CAN YOU THINK OF EVEN ON
THING BARACK OBAMA DID FOR BLACK AMERICA EVEN AS HE OPERATED 'LA RAZA' OUT
OF THE WHITE HOUSE?
"That phase of the takeover was started in 2008 by
President Barack Obama. Throughout his eight years in office, Obama practiced
divisiveness and hammered away at the Second Amendment while pouring gallons of
fuel on the fire of the "Black Lives Matter" lie. His
administration was rampant with corruption, pushing the envelope with every new
scandal." RICK HAYES
They Destroyed Our Country
“They knew Obama was an unqualified crook; yet they promoted
him. They knew Obama was a train wreck waiting to happen; yet they made him
president, to the great injury of America and the world. They understood he was
only a figurehead, an egomaniac, and a liar; yet they made him king, doing
great harm to our republic (perhaps irreparable.)”
These people were engaged in a massive political conspiracy. The
Democrats made a decision from the outset—beginning with the election campaign
of the favored candidate of Wall Street and the CIA, Hillary Clinton—that they
would not oppose Trump on his anti-working-class social policy or his
authoritarian hostility to democratic rights and promotion of anti-immigrant
racism, but on issues of imperialist foreign policy.
“Obama’s new home in
Washington has been described as the “nerve center” of the
anti-Trump opposition. Former attorney general Eric Holder
has said that Obama is “ready to roll” and has aligned himself with
the “resistance.” Former high-level Obama campaign staffers now
work with a variety of groups organizing direct action against
Trump’s initiatives. “Resistance School,” for example, features
lectures by former campaign executive Sara El-Amine, author of the Obama Organizing.”
“Attorney General Eric
Holder's tenure was a low point even within the disgraceful scandal-ridden
Obama years.” DANIEL GREENFIELD
By the end of the speech, Obama had skillfully twisted the events
to the point where theoretical, faceless white racism was to blame for the
actual, documented racism of Xavier Johnson.
On a fundamental level, Obama understands that America is not
the systemically racist cesspool he allowed it to be portrayed as under his
watch. Yet he was Machiavellian enough to let this yarn spin itself for
the purpose of political advantage.
"That
phase of the takeover was started in 2008 by President Barack
Obama. Throughout his eight years in office, Obama practiced
divisiveness and hammered away at the Second Amendment while pouring gallons of
fuel on the fire of the "Black Lives Matter" lie. His
administration was rampant with corruption, pushing the envelope with every new
scandal." RICK HAYES
“The watchdogs at Judicial Watch
discovered documents that reveal how the Obama administration's close
coordination with the Mexican government entices Mexicans to hop over the fence
and on to the American dole.” Washington Times
“Make no
mistake about it: the Latino community holds this election in your hands. Some
of the closest contests this November will be in states like Florida, Colorado,
Nevada and New Mexico -- states with large Latino populations.” PRESIDENTIAL
CANDIDATE BARACK OBAMA
“I know how
powerful this community is. Just think how powerful you could be on November
4th if you translate your numbers into votes.” PRESIDENTIAL
CANDIDATE BARACK OBAMA
THE OBOMB “PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY” FUNDED BY
MUSLIM DICTATORS AND OBOMB’S SAUDIS PAYMASTERS WILL NOT HOLD HIS PRESIDENTIAL
PAPERS. OBOMB HAS ALWAYS HIDDEN HIS TRAIL.
WELFARE
CHEAT BARACK OBAMA FUNDS HIS EGO TOWER off tax payers backs!
I am sure
that Obama and his friend and former chief of staff Rahm would not like to see
pols running for mayor on a platform of halting the giveaway."
But that halt to lawlessness hasn't stopped the
Windy City's politicians rushing to hand over almost 20 acres of precious
lakefront park land to the private foundation controlled by Barack and Michelle
Obama. The Obama Foundation (Obama.org) promises to build a monument
to his presidency, called the Obama Presidential Center (OPC). It
has to be called the OPC because it will not be an actual presidential library,
under the control of the National Archives, but rather a privately controlled
entity, free to focus on whatever pleases the 44th president.”
Michelle Obama castigates whites for ‘running from us’
Speaking at an event in Chicago called the “Obama Foundation
Summit” (were any heads of state present?), Michelle Obama let slip her
resentment of white people. The grudge goes back to her childhood, and she does
not seem to see much progress in the behavior she attributes to
Caucasian-Americans. Fox News reports what the New
York Times doesn’t:
White Americans are “still running” elsewhere when minorities
and immigrants move into their communities, Michelle
Obama observed Tuesday.
(snip)
In a sit-down interview with journalist Isabel Wilkerson, in which
Obama was accompanied by her brother, Craig Robinson, an executive with the
NBA’s New York Knicks, Obama described when she first became conscious of
what’s been called “white flight.”
We were doing everything we were supposed to do – and better,”
Obama said of her family, recalling when they got a new address on Chicago’s
South Side. “But when we moved in, white families moved out.
“I want to remind white folks that y’all were running from us,”
she continued, according to the
Chicago Sun-Times. “And you’re still
running.”
This is remarkably un-self-aware, considering that the Obamas currently
reside in Kalorama and Martha’s Vineyard. How many blacks live near their two
mansions?
“I can’t make people not afraid of black people,” she said, according
to The Hill. “I don’t know what’s going
on. I can’t explain what’s happening in your head."
Maybe what’s going on in the heads of white people is the same as
what was going on in Jesse
Jackson’s head when he said:
“There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than
to walk down the street and hear footsteps... then turn around and see somebody
white and feel relieved.”
It would be wonderful if black crime rates were similar to those
of whites and Asians, but they aren’t. That’s is why many minorities flee from ghettos as soon as they
are financially able – a group that includes Barack and Michelle Obama.
Mrs. Obama is stoking racial resentment with her remarks, an
emotion that the Democrats use as part of their electoral strategy to drive
black turnout.
At least her statement castigating whites is consistent with her
oft-expressed position that she has “zero interest” in running for president.
Here is video of her remarks on race:
Hat tip: Ed Lasky
Nolte: Michelle Obama Condemns ‘White Flight’ After Purchasing
Home in Martha’s Vineyard
Gerardo Mora/Getty Images
31 Oct 2019113
5:28
Former first lady
Michelle Obama condemned white people for fleeing minority neighborhoods just
weeks after she and her husband purchased a $15 million estate in Martha’s Vineyard.
Martha’s Vineyard is almost as white
as an Elizabeth Warren rally.
Martha’s Vineyard is whiter than my
subdivision here in rural North Carolina.
Martha’s Vineyard is whiter than
MSNBC.
During a Tuesday appearance at the
Obama Foundation Summit in Chicago, she said, “But unbeknownst to us, we grew
up in the period — as I write — called ‘white flight.’ That as families like
ours, upstanding families like ours … As we moved in, white folks moved out
because they were afraid of what our families represented.”
“And I always stop there when I talk
about this out in the world because, you know, I want to remind white folks
that y’all were running from us.” She went on, “This family with all the values
that you’ve read about. You were running from us. And you’re still running,
because we’re no different than the immigrant families that are moving in … the
families that are coming from other places to try to do better.”
Did I mention that Michelle and
Barry just purchased a $15 million estate in Martha’s Vineyard, which is 95
percent white?
Oh, and did I mention the Obamas own
a second home, an $8 million mansion, in the exclusive DC neighborhood of Kalorama, which is 80
percent white and just four percent black.
Oh, and did I mention the Obamas
have a third home, a $5.3 million mansion, in Rancho Mirage, California, which
is 89 percent white and just 2.6 percent black.
Oh, sure, the Obamas still own their
Chicago home in Hyde Park, which is at least 26 percent black. But you would
think they could do better than 26 percent!
I like Michelle Obama. I have always
liked Michelle Obama. I’ve never said an unkind word about her, quite the
opposite, and while I find her politics ignorant, she was a terrific first
lady.
But this is nuts…
Not only is she attacking white
people for seeking a better standard of living, which I can assure you (as I
will explain below) has little to do with racism, she is also attacking whites
after she herself “fled” to 95 percent white Martha’s Vineyard (I will never
stop repeating this point) and two other homes in areas where the black
population is less than 5 percent.
Worse still, she is putting white
people in a position where they can never win, where they are damned if they do
or don’t, where they are always and forever racist.
If white people move out of a black
neighborhood, they’re racists engaging in white flight.
But…
And this is important…
If white people move into a minority
neighborhood, they are also racists for either engaging in gentrification —
which is just another form of cultural genocide, donchaknow — or cultural
appropriation.
Now I’m going to tell you a little
something about white flight, from my own experience…
Because I was poor, back in the
mid-eighties, I lived in the inner-city of Milwaukee for two years. My wife and
I did not flee (my wife is not white, by the way) because of “icky minorities”
(did I mention my wife is not white?), we fled because it was not safe to live
there. It was never safe. Over those two years, we had been mugged, robbed, and
had our car stolen. That’s why we left.
And when we fled, it was to a
community that was still not as white as *ahem* Martha’s Vineyard.
In 2002, my wife and I moved to
California for nine years and lived in an East Los Angeles neighborhood that
was just four percent white. For
nearly a decade, I was outnumbered 96-4 and never gave it a thought because I
was not outnumbered. A darker skin tone, an accent, and different religious
traditions did not make my neighbors any less American than me, and when I am
among Americans I am among my own. We left because predominantly white leftists
are destroying California.
Then there’s my poor dad…
He moved to the Northside of
Milwaukee in 1980, and spent decades, a lot of money, and a ton of sweat,
remodeling his home, building a garage, and paying that home off. He intended
to retire there. And yes, there were black people in his neighborhood when he
moved in, and for most of his adult life he worked in predominantly black
institutions. He never intended to move, and held on for as long as he could… He
didn’t flee because of black people. He was not forced to start all over at age
67 because he suddenly decided he didn’t like blacks. He left because he was
robbed, because gangs started tagging his house and garage, because it was no
longer safe to live there.
You know…
If we’re going to shame people for
such things, what does it say to black people when other black people,
especially the first black president and his family, reject them? What the hell
kind of message is this to send to black Americans, especially when the Obamas
can afford the security to live safely in any neighborhood they choose?
And if the Obamas wanted to live in
Southern California, why choose Rancho Mirage over Ladera Heights, the Black
Beverly Hills, a predominantly black neighborhood as swank as any in America?
Shame on Michelle and Barack Obama.
They have the money and profile to make an important statement on this issue,
but they obviously prefer to live in overwhelmingly white neighborhoods.
Diamond Life: Michelle Obama rents out $23-million Hollywood
Hills mansion for a night
Apparently,
a hotel, even a luxury hotel, was not good enough.
Former
first lady Michelle Obama had to go big, renting out a $23-million Hollywood
Hills mansion for...a night. The New York Post has the pictures of
it here. Several news accounts explained it as
possibly a rental to try and buy, something most home-buyers don't get to
do. Whether she actually paid is also a big question mark, and if
so, whether she paid market value (which would have cost more than a
fancy hotel) or received her night there a "gift," which
presents its own ethics problems.
The Shark House, which is located in the 9200
block of Swallow Drive, is thus named due to its open air shark aquarium. It
also has a full spa, a humidor room, movie theater and walk-in wine room.
It's on the market, currently listed for a cool
$22.9 million.
A source told TMZ the Obamas may be looking at
real estate in the Hollywood Hills area, but that was not confirmed.
If
they're in the market to buy that, they've got a lot more money than the press
is reporting. We know they're loaded. But not that
loaded. Not Louis XIV loaded, which is about the range for this
sort of place. Or is it a sweetheart deal in the works we're talking
about? Maybe they'll end up buying it for "a dollar." Don't
know yet, but neither possibility makes them look good.
It's
all part and parcel of the Obamas' long, luxurious post-presidency,
a nonstop vacay that costs taxpayers millions. It's as though
we're financing kings now, not retired presidents. For a while
there, the Obamas were jetting
around with billionaires and staying on private islands. Then they bought that expensive Kalorama
mansion in Washington, D.C., all supposedly for the benefit of their daughter
Sasha, who was finishing high school. Surprise, surprise, it
actually seems to primarily serve as a political watch post for longtime Obama
loyalist and consigliere Valerie Jarrett. They did some audience
tours and hung out with more billionaires. There were those
lucrative Goldman
Sachs speeches by the celebrity president
(which certainly weren't based on economics anyone would want to trade on).
And
all of this has been financed by taxpayers, who pay his $207,000 pension, along with bennies such as unlimited air travel,
transition expenses, office expenses, presidential library funds, and lifetime
Secret Service detail.
Apparently,
to the Obamas, there's no reaching that "certain
point" at which "you've made enough
money."
For
Michelle, just call her "Mooch." Is this really what an
ex-presidency is supposed to be like? Hitting the money
jackpot? What he makes on his own is his own business (subject to
bribery laws), but taxpayers shouldn't be financing this level
of movie-star billionaire luxe life. Maybe it's time for some
pension reform from Congress. Would be quite a thing to see that
idea presented to the House's ruling Democrats.
OBAMAnomics:
Billionaire Class Enjoys 15X the Wage Growth of American Working
Class
AFP
23 Dec 20181,726
3:00
The billionaire class — the country’s top 0.01 percent of earners —
have enjoyed more than 15 times as much wage growth as America’s working and
middle class since 1979, new wage data reveals.
Between
1979 and 2017, the wages of the bottom 90 percent — the country’s working and lower
middle class — have grown by only about 22 percent, Economic Policy Institute
(EPI) researchers find.
Compare that small wage increase
over nearly four decades to the booming wage growth of America’s top one
percent, who have seen their wages grow more than 155 percent during the same
period.
Breitbart TV
The top 0.01 percent — the country’s
billionaire class — saw their wages grow by more than 343 percent in the
last four decades, more than 15 times the wage growth of the bottom 90 percent
of Americans.
In 1979, America’s working class was
earning on average about $29,600 a year. Fast forward to 2017, and the same
bottom 90 percent of Americans are earning only about $6,600 more annually.
The almost four decades of wage
stagnation among the country’s working and middle class comes as the national
immigration policy has allowed for the admission of more than 1.5 million
mostly low-skilled immigrants every year.
(Public Citizen)
In
the last decade, alone, the U.S. admitted ten
million legal immigrants, forcing American workers to compete against a growing
population of low-wage workers. Meanwhile, employers are able to reduce wages
and drive up their profit margins thanks to the annual low-skilled immigration
scheme.
The
Washington, DC-imposed mass
immigration policy is a boon to corporate executives, Wall Street, big
business, and multinational conglomerates as every one percent increase in the
immigrant composition of an occupation’s labor force reduces Americans’
hourly wages by 0.4 percent. Every one percent increase in the immigrant
workforce reduces Americans’ overall wages by 0.8 percent.
Mass immigration has come at the
expense of America’s working and middle class, which has suffered from poor job
growth, stagnant wages, and increased public costs to offset the importation of
millions of low-skilled foreign nationals.
Four
million young Americans enter the workforce every year, but their job
opportunities are further diminished as the U.S. imports roughly two new
foreign workers for every four American workers who enter the workforce. Even
though researchers say 30 percent of the workforce could lose their
jobs due to automation by 2030, the U.S. has not stopped importing more than a
million foreign nationals every year.
For
blue-collar American workers, mass immigration has not only kept wages down but
in many cases decreased wages, as Breitbart News reported. Meanwhile,
the U.S. continues importing more foreign nationals with whom
working-class Americans are forced to compete. In 2016, the U.S. brought in about
1.8 million mostly low-skilled immigrants.
Study: Elite Zip Codes Thrived in Obama Recovery, Rural America
Left Behind
10 Dec 2018549
4:49
Wealthy cities and elite zip codes thrived under the slow-moving
economic recovery of President Obama while rural American communities were left
behind, a study reveals.
The
Economic Innovation Group research, highlighted by Axios, details the massive
economic inequality between the country’s coastal city elites and middle
America’s working class between the Great Recession in 2007 and Obama’s
economic recovery in 2016.
Between 2007 and 2016, the number of
residents living in elite zip codes grew by more than ten million, with an
overwhelming faction of that population growth being driven by mass immigration
where the U.S. imports more than 1.5 million illegal and legal immigrants
annually.
The
booming 44.5 million immigrant populations are concentrated mostly
in the country’s major cities like Los Angeles, California, Miami Florida, and
New York City, New York. The rapidly growing U.S. population — driven by
immigration — is set to hit 404 millionby 2060, a
boon for real estate developers, wealthy investors, and corporations, all of
which benefit greatly from dense populations and a flooded labor market.
The economic study found that while
the population grew in wealthy cities, America’s rural population fell by
nearly 3.5 million residents.
Likewise, by 2016, elite zip codes
had a surplus of 3.6 million jobs, which is more than the combined bottom 80
percent of American zip codes. While it only took about five years for wealthy
cities to replace the jobs lost by the recession, it took “at risk” regions of
the country a decade to recover, and “distressed” U.S. communities are
“unlikely ever to recover on current trendlines,” the report predicts.
A map included in the research shows
how rich, coastal metropolises have boomed economically while entire
portions of middle America have been left behind as job and business gains
remain concentrated at the top of the income ladder.
(Economic Innovation
Group)
(Economic Innovation Group)
Economic growth among the country’s
middle-class counties and middle-class zip codes has considerably trailed national
economic growth, the study found.
For example, between 2012 and 2016,
there were 4.4 percent more business establishments in the country as a whole.
That growth was less than two percent in the median zip code and there was
close to no growth in the median county.
The same can be said of employment
growth, where U.S. employment grew by about 9.3 percent from 2012 to 2016. In
the median zip code, though, employment grew by only 5.5 percent and in the
median county, employment grew by less than four percent.
“Nearly three in every five large
counties added businesses on net over the period, compared to only one in every
five small one,” the report concluded.
Elite zip codes added more business
establishments during Obama’s economic recovery, between 2012 and 2016, than
the entire bottom 80 percent of zip codes combined. For instance, while more
than 180,000 businesses have been added to rich zip codes, the country’s bottom
tier has lost more than 13,000 businesses even after the economic recovery.
(Economic Innovation
Group)
(Economic Innovation Group)
The
gutting of the American manufacturing base, through free trade, has been
a driving catalyst for
the collapse of the white working class and black Americans. Simultaneously,
the outsourcing of the economy has brought major wealth to corporations, tech
conglomerates, and Wall Street.
The
dramatic decline of U.S. manufacturing at the hands of free trade—where more
than 3.4 million American
jobs have been lost solely due to free trade with China, not including the
American jobs lost due to agreements like the North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA) and the United States-Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS)—has
coincided with growing wage inequality for white and black Americans, a growing
number of single mother households, a drop in U.S. marriage rates, a
general stagnation of working and middle class wages, and specifically,
increased black American unemployment.
“So, the loss of manufacturing work
since 1960 represents a steady decline in relatively high-paying jobs for
less-educated workers,” recent research from economist Eric D. Gould has
noted.
Fast-forward
to the modern economy and the wage trend has been the opposite of what it was
during the peak of manufacturing in the U.S. An Economic Policy Institute studyfound this year
that been 2009 and 2015, the top one percent of American families
earned about 26 times as much income as the bottom 99 percent of
Americans.
Record high income in 2017 for top
one percent of wage earners in US
In 2017, the top one
percent of US wage earners received their highest paychecks ever, according to
a report by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI).
Based on newly released
data from the Social Security Administration, the EPI shows that the top one
percent of the population saw their paychecks increase by 3.7 percent in 2017—a
rate nearly quadruple the bottom 90 percent of the population. The growth was
driven by the top 0.1 percent, which includes many CEOs and corporate
executives, whose pay increased eight percent and averaged $2,757,000 last
year.
The EPI report is only
the latest exposure of the gaping inequality between the vast majority of the
population and the modern-day aristocracy that rules over them.
The EPI shows that the
bottom 90 percent of wage earners have increased their pay by 22.2 percent
between 1979 and 2017. Today, this bottom 90 percent makes an average of just
$36,182 a year, which is eaten up by the cost of housing and the growing burden
of education, health care, and retirement.
Meanwhile, the top one
percent has increased its wages by 157 percent during this same period, a rate
seven times faster than the other group. This top segment makes an average of
$718,766 a year. Those in-between, the 90th to 99th percentile, have increased
their wages by 57.4 percent. They now make an average of $152,476 a year—more
than four times the bottom 90 percent.
Decades of decaying
capitalism have led to this accelerating divide. While the rich accumulate
wealth with no restriction, workers’ wages and benefits have been under
increasing attack. In 1979, 90 percent of the population took in 70 percent of
the nation’s income. But, by 2017, that fell to only 61 percent.
Even more, while the
bottom 90 percent of the population may take in 61 percent of the wages, large sections
of the workforce today barely pull in any income at all. For
example, Social Security Administration data found that the bottom 54
percent of wage earners in the United States, 89.5 million people, make an
average of just $15,100 a year. This 54 percent of the population earns only 17
percent of all wages paid in America.
However unequal, these
wage inequalities still do not fully present the divide between rich and poor.
The ultra-wealthy derive their wealth not primarily from wages, but from assets
and equities—principally from the stock market. While the bottom 90 percent of
the population made 61 percent of the wages in 2017, they owned even less, just
27 percent of the wealth (according to the World Inequality Report
2018 by Thomas Piketty, Emmanuel Saez, and Gabriel Zucman).
The massive increase in
the value of the stock market, which only a small segment of the population
participates in, means that the top 10 percent of the population controls 73
percent of all wealth in the United States. Just three men—Jeff Bezos, Warren
Buffet and Bill Gates—had more wealth than the bottom half of America combined
last year.
Wages are so low in the
United States that roughly half of the population falls deeper into debt every
year. A Reuters report from July found that the pretax net income (that is,
income minus expense) of the bottom 40 percent of the population was an average
of negative $11,660. Even the middle quintile of the
population, the 40th to 60th percentile, breaks even with an average of only $2,836
a year.
As the Social Security
Administration numbers show, 67.4 percent of the population made less than the
average wage, $48,250 a year in 2017, a sum that is inadequate to support a
family in many cities—especially, with high housing costs, health care,
education, and retirement factored in.
For the ruling class,
though, workers’ wages are already too much. The volatility of the stock market
and the deep fear that the current bull market will collapse has made
politicians and businessmen anxious of any sign of wage increases.
In August, wages in the
US rose just 0.2 percent above the inflation rate, the highest in nine years.
Though the increase was tiny, it was enough to encourage the Federal Reserve to
increase the interest rate past two percent for the first time since 2008.
Raising interest rates helps to depress workers’ wages by lowering borrowing
and spending. As the Financial Times noted, stopping wage
growth was “central” to the Federal Reserve’s move.
Further analysis of the
Social Security Administration data shows that in 2017, 147,754 people reported
wages of 1 million dollars or more—roughly, the top 0.05 percent. Their
combined total income of $372 billion could pay for the US federal education
budget five times over.
These wages, however
large, still pale in comparison to the money the ultra-rich acquire from the
stock market. For example, share buybacks and dividend payments, a way of
funneling money to shareholders, will eclipse $1 trillion this year.
Whatever the immediate
source, the wealth of the rich derives from the great mass of people who do the
actual work. Across the United States and around the world, workers, young
people, and students have entered into struggle this year over pay, education,
health care, immigration, war and democratic rights. This growing movement of
the working class must set as its aim confiscating the wealth and power of this
tiny parasitic oligarchy. Society’s wealth must be democratically controlled by
those who produce it.
THE STAGGERING ECONOMIC INEQUALITY UNDER OBAMA'S ADMINISTRATION SERVING THE BILLIONAIRE CLASS.
THE
ENTIRE REASON BEHIND AMNESTY IS TO KEEP WAGES DEPRESSED AND PASS ALONG THE REAL
COST OF "CHEAP" MEXICAN LABOR TO THE AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS.
AND IT'S WORKING!
SEN. BERNIE SANDERS
“Calling income and wealth inequality the "great
moral issue of our time," Sanders laid out a sweeping, almost unimaginably
expensive program to transfer wealth from the richest Americans to the poor and
middle class. A $1 trillion public works program to create "13 million
good-paying jobs." A $15-an-hour federal minimum wage. "Pay
equity" for women. Paid sick leave and vacation for everyone. Higher taxes
on the wealthy. Free tuition at all public colleges and universities. A
Medicare-for-all single-payer health care system. Expanded Social Security
benefits. Universal pre-K.” WASHINGTON EXAMINER
YOU THOUGHT OBAMA INVITED
OBAMANOMICS and started the assault on the American middle-class?
NOPE!
“By the time of Bill Clinton’s election in 1992, the Democratic
Party had completely repudiated its association with the reforms of the New
Deal and Great Society periods. Clinton gutted welfare programs to provide an
ample supply of cheap labor for the rich (WHICH NOW MEANS OPEN BORDERS AND NO
E-VERIFY!), including a growing layer of black capitalists, and passed the 1994
Federal Crime Bill, with its notorious “three strikes” provision that has
helped create the largest prison population in the world.”
Clinton
Foundation Put On Watch List Of Suspicious ‘Charities’
OBAMA: SERVANT
OF THE 1%
Richest one
percent controls nearly half of global wealth
The richest one percent of the
world’s population now controls 48.2 percent of global wealth, up from 46
percent last year.
The report found that the growth of global inequality has
accelerated sharply since the 2008 financial crisis, as the values of financial
assets have soared while wages have stagnated and declined.
Millionaires projected to own 46 percent of global private wealth by 2019
By Gabriel Black
18 June 2015
Households with more than a million
(US) dollars in private wealth are projected to own 46 percent of global
private wealth in 2019 according to a new report by the Boston Consulting
Group (BCG).
This large percentage, however,
only includes cash, savings, money market funds and listed securities held
through managed investments—collectively known as “private wealth.” It leaves
out businesses, residences and luxury goods, which comprise a substantial
portion of the rich’s net worth.
At the end of 2014, millionaire households owned about 41
percent of global private wealth, according to BCG. This means that
collectively these 17 million households owned roughly $67.24 trillion in
liquid assets, or about $4 million per household.
In total, the world added $17.5
trillion of new private wealth between 2013 and 2014. The report notes that
nearly three quarters of all these gains came from previously existing wealth.
In other words, the vast majority of money gained has been due to pre-existing
assets increasing in value—not the creation of new material things.
This trend is the result of the
massive infusions of cheap credit into the financial markets by central banks.
The policy of “quantitative easing” has led to a dramatic expansion of the
stock market even while global economic growth has slumped.
While the wealth of the rich is growing at a breakneck pace,
there is a stratification of growth within the super wealthy, skewed towards
the very top.
In
2014, those with over $100 million in private wealth saw their wealth increase
11 percent in one year alone. Collectively, these households owned $10 trillion
in 2014, 6 percent of the world’s private wealth. According to the report,
“This top segment is expected to be the fastest growing, in both the number of
households and total wealth.” They are expected to see 12 percent compound
growth on their wealth in the next five years.
Those families with wealth between
$20 and $100 million also rose substantially in 2014—seeing a 34 percent
increase in their wealth in twelve short months. They now own $9 trillion. In
five years they will surpass $14 trillion according to the report.
Coming in last in the “high net
worth” population are those with between $1 million and $20 million in private
wealth. These households are expected to see their wealth grow by 7.2 percent
each year, going from $49 trillion to $70.1 trillion dollars, several
percentage points below the highest bracket’s 12 percent growth rate.
The
gains in private wealth of the ultra-rich stand in sharp contrast to the
experience of billions of people around the globe. While wealth accumulation
has sharply sped up for the ultra-wealthy, the vast majority of people have not
even begun to recover from the past recession.
An Oxfam report from
January, for example, shows that the bottom 99 percent of the world’s
population went from having about 56 percent of the world’s wealth in 2010 to
having 52 percent of it in 2014. Meanwhile the top 1 percent saw its wealth
rise from 44 to 48 percent of the world’s wealth.
In
2014 the Russell Sage Foundation found that between 2003 and 2013, the median
household net worth of those in the United States fell from $87,992 to
$56,335—a drop of 36 percent. While the rich also saw their wealth drop during
the recession, they are more than making that money back. Between 2009 and
2012, 95 percent of all the income gains in the US went to the top 1 percent.
This is the most distorted post-recession income gain on record.
As the Organization for Economic
Co-operation and Development (OECD) has noted, in the United States “between
2007 and 2013, net wealth fell on average 2.3 percent, but it fell ten-times
more (26 percent) for those at the bottom 20 percent of the distribution.” The
2015 report concludes that “low-income households have not benefited at all
from income growth.”
Another report by Knight
Frank, looks at those with wealth exceeding $30 million. The report notes
that in 2014 these 172,850 ultra-high-net-worth individuals increased their
collective wealth by $700 billion. Their total wealth now rests at $20.8
trillion.
The report also draws attention to
the disconnection between the rich and the actual economy. It states that the
growth of this ultra-wealthy population “came despite weaker-than-anticipated
global economic growth. During 2014 the IMF was forced to downgrade its
forecast increase for world output from 3.7 percent to 3.3 percent.”
No comments:
Post a Comment