4 ms·

This stat is due to counting net wealth, or assets - debt. To quote Felix Salmon: "My niece, who just got her first 50 cents in pocket money, has more money th

This stat is due to counting net wealth, or assets - debt. To quote Felix Salmon: "My niece, who just got her first 50 cents in pocket money, has more money than the poorest 2 billion people in the world combined." http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2014/04/04/stop-adding-up-the-wealth-of-the-poor/ http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2014/04/04/stop-adding... The poorest person in the world is the rogue trader Jerome Kerviel - he owes $6B. He's vastly poorer than a homeowner who owes $500k on a mortgage, and this person in turn is vastly poorer than a homeless person who owes no one anything. Donald Trump has gone bankrupt a few times - it's quite possible he was the poorest person in the world at that point.

TheCoelacanth 11y ago
Only Trump's businesses have gone bankrupt, usually after he got a substantial amount of personal wealth out of them. He has never personally gone bankrupt.
danieltillett 11y ago
Don’t you think it a problem that 2 billion people don’t even own 50 cents of net assets? Jerome is far from the poorest person in the world since he is not starving - hundred of millions of people would swap places with him in an instant if they could.
- yummyfajitas 11y ago
  If you think it's a problem that 2 billion people have negative net worth, ban lending. Good luck with that. As for Jerome Kerviel, take it up with the folks pushing this silly statistic. It's their methodology that counts him as the poorest person in the world.
  - danieltillett 11y ago
    Lending to the very poor is a real problem since the interest rates they pay are astronomical. A lot of poor stay poor because they can’t get out of their debt trap. It is defiantly a hard problem to know how to best compare wealth between groups, but as long as you keep the method the same then the delta does tell you something interesting. There does seem to be a massive increase in wealth concentration at the top, which I don’t think is a good thing.
    - Pyxl101 11y ago
      But loans are also a critical way to get leverage. You buy some equipment for your farm up front so that you can produce more food immediately. If you have to save up for a year to buy that equipment, then you're far behind where you are if you buy it with a loan. This is why most people buy houses with a mortgage: because they'd rather live in a house today and pay it off for 30 years, than save up for 30 years (while living where?) and buy it in cash at the end. Lending is generally a good thing. I'm not sure what to do about the cost of lending to the poor. Perhaps there should be government aid of some kind to help them find jobs or start a business. Ultimately, every person needs to make the decision for themselves about whether it's better to save and buy the things they need in cash, or take a loan to buy those things now.

TheCoelacanth 11y ago

Only Trump's businesses have gone bankrupt, usually after he got a substantial amount of personal wealth out of them. He has never personally gone bankrupt.

danieltillett 11y ago

Don’t you think it a problem that 2 billion people don’t even own 50 cents of net assets? Jerome is far from the poorest person in the world since he is not starving - hundred of millions of people would swap places with him in an instant if they could.

yummyfajitas 11y ago
If you think it's a problem that 2 billion people have negative net worth, ban lending. Good luck with that. As for Jerome Kerviel, take it up with the folks pushing this silly statistic. It's their methodology that counts him as the poorest person in the world.
- danieltillett 11y ago
  Lending to the very poor is a real problem since the interest rates they pay are astronomical. A lot of poor stay poor because they can’t get out of their debt trap. It is defiantly a hard problem to know how to best compare wealth between groups, but as long as you keep the method the same then the delta does tell you something interesting. There does seem to be a massive increase in wealth concentration at the top, which I don’t think is a good thing.
  - Pyxl101 11y ago
    But loans are also a critical way to get leverage. You buy some equipment for your farm up front so that you can produce more food immediately. If you have to save up for a year to buy that equipment, then you're far behind where you are if you buy it with a loan. This is why most people buy houses with a mortgage: because they'd rather live in a house today and pay it off for 30 years, than save up for 30 years (while living where?) and buy it in cash at the end. Lending is generally a good thing. I'm not sure what to do about the cost of lending to the poor. Perhaps there should be government aid of some kind to help them find jobs or start a business. Ultimately, every person needs to make the decision for themselves about whether it's better to save and buy the things they need in cash, or take a loan to buy those things now.