Catching up Part 3 – Oxfam hates rich people

by Skip

Pile-Of-MoneyBut loves Government. Once again, it’s all about “inequality” and how to “fix it – at Davos.  Think about inequality at the annual “aren’t we rich and Elite” party they throw for themselves?  The AP decided to weigh in on this report from Oxfam (1/16/17):

Sidenote: Oxfam – weren’t they the folks that were just concerned about getting food to hungry people?  Oh, right, once a charity, everybody’s morphed into a some kind of Social Justice Warrior – and once an SJW, you become a full spectrum SJW because: INTERSECTIONALITY (where SJWs play “Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon” with every issue where “We good, everyone else needs a hearty verbal lashing and internet mobbing”)

So how did it start (reformatted, emphasis mine)?

Stark inequality: Oxfam says 8 men as rich as half the world

The gap between the super-rich and the poorest half of the global population is starker than previously thought, with just eight men, from Bill Gates to Michael Bloomberg, owning as much wealth as 3.6 billion people, according to an analysis by Oxfam released today. Presenting its findings on the dawn of the annual gathering of the global political and business elites in the Swiss ski resort of Davos, anti-poverty organization Oxfam says the gap between the very rich and poor is far greater than just a year ago. It’s urging leaders to do more than pay lip-service to the problem.

Did Oxfam expect to “rich shame” them?  Just “give it away”? Very doubtful.  They want government to do the deed.

If not, it warns, public anger against this kind of inequality will continue to grow and lead to more seismic political changes akin to last year’s election of Donald Trump as U.S. president and Britain’s vote to leave the European Union.

You know something?  The people I know aren’t concerned with financial inequality – they are ticked over “not-getting-the-govt-we-vote-for” – something completely different.  Oxfam sees Govt as merely a tool to reduce “inequality” – we see Govt as the problem. And the the spokesflack really steps in it, IMHO, with one. single. sentence.:

“It is obscene for so much wealth to be held in the hands of so few when 1 in 10 people survive on less than $2 a day,” said Winnie Byanyima, executive director of Oxfam International, who will be attending the meeting in Davos. “Inequality is trapping hundreds of millions in poverty; it is fracturing our societies and undermining democracy.”

If you can afford to fly to Davos, to eat at Davos, and stay in a hotel in Davos, well, you’re pretty well off compared to those “hundreds of millions”. I ask this: are the rich stealing it in open, transparent democracies? Perhaps some, as we see stories about people ripping off others on a regular basis.  But compared to the dictatorships, tinpot despots, and kleptocracies around the world, it’s a minor problem.  Countries that don’t adhere to the Rule of Law, the Right to Private Property, and an independent Judiciary and a sepat ration of military and civilian govt, well, they are the countries that treat their citizens as cattle.  Just look at Venezuela – that haven of socialism that both Obama and Bernie praise all the time.  People are eating rats and zoo animals – and the richest person there is Chavez’s daughter (estimated net worth last I remember is $4Billion).

The same report a year earlier said that the richest 62 people on the planet owned as much wealth as the bottom half of the population. However, Oxfam has revised that figure down to eight following new information gathered by Swiss bank Credit Suisse. Oxfam used Forbes’s billionaires list that was last published in March 2016 to make its headline claim. According to the Forbes list, Microsoft founder Gates is the richest individual with a net worth of $75 billion. The others, in order of ranking, are Amancio Ortega, the Spanish founder of fashion house Inditex; financier Warren Buffett; Mexican business magnate Carlos Slim Helu; Amazon boss Jeff Bezos; Facebook creator Mark Zuckerberg; Oracle’s Larry Ellison; and Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York.

In each of those cases (let’s forget about Crony Capitalism and rent-seeking for a bit for the sake of discussion), they earned their money (not stolen). Gates sold software which consumers preferred to the competition.  Ditto for Ortega – fashion is a disposable item and if it didn’t have “value” his wares would have stayed on the racks.  Buffet knows how to invest – he spent his money betting the companies he bought would flourish.  Can’t remember what Slim did (telephony I think) and Bezos totally turned the retail trades upside down with Amazon.  Zuckerberg also used the Internet to disrupt how to deal with each other – again, a totally voluntary action to sign up and yap away.  Ellison built some of the best databases and then offered vertical market solutions and services and Nanny NYC Mayor Bloomberg (and gun-grabber) made his fortune repackaging and selling financial information to financial traders.

Yet, because they sold stuff that people willingly bought, they are worse than the devil.  Or at the least, take their money.  After all, because: EQUALITY!!!

Oxfam outlined measures that it hopes will be enacted to help reduce the inequality.

And here Oxfam, a charity that relies on the benevolence of rich people (and grants from taxes paid by rich people) goes all Socialist and Big Government rent-seeker:

They include higher taxes on wealth and income to ensure a more level playing field and to fund investments in public services and jobs, greater cooperation among governments on ensuring workers are paid decently and the rich don’t dodge their taxes. And business leaders should commit to paying their fair share of taxes and a living wage to employees. Max Lawson, Oxfam’s policy adviser, urged billionaires to “do the right thing,” and to do “what Bill Gates has called on them to do, which is pay their taxes.”

Yep, Government is THE answer – the bigger the better to make us all equal and provide for “equality” of the socialist type. And also continues the lie that Warren Buffet started about him and his secretary.

“We have a situation where billionaires are paying less tax often than their cleaner or their secretary,” Lawson told the Associated Press. “That’s crazy.”

No, it’s the result of investment.  Plain and simple and American society values it knowing that it gets used to do it all again.

It’s because of this kind of inequality that trust in institutions has fallen sharply since the global financial crisis of 2008, according to Edelman, one of the world’s biggest marketing firms.  In its own pre-Davos survey of more than 33,000 people across 28 markets, Edelman found the largest-ever drop in trust across government, business, media and even non-governmental organizations. CEO credibility is at an all-time low and government leaders are the least trusted group, according to the survey.

Heh!  Did Katherine Gregg read this survey?

The firm’s 2017 Trust Barometer found that 53 percent of respondents believe the current system has failed them in that it is unfair and offers few hopes for the future, with only 15 percent believing it is working. That belief was evident for both the general population and those with college education.

We certainly have seen that here in the US – but I believe it is self-inflicting.  If you operate in such a way that people perceive as self-rewarding at the expense of other, Trust doesn’t just go away, it can evaporate in a heartbeat and many institutions have done just that.  And who is to blame for it?

Yeah, the type of folks running those institutions including those who go to Davos.

“The implications of the global trust crisis are deep and wide-ranging,” said Richard Edelman, the firm’s president and CEO. “It began with the Great Recession of 2008, but like the second and third waves of a tsunami, globalization and technological change have further weakened people’s trust in global institutions. The consequence is virulent populism and nationalism as the mass population has taken control away from the elites.”

Mr. Edelman, it is called “Accountability”.  Eventually (at least in the majority of cases), Elites who really aren’t all that elite will be found out and tossed.  That’s what has happened to the Democrats these last few elections (and the Republicans before them) – they got too full of themselves and the mass population tossed them like a stale cookie.  If the Republicans can’t get their acts together, they’ll be restart that pendulum in the other direction.

Edelman highlighted how “the emergence of a media echo chamber” that reinforces personal beliefs while shutting out opposing views has magnified this “cycle of distrust.” According to the survey, search engines are trusted more as an information tool than traditional news editors, 59 percent to 41 percent. “People now view media as part of the elite,” said Edelman. “The result is a proclivity for self-referential media and reliance on peers. The lack of trust in media has also given rise to the fake news phenomenon and politicians speaking directly to the masses.”

Again, self-inflicted – too many polls have shown the political orientation of “news” organization and the Internet, giving us choices, has allowed us to hold them, finally, accountable.  As we are seeing with Trump, the Internet has democratized communications – as in other industries, it allows the cutting out of the middle man.  In this case, as the meme goes, those that would cover the news with a pillow.


Yes, I agree that Trust has been recalled but not for the reasons Oxfam gives.  If institutions had stayed true to their original purposes, they’d probably be ok.  But mission creep (and with creeps heading those institutions) and trying to go outside their lanes (e.g. the NFL deciding that playing football wasn’t enough – they needed to lecture us on our social justice failings.  Yeah, just shut up and play or we’ll just shut down.  Go look at the ratings and see which decision they’ve picked).

A comment at the link also says much and one that Oxfam kinda just tossed off:

The folks on the list give away millions of their money and employe people. They give back. Still not good enough for progressives, we are talking 1% of folks here.

Employ people – millions and millions of people are able to take care of their families.  That does count for a lot!

(H/T: Concord Monitor)

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: