Bloody Oxfam

There is no getting away from the fact that the biggest winners in our global economy are
those at the top. Oxfam‟s research has revealed that over the last 25 years, the top 1% have
gained more income than the bottom 50% put together.

Checking their own report as their source:

Since the turn of the century, the poorest half of the world’s population has
received just 1% of the total increase in global wealth, while half of that
increase has gone to the top 1%.

Twats writing about global income and wealth who are not able to distinguish correctly between income and wealth are twats, aren’t they?

10 comments on “Bloody Oxfam

  1. To Oxfam a person with no assets has no wealth.

    That includes spendthrifts on decent salaries who can’t save and those on good salaries who are still in debt for University or similar.

  2. Chester, quite so. The amount of investment required to get someone up to western levels of earning potential is enormous, once you factor in the state education etc that we take for granted.

    You could go on to argue that capitalism is explicitly set up to cover such investment, raise everyone to their full earning potential*, and then reap the profits. Making the inequality Oxfam bewails both inevitable and necessary for future investment.

    *marketable skills, obviously. Sorry, struggling artists.

  3. “The amount of investment required to get someone up to western levels of earning potential is enormous, once you factor in the state education etc that we take for granted.”

    Hmm.

  4. “Twats writing about global income and wealth who are not able to distinguish correctly between income and wealth are twats, aren’t they?”

    You think it’s _accidental_?!

  5. I think there is no chance at all that Oxfam doesn’t know it is lying here.

    Time for an Ecksian solution.

  6. Oxfam this morning launches an attack on eight billionaires whose wealth they label “grotesque“, claiming this “super-rich elite are able to prosper at the expense of the rest of us“. Guido has done some cursory digging and found that the eight billionaires lambasted by Oxfam have made at least $60 billion in charitable donations. By contrast Oxfam spends around £300 million a year on charitable causes. It would take more than 150 years for Oxfam to raise as much for charity as the eight billionaires they condemn today.

    Says it all. The rest of his post about left wingers in the chairty sector is worth a read as well.

  7. Actually on 2nd thoughts it doesn’t say it all. What Oxfam really mean is that the money should be given to them to spend on their pet projects like higher pay for their managers, business class travel to conferences where they can strut around, posture and lecture the rest of us about our lifestyles.

  8. Ducky, yes, fair enough. Not suggesting it’s fit for purpose, but I’m optimistically assuming they learn slightly more than some kid studying one day a week if it’s not too busy on the farm.

  9. NielsR, well, yes, but it just struck me that wot you wrote could be read both ways. I just found that amusing.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.