Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: America's 99% = 4% of world's population with 18% of world's wealth

Posted 2 years ago on July 21, 2012, 2:23 a.m. EST by jaktober (286) from Sonoma, CA
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

http://freeindependentsun.com/zen/occupy-the-world-we-are-100/

"The idea of the 1% vs. the 99% was made popular by the Occupy campaign. It showed the gross wealth discrepancy in the United States. 1% of the population in the United States makes roughly over $400,000 per year. They control 25% of the wealth in the country. This is important to know. It also important to see how these numbers play out on a global scale (after all, we are all about world peace and harmony). Out of the world’s 8Billion or so people, the top 1% make at least a little over $40,000 per year. The top 10% make over $23,000 per year. The United States, with less than 5% of the world’s population, controls 25% of the world’s wealth. While a quarter of that wealth is controlled by the top 1% of the U.S., the remaining 99% control the rest, which equals roughly 18% of the world’s wealth."

75 Comments

75 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by rpc972 (628) from Portland, OR 2 years ago

BULL SHIT!!!!

What a disgustingly fallacious and dishonest argument!!!

Nevermind the cost of living differences, or the fact that 1% gamblers in Wall Street wrecked the world economy and are still at it in the LIBOR Scandal; WTF do you bastards care about the well being of even you own country's citizens, much less those of Sudan, Mexico, or the Marianna Islands??!!

Go to hell false-equality fraudsters!!

[-] 0 points by jaktober (286) from Sonoma, CA 2 years ago

Easy...there is a saying that hate is like drinking poison hoping it'll kill someone else.

As far as cost of living. I lived in Mexico for a couple months. We lived in a cinder-block house, where two of the walls were turned on the side (as to be open) and covered with blankets. There was no running water to the house (knowing what I know now I could have fixed that for them). Some people in the town lived better, some lived worse. I could get a bag of groceries for a couple dollars. The store was dirty, there wasn't much "selection", lot of flies. We were out at a "gringo bar" (mostly Canadians), and the cops came in, grabbed my Mexican friends and strip searched them outside.

"Cost of living." Yup! It costs a lot to live in the nicer parts of the World.

I can't answer for "you bastards" - not really sure who that refers to - but I can answer for myself. I donate a lot (% wise of my income, and relative to what it can do globally) to global charities. I campaign and vote for candidates that want to end wars overseas. I've spent time in Nepal and Mexico. I care about the general well being of all people. Yes, sometimes people can piss me off...but I still wish them the best.

You are either in hell or you are not. I don't think it is an after life thing as much as it is a "THIS IS YOUR LIFE" type of thing.

Good talk...

[-] 1 points by rpc972 (628) from Portland, OR 2 years ago

The argument/post remains a FRAUD!

Nothing more than fallacious and dishonest propaganda designed to Pettifog the Class War waged on the 99% by a maniacal few in the 1% executed by the RepubliCon Cult they own.

Get out the Vote! Don't be Conned! 2010 Never EVER Again!!

[-] 0 points by nazihunter (316) 2 years ago

He's right. No use losing sleep over this post. It's right-wing think tank propaganda that misses the point, which is basically that our government is in collusion with the well-to-do to perpetrate crime after crime against their own people, undermine the public trust and forego any meaningful programs other than to act as their personal police force while we're all left to fend for ourselves. Did I get that right? In the meantime, I think we need the country by country breakdown to give this bs any credence, don't you?

[-] 0 points by jaktober (286) from Sonoma, CA 1 year ago

I wrote this from my couch after looking up numbers. I am not a right-wing think tank. If I am, I'm not getting paid enough (spoiler: not getting paid at all).

[-] 1 points by nazihunter (316) 1 year ago

ok, I gotcha. sorry. didn't want the other guy to get so upset. One frightening statistic to add to you numbers though, 6 of your 8 billion people came about in just the last century. The whole planet is on a fast coming meeting with destiny-one that won't work out well for a lot of people. the only way to stop it is to all get on the same page-QUICK. with all the infighting, selfishness and greed, it would appear that's not gonna happen. I caa understand the guy's frustration.

[-] 0 points by jaktober (286) from Sonoma, CA 1 year ago
[-] 0 points by nazihunter (316) 1 year ago

I'll give it a read. Thanks jak.

[-] 1 points by paydayloansonline (1) 2 years ago

Fill out simple online application and get best payday loans from us. Our loans are independent of bad credit for short term repayment.

http://getcashpaydayloansonline.com/best-payday-loans.html

[-] 1 points by know1 (210) 2 years ago

DO U HAPPEN TO KNOW , roughly, what % of americans own absolutly nothing other than , say a car and a couple thousand bucks

I heard the figure once, i think its at lest 60%

[-] 1 points by chachieo (-1) 1 year ago

That is their own fault. They should learn to manage their money better.

[-] 0 points by jaktober (286) from Sonoma, CA 1 year ago

I don't know, this article says 70% live paycheck to paycheck. I do. I finally am getting settled (after traveling a while) and should be able to start saving and investing this month.

A car and a couple thousand bucks...I don't have either of those.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

There is a solution to poverty in the developing world and to the economic crisis in the "developed" nations. Its what FDR wanted to do after WW2, which was to use the US manufacturing capacity to produce advanced equipment for third world nations and provide it to them on credit.

Once such advanced equipment would be installed in the developing nations, it would begin to produce wealth, allowing those nations to pay off their debt to the US. This would have created a world of first world nations living in harmony.

We would first have to rebuild our manufacturing capacity, but that could be done quite rapidly.

[-] 0 points by jaktober (286) from Sonoma, CA 2 years ago

That is bloody brilliant! (I'm watching a British Comedy right now).

That is basically what I am proposing in much of my writing: http://freeindependentsun.com/zen/2012-enlightenment-theory-appendix/

We can do this with and/or without government though. That is what I'm trying to point out. We have the means and resources at our disposal, we just need to organize and focus it and we can start spreading tools and technology around the world. I also want to advance sustainable farming around the world. Housing. Power.

http://freeindependentsun.com/zen/2012-enlightenment-theory-a-world-of-abundance-and-self-governance/

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

Interesting website you have. Are you inclined towards anarchism? I just ask because you say such a project would not require the government.

[-] 0 points by jaktober (286) from Sonoma, CA 1 year ago

No, I'm more inclined toward Federalism: http://freeindependentsun.com/republic/charter-12-the-american-federalist-platform/

Check this out; free $25 to lend to third-world folk: http://www.kiva.org/invitedby/jaktober

I start with what I can do directly, then I find what other people are doing and support them. I

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 1 year ago

Interesting platform. However, one item that I notice as being conspicuous in its absence is "economic development", I didn't see an idea there related to this. Much of our economic crisis is based on the absence of economic development activities in America today.

The development of our economy requires substantial investment, but substantial investment can pay off substantially as well.

[-] 0 points by jaktober (286) from Sonoma, CA 1 year ago

Check out this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1fVhD2HF4Y

They are trying to use this same model to take care of poverty with sustainable business: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6Iz64cezbo

I don't think that X-prize is perfect, but the concept shows how funds can be leveraged to stimulate economic development.

The point of the system is to leave economic development to people who voluntarily want to help (not a few people forcing others to help in a way that may not be the best way).

I cut income taxes so more money is in the hands of the people. I legalize gold and silver in order to promote them as savings, thus keeping all the "money" (issued from the Treasury/Public Bank rather than the Federal Reserve) in circulation (being spent).

I'd cut regulations and subsidies, thus freeing up economic develop (rather than attempting to guide it).

Most of the "investment" would have to come from the market or from the State's if it must (not the Federal Government).

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 1 year ago

What makes a first world nation is having advanced infrastructure, such as schools, hospitals, transportation and energy systems. The people, investing their money by themselves can't develop such things.

[-] 0 points by jaktober (286) from Sonoma, CA 1 year ago

Schools: http://freeindependentsun.com/natural_law/education-reform-proposal-for-the-sonoma-valley-unified-school-district/

Hospitals are a good thing. We can have public and private, non-profit, etc. All working together. Those who want to act can help take the load off the government (and the taxation of the market and individuals).

Transportation is taken care of on a sliding scale, with most roads and buses being taken care of at the Municipal level. I'd like to see a better train system. That is something that needs to be taken care of by a regional governing body, such as the county or state.

Energy systems are critical, I think the government can do a big part by changing over their current energy systems to solar, wind, geothermal, tidal, etc. as applicable. However, there is a lot of progress in consumer solar and wind. In addition to efficiency we can reduce the load of public power. In addition we can bring public power more local.

It's not an all this one way or all the other. Not extremes. Extremes divide. Especially when the best solution is rarely 100% on one side we need to find the middle ground.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 1 year ago

Larger investments result in an "economy of scale". That is, when you buy in bulk, you get more for your money. For this reason national governments are better at making some investments.

In fact, groups of countries may be even better at some investments, such as international transportation systems, like the train route across the Bering Strait, which would connect North America with Asia.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

that just means that extreme poverty on a massive scale exists in other countries.

[-] -1 points by jaktober (286) from Sonoma, CA 2 years ago

Yup, and we already have the resources to do something about it. We are to the world what the "1%" is to us.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

Very good point. If we only want equality for Americans, we are no better than the 1% who only want equality for themselves.

[-] 1 points by ThomasKent (111) 2 years ago

I think there's a distinction between equality as a Constitutional right among Americans and the constitutional right in an Islamic republic, constitutional monarchy, communism, theocracy, absolute monarchy, dictatorship where the concept of rights and equality are not American.

[-] 0 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

The post was about economic equality, not political equality.

[-] 1 points by ThomasKent (111) 2 years ago

It's either the same thing or it doesn't matter. Americans have mortgages, credit cards, taxes,paved roads, cars, buses, public schools, large military, large banks, hospitals, sports stadiums, movie theatres, many universities, good government, a large country, etc.

We use money differently because our economic environment is different. Our economy is without equal. No country can compare to the USA. Our 99% may have 18% of the world's wealth and are about to go broke.

[-] 0 points by jaktober (286) from Sonoma, CA 2 years ago

Thanks you J.R. The post is about economic equality, but it is also about cognitive problems with group think (99% vs. 1%) and the temptation of "playing the victim" and the untapped potential of the Occupy movement (actually, more importantly, the untapped potential of the individuals who participate in Occupy).

I believe Thomas is relating to the cognitive issues I bring up. He is expanding into the concept of rights. Do the 99% (of the World or the U.S.) have the "right" to demand goods and services (wealth) from the 1%? TK falls to legal rights, however, I'd suggest that there is value in addressing whether or not their is moral rights to others lives. This is purely philosophical. The actual system is far more complex with that.

Do we access how much "public property" a business uses when determining their "debt" back to society? Or is their work/service/product alone the payment of debt? Is their project in of itself (without further taxing) the goal of making public property accessible by all?

Does the bird in California owe trigs and nest building labor to the bird in New York? Again, our reality is far more complex. We have global awareness, and have the means to help (and a lot of us the desire to).

My goal is to empower those that have a desire to help to do so without "taxing" (both monetarily and mentally) those that have no desire to. I believe it will make those that want to help far more productive if they take the power into their own hands and stop bothering with debate and struggle with those who have other priorities and desires.

[-] 1 points by ThomasKent (111) 2 years ago

US Foreign Aid uses tax payer (99%) money to support people around the world. Our largest beneficiaries are Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel and Egypt. How long can we afford to do this?

[-] -3 points by Porkie (-255) 2 years ago

True, and now we're providing medical care to all of South America.

[-] -2 points by Porkie (-255) 2 years ago

huh?

[-] 1 points by ThomasKent (111) 2 years ago

Equality liberty and happiness are very important to Americans.

[-] 0 points by ponchovilla (16) 1 year ago

What wealth???

We have massive debts. It's like saying the Joneses live the good life but have a million in credit card debt.

It's an illusion, thanks to the donkeys in Washington DC.

[-] 1 points by jaktober (286) from Sonoma, CA 1 year ago

With the use of my $300 laptop and $50/month (or so total split between roommates) internet connection I was just able to get $150 loaned to economic development projects in the third-world by inviting friends to Kiva (someone sponsored a free trial program): http://www.kiva.org/invitedby/jaktober

I've donated quite a bit to Charity:Water ($20 provide clean water for a year for a person; I have that + they don't = wealth).

I have no debt. I paid for college in cash (worked full time, state school). I bought me two cars in cash. I don't have credit cards.

[-] 0 points by nazihunter (316) 2 years ago

what's the country by country breakdown?

[-] 1 points by nazihunter (316) 2 years ago

Thanks. The statistics seem problematic. To say Canada has less than 2% of the World's Wealth? I would have to question that one alone, big time. I also see Australia, Russia, and a few other natural resource and material rich countries as problematic. Another thing that's problematic is what determines wealth? Try to own real estate in Europe and see how much expensive it is compared to us. Ever been to Europe? I have. I know a guy whose just a foreman at a factory, no college, small company who owns a home high up on a hill overlooking the Atlantic. How can that be? Next, we have to consider the Adult population and not the children. You know why. Take your own numbers: We have the adult population of Italy, Germany and Japan. All added up, they have more wealth than the 99%. Next we take 25% of 25% and we realize that that takes 8 points right off the top of food chain. It also means that our 1% also have the wealth of Japan, Germany, Italy...combined.
All that said, the US has attained the highest standard of living in the world. One can't deny that. But shouldn't it have been the one the other countries have should been trying to achieve? To the extent that they did not take on their own countries' lack of concern for their people. Some now are, and as such are gaining fast. Others, instead of taking on their own countries, they come here to take our jobs, and as such, have been welcomed. Isn't it like the 'white man' paradox? Things are so climactic where you are, that you uproot. Then you come here and complain about the 'white man.'
The obvious becomes clear. The loss of our standards will become the loss of any standards. We all lose. However they look at the US, they really should be looking at their own countries first. The bottom line: The movement has credibility now matter how you want to muddy the water.

[-] 0 points by jaktober (286) from Sonoma, CA 1 year ago

Check this out; if you join Kiva right now you can use someone else's money to loan to third-world folk: http://www.kiva.org/invitedby/jaktober

[-] 0 points by shooz (17714) 2 years ago

Not this libe(R)tarian BS again.

Can't you at least come up with an original angle, this has been posted in one form or another umpteen times already.

Fucking CATO echo chamber.

[-] 1 points by jaktober (286) from Sonoma, CA 2 years ago

Make that umpteen + 1.

I thought it was pretty original when I first talked about it in Iowa last year:

http://ames.patch.com/articles/occupy-movement-made-its-way-to-isu-campus-in-ames#video-8102747

"Jack Wagner, a writer from California who watched the protest, said they were the 1 percent of the world.

“If you make more than $47,000 you are the 1 percent,” Wagner said.

Even if they made $23,000 they still are the “rich of the world.” Wagner said, adding that marchers could be doing something more productive besides marching."

[-] 1 points by shooz (17714) 2 years ago

"Wagner", an otherwise unheralded writer from California.

Now there's a source you can trust.

Of course none of this "discourse" says a word about how much has been lost in the dismantling of the middle class, now where the money and it's value have gone......... An extremely narrow view, lacking any real veracity or analysis.

Just like something from the CATO web site. It is better know by it's street term................bullshit.

[-] 1 points by jaktober (286) from Sonoma, CA 2 years ago

Can I quote you?

'"Wagner", an otherwise unheralded writer from California.'

I love it! You seriously just made my day!

I don't talk about that type of stuff that often (I'll mention it from time to time) because I think other people do a good job at that. For instance, I don't talk about where all the money the Fed gave out went, I think that gets covered, I use my time and "influence" to tell the people that know how to actually do something about it (like calling your Senators to support the Audit the Fed bill that just passed the House).

I haven't read CATO all that much. I've visited their site a couple times. I don't really read much opinion. I read legislation and science-fiction (reading some high-fantasy right now: Eye of the World). I read numbers and creative works.

[-] 0 points by ThomasKent (111) 2 years ago

The United States has done more than any other country to bring about world modernization. The telegraph, telephone, air plane, television, electronic computer,oil exploration, transistor, space exploration, nuclear energy, satellite communication, Internet, personal computing, synthetic biology, human genome, stem cells are some of the contributions the Americans have made. If this has created wealth for the whole planet, it is because of American generosity and naivete. The world doesn't reciprocate, they want even more from us.

American Ingenuity http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/11/the_restoration_of_american_ingenuity.html

Because Americans invented airplanes, telephones, computers, etc. why does this mean the whole world should have them, too?For thousands of years mankind has existed without them. Civilizations much older than ours have waxed and waned without their discovery. The proliferation of internal combustion engines has increased the demand for petroleum beyond its sustainable production. That is a problem for the future and is a problem today.

[-] 3 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

Another aspect of American ingenuity has been the cleverness to extract every form of natural resource in every other country while setting up and maintaining sufficient autocratic power, or other forms that are less efficient, to keep the local population under control and available to provide whatever manual labor is required to extract, process and ship these resources to the destination of our choosing. This ia done while maintaining standards of ignorance and poverty sufficient to keep the population in line.

In this way, these countries can claim to be essential cogs in the modern wheel. We have created wealth from the whole planet and we invest this wealth in, or rather through, those enlightened countries that are willing to forgo taxation. Of course the ownership resides in those generous creators of the wealth who travel the world spending this wealth on luxury. Makes you feel proud, doesn't it?

[-] 0 points by ThomasKent (111) 2 years ago

We can't imagine how dark the world was before Thomas Edison. There's always been plenty of fraud and corruption all over even in ancient times. Americans didn't invent that.

I wouldn't mind if the great American inventions never left the country.

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

We should get credit for perfecting it, raising it to an unprecedented level, and creating the greatest disparity in wealth and income the world has ever seen.

You might be surprised at the changes here, if we were required to give up everything enabled by foreign born people's discovery and invention.

Here are a few : Johannes Gutenberg developed the first printing press in 1436. It used movable type made of metal, and each piece of type was a uniform size for better printing quality. Before the printing press, people had to copy everything by hand, or carve the letters into blocks of wood that could be inked, a very time-consuming process.

Vaccine (England)

In the 1700s, Edward Jenner discovered that people who got a mild disease known as cowpox didn't get the much more serious smallpox disease. He developed a way to inject cowpox into healthy people so that they would develop an immunity to smallpox. Boyle, Robert (1627-91): Robert Boyle was an Anglo-Irish physicist and chemist. Often referred to as the father of modern chemistry.

Curie, Pierre (1859-1906) & Marie (1867-1934): The Curies, in 1903, won the Nobel Prize in Physics "in recognition of the extraordinary services they have rendered by their joint researches on the radiation phenomena discovered by Professor Henri Becquerel." Faraday, Michael (1791-1867):

Faraday is generally credited with the discovery of electromagnetic induction (1821), and described certain elements and chemical compounds such as chlorine and benzene.

Newton, Sir Isaac (1642-1727).Laws of motion. Roentgen (Röntgen), Wilhelm Conrad (1845-1923):Radiation Teller, Edward (1908- ): The A-bomb. Volta, Alessandro, Count (1745-1827): Electricity It wasn't until 1885 that the first practical automobile was invented by Karl Benz in Germany. The French were the first to manufacture a complete motor vehicle with engine and chassis.

So it has been a two way street.

[-] 1 points by ThomasKent (111) 2 years ago

Americans did a lot, in the 20th century especially, to democratize technology while earlier inventors had to wait centuries for Henry Ford to perfect mass production.

Mass Production http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_production

Corporate Propaganda http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jexp9A6QaDU&feature=related

Critical Thinking http://www.youtube.com/watch?playnext=1&index=0&feature=&v=WGL8FEMc378&list=PL17D84835C1F31B95

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

Regarding Edison and the dark, if Nicola Tesla, born in Serbia, hadn't invented alternating current (AC), much of the world would still be in the dark.The direct current (DC) that Edison used was poor for transmitting large amounts of power for distances and soon was replaced by Tesla's technology. Tesla did become an American citizen.

[-] 0 points by ThomasKent (111) 2 years ago

Edison is the fourth most prolific inventor in history, holding 1,093 US patents in his name, as well as many patents in the United Kingdom, France, and Germany. He is credited with numerous inventions that contributed to mass communication and, in particular, telecommunications. These included a stock ticker, a mechanical vote recorder, a battery for an electric car, electrical power, recorded music and motion pictures.

Thomas Edison http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Edison

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

Was there a point to all of this?

[-] 2 points by ThomasKent (111) 2 years ago

The point is that America's inventions contributed a lot to the technology and wealth of the planet and the rapid advances in the quality of life. The ordinary citizens (99%) would be even richer if the 1% controlled less.

The creators of America's wealth weren't rich to begin with. US Banks aren't investing in the US. Nikola Tesla died in New York City in 1943 penniless and in debt. He should have died a multimillionaire.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

OK, I'll buy that.

[-] 1 points by shooz (17714) 2 years ago

Actually it was Tesla who lit the World.

The Edison version is the corrupted one.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

Telsa died broke

[-] 2 points by shooz (17714) 2 years ago

I'm well aware of that, as I've read several biographies.

It still stands that it was Tesla that lit the World, not Edison.

Tesla's patents are in every electronic devise we use today too.

So it might be said he did a whole lot more than that.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

he was buried in paperwork and couldn't get food stamps because he misfiled an address by a year?

[-] 0 points by jaktober (286) from Sonoma, CA 2 years ago

I'm going to make about $20,000 this year. I am sitting in very nice house in the foot hills of the Wine Country in Northern California. I have a laptop with Internet access that gives me access to...well, almost everything. I barter labor for local meat and vegetables. I eat incredibly well. I have access to luxury beyond most global citizens wildest dreams.

How can I be so petty to then covet the wealth of others; while I know good and well, that even at $20,000 per year, I live better than 90% of the inhabitants of the planet.

$20 is clean water for a year for one child in Africa: http://www.charitywater.org/

Think about that. And we are powerless to help empower the world toward a global revolution? Who needs the 1%. Continue with the lawsuits and prosecution and financial reforms; but don't forget that we can also work at fixing the problems caused by this corruption. We have the power. We have the technology. We can rebuild it...

[-] -1 points by jaktober (286) from Sonoma, CA 2 years ago

I definitely agree that a bird in New York does not have the right to ask a bird in California to build his nest for him.

The point of the quote is to show that finger pointing doesn't get us anywhere, because it can easily continue to the line. As well, I wanted to show that the 99% are powerful and could be focusing their energy on what they can do with that power that they demand the 1% to do with theirs.

I don't think anyone owes anyone anything beyond which they agree to.

The point of my article (linked above) is that as long as Occupy is stuck in the victim role they will be missing out on what they can do in the actors role. As well, the longer you point the blame and responsibility onto someone else, the longer you prop them up.

You can focus on what others do wrong, or you can focus on what you do right. Both take away from your ability to do the other.

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

Sounds good BUT it doesn't prop them up. When a fraud is perpetrated, it is incumbent on the victim to seek justice. This is important because it educates others who are in the fraud business that they better find a new business model. It is also important because it teaches the other victims that justice is available to those who cherish and deserve it. And finally, it educates everyone that fraud is not acceptable and that when it is perpetrated it will be prosecuted and reversed.

Society can not function without justice. It must be restored. Everything you say, can be reduced to, "You are a victim and you will always be a victim and there will be an unending stream of new victims, while the perpetrator is never challenged." That is what the fraud would say. Do you want the victims to be enablers of this kind of crime spree?

If fraud isn't illegal, it must be made illegal. That isn't finger pointing. If it is illegal, then it must be prosecuted. Civil suits must follow to restore the property to the rightful owner(s).

If you don't know that there has been widespread fraud and other crimes that caused this situation, you should be ashamed. And you should be ashamed of advocating such a timid response.

[-] 0 points by jaktober (286) from Sonoma, CA 2 years ago

Please read my articles. "Timid" is a new one.

I call for taking control of the nearly 1/5th of the world's wealth the 99% has control over and use it to take back the means of production and undermine the relevance of corporations and governments. I'm talking about directly helping people and taking our money out of the system while simultaneously taking over the various political parties, organizations and government that we can.

Timid is calling for grand reforms without even doing the humble work.

[-] 0 points by ThomasKent (111) 2 years ago

Where do most of the cronies come from? The 1%.Cronyism distorts the democratic order. We have elected presidents who do not know how the economy works, and their advisors don't either. If Reagan and Bush had not cut taxes on the wealthy we'd have a surplus.If Bush had raised taxes to pay for 2 wars and Medicare Drugs the deficit would be smaller.

If the 1% don't want to pay higher taxes, and there are over 3,000 millionaires and billionaires in the USA, why haven't they formed their own economics councils and adopted each of 50 states and volunteered to boost education and job creation?

They don't need to know how to create jobs. They can get richer just by collecting interest on their jumbo CDs. An acquaintance told me she had a CD that earns 10% interest. That has to be an old CD that was bought about 30 years ago, and has been rolled over every year. The account balance doubles every 7 years. High yield CDs are offering about 1% interest today. They will double in about 70 years.

This means the 1% don't have to create jobs when their old money is earning10% compounded interest. If new CDs only can get 1% the income gap will never close. This disparity must be pointed out.

[-] 0 points by jaktober (286) from Sonoma, CA 2 years ago

Exactly, the discrepancy needed to be pointed out. Occupy did that. It is done. Good work!

Now if you really want to change the wealth discrepancy you need to stop protesting (because you already accomplished what the goal of the protest was; to raise public awareness) and start working on projects to help bridge the gap between the rich and the poor.

The article I linked to in this post links to tons of stuff you can start doing; I can even give examples from Occupy (Occupy Boston Radio, Occupy Vacant Lands, #NateforCongress, etc.)

[-] 0 points by jaktober (286) from Sonoma, CA 2 years ago

Added the quote!

[-] -2 points by Porkie (-255) 2 years ago

It's a rather foolish slant of statistics because what you are not saying is that over half the wealth of the world is controlled by but one family and that once outside the US the disparity between rich and poor is far greater.

[-] 0 points by jaktober (286) from Sonoma, CA 2 years ago

Sources? 50% by one family?

It's not a slant, I'm just covering one statistic. 25% of the world's wealth is controlled by Americans and the 1% only controls 25% of that wealth, so the rest of us control 75% of 25% (18.75%) of the world's wealth despite what is controlled by other groups.

If you follow through to my "Enlightenment" articles you'll see why other people's wealth is not as important as your wealth, or rather, your abilities: http://freeindependentsun.com/zen/2012-enlightenment-theory-appendix/

[-] -1 points by Porkie (-255) 2 years ago

Wait a minute; did I hear you right, you propose to "enlighten" me?

In reference to the statistical analysis I think it's rather flawed; I don't like the arbitrarily chosen 400k divide and I don't think it's accurate to say that we control the wealth when we are exporting far more wealth than we are importing; it's a rather flawed basis for promoting your agenda; choose another.

[-] 0 points by jaktober (286) from Sonoma, CA 2 years ago

::waiting a minute:: No, you read me wrong, I wrote a series of articles titled "2012 Enlightenment Theory" which refers to what I observe happening which is an agreement on the direction I present in said series of articles. I linked you to the Appendix which has all the links to the various articles; 2012, 2020, 3013: http://freeindependentsun.com/zen/2012-enlightenment-theory-appendix/

The numbers are not arbitrary; 400K is actually a little less than the current numbers, the number I sourced was $380,000 from 2008: http://www.economist.com/node/21543178

As far as the global income scale: http://www.globalrichlist.com/

As far as the 25% of the world's income, 4% of world's population:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population

http://www.boston.com/news/world/articles/2007/10/07/average_earnings_worldwide/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wdpiechartppp2000.gif

[-] -1 points by Porkie (-255) 2 years ago

I think an arbitrarily chosen 380K as the divide between ultra-rich and non ultra-rich is a rather flawed basis, don't you? I think most working class people view comfortable as beginning in the 150 - 200 range; they view middle class as some range beginning here and extending into the several millions; with ultra-rich in the billionaire plus category. While it may be true that American corporations, command or extract wealth, it is not accurate to say that the single entity - America - controls that wealth; it does not. Gluttony is not an apt term here.

[-] 0 points by jaktober (286) from Sonoma, CA 2 years ago

The 380K number comes from the top 1% earners that the whole "99%" thing refers to. You know, "Occupy" "We are the 99%"

I think rich is a hot shower and a fresh cup of coffee after a good nights sleep.

[-] -1 points by Porkie (-255) 2 years ago

No doubt there are those with incomes of 380 or more that are absolutely appalled at the income disparity, but you must realize, this is twenty five times the minimum wage.

I have my own arbitrary number; I will only support 53% of your 99%.

[-] 0 points by jaktober (286) from Sonoma, CA 2 years ago

Check this out: http://www.nationalreview.com/agenda/279319/we-are-99-percent-even-rich-people-josh-barro

Why not support life in general? The 100%.