Topic: 80 richest people on the planet have the same wealth as the poorest 50% - page 3. (Read 6185 times)

Well just to put this into another context
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4nSjPdT788

I think a significant number of bitcoins will be lost, when people die unexpectedly. Planning to transfer digital assets is not high on the priority list of many people.

This will be the first time in human history that family can leave wealth behind to progeny that can't be confiscated. New family bonds can form around protecting the future for generations to come.

Almost everyone on this forum is in the top 5%. It's easy to look up and say, "It's not fair". Nobody looks down and says the same. The world can't support 7 billion people with a TV and air-conditioning. Before you expect the top 1% (only about 1.5 million dollars by the way) to give some up, how about you give your wealth to somebody in Africa?

Crashes like this are good for Bitcoin, so rich bastards lose their money on panic sells and new poor people can start adquiring Bitcoin and reasonable prices for a longer period before price goes too high.
Yes, its unfair as life itself but at least with Bitcoin there are no rothchilds printing magic money.

I knew he was from an above normal family but I am pretty sure his wealth is incomparable compared to what his families had. Also there are many billionaires in IT industry like Piere Omidyar, ebay founder or....
But anyway thanks for info

This has historically been a temporary short-term problem that finds permanent solutions, at least for the unlucky few. Hopefully, Bitcoin will reverse the trend.

Bingo.  Too many many of these 'kids' weren't even around before Bill Gates became 'Bill Gates,' so they have no idea what happened during his rise to fame.  

The rich will continue to get richer...and that certainly holds 100% true for the richest in the world.  Generational money never leaves, especially when they typically hold virtual monopolies in their respective industries.


Zuckerberg?  I'll give you a hint...Jewish.  


expert4knowledge, I'm sorry man, but you don't have any clue as to what you speak on regarding this subject.  Inflation has zero bearing on the wealth divide and how the richest live.  

Bill Gates came from a generational banking family and he was busted driving a Porsche without a license at age 21.  How many 21 year olds do you know have a porsche at their age?  If Bill Gates didn't found Microsoft I'm sure he would had gone on some gap year, attempted university again and then ended up as a Bank President somewhere.  


If you're going to single out the exceptions then at least research their backgrounds.  Bill Gates even as a teenager was already a member of the 1% and was guaranteed to be a success, unless he developed a mental illness or something, due to family connections.

As well these threads are total bait for selection bias.  Typical college dropout isn't a billionaire, the 1 college dropout who becomes a billionaire there is probably 1 million dropouts who never amounted to anything and died broke.

But if you look at the current richest people you see that they were entrepreneurs who became rich in recent decades or years, people such as mark zuckerberg, Bil Gates and even the first bitcoin developers. The problem are bankers and people who have usually much money and some financial companies in us.

This is not news. Inequality is something we all hate to see, but no one has a solution. Repeating that again and again is not going to help. Don't compare you self to the wealthiest, just do your best and enjoy what you have (rich or poor).

The distribution of wealth has little to do with inflation, if any.  The top wealthiest individuals on this planet all come from old family money which has been kept and transferred from generation to generation.  Generally in the form of businesses, resources (oil/diamonds/etc), entertainment (recording industry/film/television/etc), or simply royalty.  All inflation does is allow the bankers to help the irresponsible politicians keep their frivelous spending habits without having to take out loans.   The wealth distribution and divide between rich and poor would remain the same with or without inflation.  So not sure what the OP's point is.  

inb4 Winklevoss

Welcome to the elite my friend! The elite in practical knowledge that is. It's a shame few realize what you've said. Getting rich is for poor people, making money is for the rich.

From the article:

It takes two to tango.  If merely having wealth is a concern vis-à-vis corruption then surely simply having power is equally problematic.  When you say that the poor are voiceless aren't you really just admitting that a person's vote is practically worthless and that worldwide "power inequality" is already far more extreme than wealth inequality?  It sounds as if you're suggesting that political systems worldwide are already so heavily broken that we must rely on corruption to afford some level of fairness and therefore need to aim for a more even distribution of wealth so as to emulate democracy with money in place of votes.


You're just appealing to the reader's envy.  Your behaviour is appauling and you ought to be ashamed.

This is not to say that there are no political or economic problems in the world today, far from it.  I simply claim that increasing wealth inequality is a symptom, not a problem in itself, and that we could do with more noble attempts to help others (such as the Bitcoin experiment, part of an ambitious attempt to diffuse central bank power) and fewer people trying to "raise awareness" by baffling people with emotionally charged bullshit.  If a result of your conduct leads to an increase in political power anywhere to force a different wealth distribution then you'll have done the equivalent of painting a rash with skin-coloured paint.

i think a fair number of top 100 btc wallets are satoshi and exchanges

Most of the value held by rich people is not in the form of money, but in the form of assets (mainly capital, that is production, assets, such as companies).

The distribution of wealth has not much to do with the monetary policy.  In fact, only relatively poor people have a large part of their holdings in money.  Everything which devaluates money is in fact punishing more the lower economic classes which have less means to protect their stores of value.

You know, Baudrillard's hyperreality quote bears a resemblance to the metaphysical arguments/explanations of the Vedas and the Jain scriptures.
I'm considering getting his Symbolic Exchange and Death to read over the weekend, but no Kindle version -we'll see.

Comedy gold.

Past a certain point every one of life's needs and wants are fulfilled.  That's when people start going silly buying their fifth Ferrari, competing with friends on who can get the biggest diamond, and how many villas they have that never get used.

The one thing they can't buy is more life.  Not even Steve Jobs, with billions of dollars to spend on the finest doctors and medicines on the planet, could live to a ripe old age of 60.

Yeah, it's a screwed up world we live in.  I've heard a few people ask the question, "how much money does anybody really need?"  When you think about it you realize just how obscene some fortunes are.  Way more than several generations could ever need and yet people accumulate scarce resources that others simply can't afford.  This is what actually causes poverty and disruptive ripples in various economies. 

"DAVOS (The Borowitz Report)—A new Oxfam report indicating that the wealthiest one per cent possesses about half of the world’s wealth has left the richest people in the world “reeling with disappointment,” a leading billionaire said on Tuesday."

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/richest-one-per-cent-disappointed-possess-half-worlds-wealth?mbid=nl_Borowitz%20%28144%29&CNDID=32291837&spMailingID=7435981&spUserID=ODc4NDk0NTczMDAS1&spJobID=602473034&spReportId=NjAyNDczMDM0S0