5 ms·

When a small fraction of one percent controls well over 2/3 of the world's assets - explain how the "current power brokers/structure" is ending. This article i

When a small fraction of one percent controls well over 2/3 of the world's assets - explain how the "current power brokers/structure" is ending. This article is nothing but pie in the sky fantasy.

coolsunglasses 13y ago
Yes but it's libertarian pie in the sky fantasy, so we like it.
- eruditely 13y ago
  It's a reason.com right-libertarian sky fantasy. Please make the distinction.
- sultezdukes 13y ago
  I'm sure there's a Paul Krugman article coming up soon.
michaelkeenan 13y ago
> a small fraction of one percent controls well over 2/3 of the world's assets Citation for that? Wikipedia says that the richest 1% of adults owned 40% of global assets[1], though that figure is from 2000. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth#21st_century http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth#21st_cen...
akiselev 13y ago
Who cares who controls the majority of the world's assets when global standards of living are increasing, apparently quite drastically? It seems like living in the developed world puts you in a bubble relative to the world that is similar to the culture on Wall Street. It doesn't matter that everyone (still there after the recession) is stil getting paid an order or two of magnitude more than 99.5% of the country, many traders are still ridiculously competitive and hung up on the fact that there are people up the ladder making more than them while entirely taking their good fortune for granted. The world is getting better for everyone and the point of the article is that the luxuries that come with increased wealth (internet, mobiles, greater political awareness, travel) make old power structures harder and harder to maintain, in almost every facet of society. It's easy to get lost in the massive problems and doom and gloom facing everyone but if you step back and look at the forest, it's not all that gloomy.
- coolsunglasses 13y ago
  Things are pretty gloomy if you like fish.
- adventured 13y ago
  Because whether you can use that mobile phone or not is determined by who controls the money. Whether we're talking cartels, the Fed, Congress, oligarchs, big corporations, or good 'ol fashioned free market billionaires. They dictate ultimately whether your phone 'works,' whether you can get on a plane, whether you can use Google or the Internet, or drive a car, or draw power when you plug into an outlet (at least for 99.9% of the population). None of that has changed one bit, and none of it is going to. You can swap one power broker for another, but what you can never do is remove them. You can start by asking who has the military weapons, who has the control over money standards, who controls taxing authorities - and then you can follow the chart of money / power on down.
- angersock 13y ago
  Yes, indeed, the average cage is getting bigger and shinier.
- unclebucknasty 13y ago
  >Who cares who controls the majority of the world's assets The author. The article is about power and it's safe to say that he who controls the majority of the world's assets holds the power (and vice-versa).
- rvkennedy 13y ago
  Revolutions occur not during, but after times of intense hardship. When the general population has enough time and resources to inform themselves of perceived imbalances in the power structure, and isn't expending all their efforts on survival, they have the opportunity to become politically active. This is why smart dictators keep their populations in constant poverty and either war, or war-readiness.
InclinedPlane 13y ago
The funny thing about wealth (even gold) is that it has value only in so far as other people let it have value. And there are certainly many extreme examples from history where massive amounts of wealth can go away quite quickly. Both through economic change and through political upheaval. Indeed, it can be surprising how fast such processes can work, and how quickly large concentrations of wealth can shrink, even when it's merely through economic and industrial change. As it turns out, a lot of the "wealth" that is owned by that small percentage you describe is actually just paper wealth, the sort of wealth that goes away the easiest. It's also worth remembering that the world's economy is doubling about every 15 years or so. So the wealth of the elite can easily become a much smaller portion of the whole if they don't keep up.

When a small fraction of one percent controls well over 2/3 of the world's assets - explain how the "current power brokers/structure" is ending. This article is nothing but pie in the sky fantasy.

coolsunglasses 13y ago

Yes but it's libertarian pie in the sky fantasy, so we like it.

eruditely 13y ago
It's a reason.com right-libertarian sky fantasy. Please make the distinction.
sultezdukes 13y ago
I'm sure there's a Paul Krugman article coming up soon.

michaelkeenan 13y ago

> a small fraction of one percent controls well over 2/3 of the world's assets Citation for that? Wikipedia says that the richest 1% of adults owned 40% of global assets[1], though that figure is from 2000. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth#21st_century http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth#21st_cen...

akiselev 13y ago

Who cares who controls the majority of the world's assets when global standards of living are increasing, apparently quite drastically? It seems like living in the developed world puts you in a bubble relative to the world that is similar to the culture on Wall Street. It doesn't matter that everyone (still there after the recession) is stil getting paid an order or two of magnitude more than 99.5% of the country, many traders are still ridiculously competitive and hung up on the fact that there are people up the ladder making more than them while entirely taking their good fortune for granted. The world is getting better for everyone and the point of the article is that the luxuries that come with increased wealth (internet, mobiles, greater political awareness, travel) make old power structures harder and harder to maintain, in almost every facet of society. It's easy to get lost in the massive problems and doom and gloom facing everyone but if you step back and look at the forest, it's not all that gloomy.

coolsunglasses 13y ago
Things are pretty gloomy if you like fish.
adventured 13y ago
Because whether you can use that mobile phone or not is determined by who controls the money. Whether we're talking cartels, the Fed, Congress, oligarchs, big corporations, or good 'ol fashioned free market billionaires. They dictate ultimately whether your phone 'works,' whether you can get on a plane, whether you can use Google or the Internet, or drive a car, or draw power when you plug into an outlet (at least for 99.9% of the population). None of that has changed one bit, and none of it is going to. You can swap one power broker for another, but what you can never do is remove them. You can start by asking who has the military weapons, who has the control over money standards, who controls taxing authorities - and then you can follow the chart of money / power on down.
angersock 13y ago
Yes, indeed, the average cage is getting bigger and shinier.
unclebucknasty 13y ago
>Who cares who controls the majority of the world's assets The author. The article is about power and it's safe to say that he who controls the majority of the world's assets holds the power (and vice-versa).
rvkennedy 13y ago
Revolutions occur not during, but after times of intense hardship. When the general population has enough time and resources to inform themselves of perceived imbalances in the power structure, and isn't expending all their efforts on survival, they have the opportunity to become politically active. This is why smart dictators keep their populations in constant poverty and either war, or war-readiness.

InclinedPlane 13y ago

The funny thing about wealth (even gold) is that it has value only in so far as other people let it have value. And there are certainly many extreme examples from history where massive amounts of wealth can go away quite quickly. Both through economic change and through political upheaval. Indeed, it can be surprising how fast such processes can work, and how quickly large concentrations of wealth can shrink, even when it's merely through economic and industrial change. As it turns out, a lot of the "wealth" that is owned by that small percentage you describe is actually just paper wealth, the sort of wealth that goes away the easiest. It's also worth remembering that the world's economy is doubling about every 15 years or so. So the wealth of the elite can easily become a much smaller portion of the whole if they don't keep up.