honestly believes jeff bezos is actually worth what he makes. Hah, enjoy your future wage cage. Jeff has built his empire on the backs of government subsidy and worker abuse

they deserve the 100%

Attached: 1558595218856s.jpg (219x250, 13K)

Jeff Bezos is worth what he makes or else he wouldn't be earning what he does. Unproductive, unskilled workers have to beg him for jobs because they know that only Amazon would employ them and pay them far above what they're actually worth.

Attached: 2e9ecca.jpg (750x761, 94K)

Attached: Gibson Rothschild.png (660x613, 556K)

>the saudi royal family has earned their wealth
>not inherited oil fortunes
there's degrees to this certainly, and musk is based and reinvests his wealth, but you need to wake up and realize that the best years of society are the years where wealth has some mechanism to be distributed nicely

Attached: 1558596128077.png (642x155, 12K)

I'd like to grow my net worth but not through confiscating the wealth of others. I don't give a fuck if there are people richer than me and can't care less if it is fair or unfair, except if their wealth was acquired through violent or coercive means

Automation lad.

>Because they're high IQ individuals that earned it.

Attached: image.png (461x451, 39K)

Yes or no: ALL FIRSTIES ARE RICH

relative assessment

>Not a yes
>not a no

Well are we rich (as firsties) or not??

They're all 3rd gen billionaires who were born to people who were born to people who owned it, who spent decades lobbying governments to structure society in a way that failure is no longer possible for people in their position. 2000 bad investments and 6 tanked companies ending in nothing but golden parachutes all the way down.

relative to cost of living. 40k USD in the US is a lot different than the same money in mexico or south america

there is nothing wrong with giving money to your childs.

I don't understand why we don't start a wealth tax on people who have $20+million in net worth. Bringing the income tax to 100% won't do anything if a guy who inherited $50 million has no income since most of his money is invested

But we still have computer, indoor heating, plumbing. internet that even the greatest Kings and Queens of the 1700s did not have. Correct?

thirdies have some of those things, cell phones are actually really common in africa and india. But I don't see your point

But people don’t own shit, most Canadians are renters. No money means getting drilled anally and being a beggar.

I rent too but I still own computer, internet etc, and never have to worry about food or even rent I always have those covered. Since I am young I dont have to worry about medical bill either since I am healthy Even marie antoinette didnt have computer or internet. I would argue the ability to speak to people all over the world is a greater rich than silver or gold.

Basically I am confused on how rich I am and how much responsibility I should take to the third world. Thats what confuses me.

>106920766
>being this naive

>To the ancient Kings and Queens of Europe, the average middle class or even poorfag American looks way way way richer than them!
This is cope from people who just like handwaving current inequality.

Stefan pls

China isn't the sort of socialism most socialists in the west support. You could argue with some evidence that it's not socialist outside of official documents. This causes IMMENSE butthurt any time someone mentions it but it's not exactly wrong.

I dont want to handwave current inequality but arent modern day Americans the winners in current inequality? Since we have electricity, plumbing, internet, etc etc etc and so many others do not??

Soviet citizens in 1950 were living much better than their grandparents were.

What about Scandinavia?

Globally Americans are better off than peasant farmers or slum dwellers somewhere in Africa or South Asia. That's clear. That doesn't mean that there are obvious issues with the class system in the US.

Ok so they were rich too. No point in looking to the long long dead.

Point being, we are super super rich, richer than marie antoinette and richer than those soviet citizens too. The greatest monarchs of the 1800s live like animals compared to us, we have internet and computer and they do not. So now what do we do with this wealth? Do the rich (such as ourselves) have responsibility to the poor? Or do we let them eat cake?

Sort of, but as the global megarich do we have the right to get jealous of the global megarichest? And if we do, shouldn't any spoils squeezed from both us and the even richest go to the poor and needy ?

Philosophers like Peter Singer have written about this interesting topic.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Life_You_Can_Save

No Marie Antoinette is still richer than a person making 6 figures today. In this day and age she would be a multi-millionaire or billionaire heiress. Feudalism hasn’t died out, the only difference today from back then is that the merchant class is now apart of nobility.

Right now I donate 10% to charity....maybe I should donate more, go without various luxuries like alcohol, meals out, retirement fund and internet so others can eat. But it can be hard. I get attached to these luxuries

How can she be richer? She didnt even have electricity, which now even poorfags have. She lived like a pathetic peasant except she had some nice clothes etc. Seems to me that we are richer.

t. Derechango

Attached: derewojak.jpg (720x561, 56K)

There are more millionaires in the US alone than this chart suggests are in the world.

Do you not realise investing in stocks is as good as creating new businesses and hiring people?

socialism works only in homogeneous countries and regions

Oligarchs literally control all the governments of the “”””””few””””””” world and unless the average man rises up and starts lynching these fucking billionaires we are going to continue careening to a horrible dystopian hell of indentured servitude for the masses

That chart doesn’t include the family members of millionaires.

>we

Attached: 1556483170110.jpg (251x242, 11K)

*”””””””””free””””””””” world

Why I'm not surprised?
Another dumb American who not understand market Socialism.

Sure, one of the regions more economically liberal in the world "socialism".
You Americans take the world idiot to a whole other level, holly Satan.

They're going to kill us all when automation makes human labor obsolete.

>Feudalism

That doesn't mean what you think it means, Muppet.

>What about Scandinavia?
Those are social-democrat states, still "capitalist" and not "revolutionary" marxist-leninist states, like Cuba or China in theory still claim they are. In Scandinavia the average working people are the ones that pays the high taxes that support their welfare states, while corporations don't pay that much money, and actually enjoy tax cuts to bring their business over there, Sweden tried to tax rich people back in the 70's and didn't worked out at all since rich people can move their money elsewhere.
Scandinavian states don't have a plan to ever get rid of private property or become someday a communist utopia like Vietnam or Laos still want to according to their goverments.

They don't need to thanks to birth control.

Market socialism would be like Yugoslavia 1948-1980s.

Try to take what is yours by birthright? Yeah...

Not quite so.

That was a population control tool but when full automation comes they will literally kill off the rest of humanity. The Georgia guidestones make it clear that the world population is to remain at a maximum 500 million

Honestly, there needs to be some form of transfer of wealth and income from developed countries to poorer countries. The earth belongs to EVERYONE and we should be sharing at least some of the goods that we're generating from these resources with the rest of the world.

>people like Barry make up the largest unified voting blocks in most developed countries at the moment
Fucking grim.

>Fucking grim.

Attached: 1556186567977.png (785x731, 201K)

China's economic system is "socialism with chinese characteristics" their logic is that according to Marx societies evolve like Pokemon,until Deng Xiaoping they were feudal so they have to be capitalist first to generate enough wealth so they can redistribute it to the people, and when they get rich enough they'll evolve into true socialist and when they perfect the system then they'll evolve into communism.

Most wealth is inherited, desu.

Even the serfdom had housing. These days younger people don't even have that.

It's sad to see cancerous reddit garbage being posted by Australian flags. Have a bit of basic respect for this place; you aren't an American so there's excuse for acting like a fuckwit.

>It's sad to see cancerous reddit garbage being posted by Australian flags. Have a bit of basic respect for this place; you aren't an American so there's excuse for acting like a fuckwit.

Attached: 1403786963814.jpg (517x678, 31K)

>15 year old's first socialist "woke" moment
Don't worry, by 18 you'll outgrow it.

This or their parents, grandparents, etc were
any other answer is literally just cope

it's not

>High IQ individuals
>Not cheaters who advocate for more inequality and make the system even harder to climb
>Muh Social Darwinism
Yikes

this is why we need meritocratic monarchism

Except kids can NEET in their parents house until 25 now instead or labouring from the age of 4. Along with education, healthcare, phones etc. Especially in countries with free/cheap uni, but even in ones like the US and UK people can choose to do whatever the fuck they want and have plenty of info on what is the most lucrative path from and can focus and work hard through those years to end up with a fine job to build wealth themselves and become a millionaire in their lifetime. In the US most just pick shite paths and party through the years which is not conducive to upward mobility

Unironically asking,why do middle class americans support this so much,they really think that somehow they will reach that 1%?

sorry zhang life isnt fair

I find this picture inspiring though

>pokemon
No it's more along dialectical lines, but the general idea is that you can't shortcut history

...