Ranks of world's richest grow in 2006
-
NEW YORK - Suppose all of the world's wealthiest people got together and pooled their assets into one lump sum. How much money would that be? According to a report released on Wednesday, the combined wealth of the globe's richest individuals rose more than 11 per cent to a grand total of US$37.2 trillion last year.
The rise marks the first double-digit increase in seven years.
Thanks to a strong global economy, 9.5 million people held at least US$1 million in financial assets - excluding the value of their primary homes - in 2006, up from 8.7 million in 2005, according to the 11th annual World Wealth Report compiled by Merrill Lynch & Co and the consulting firm Capgemini Group.
Those accumulated trillions give these individuals control of about a quarter of the world's total wealth, or nearly three times the United States' gross domestic product.
If the rich decided to combine their assets and split the money evenly among all 9.5 million of them, they'd each be left with nearly US$3,915,789. That would be enough for each person to buy about a dozen Rolls Royce luxury cars, or more than 7,000 of Apple Inc's new iPhones.
Worldwide, gross-domestic-product growth and accelerating market capitalisation - or the value of corporations' outstanding shares in the global market - fuelled the generation of wealth, the report found.
Despite last year's strong international economy, the world's wealthiest shifted their money away from 'alternative investments' - such as hedge funds, foreign currencies and commodities - in favour of high returns on real estate ventures, the study stated.
The investment strategies of millionaires may not suit those with fewer assets to spare, however, Robert McCann, president of Merrill Lynch's Global Private Client Group, said after a press conference outlining the report.
'The world is becoming more and more global,' he said. 'That's an interesting thing to think about, whether you have US$10,000 or US$10 million.' The expansion of the world's richest class was the strongest in both India and Singapore, the report found, which each boasted increases of more than 20 per cent. Solid investor cash-flow into riskier corners of both countries' emerging markets generated much of the gains, according to the report.
Driving the growth of many millionaires' fortunes was the growing class of the super-rich, individuals whose assets exceed US$30 million, the report stated. Their ranks also grew more than 11 per cent last year to 94,970, with a combined wealth of US$13.1 trillion.
Topping the list in both in the number of wealthy individuals and the sum of their accumulated assets was the United States, fuelled by gross-domestic-product growth, the report found. Japan ranked second.
Investments by the wealthy in North America dipped in favour of allocations to Europe, which enjoyed its best performance since 2000.
In the annual study's first breakdown of philanthropic giving, individuals worth US$1 million or more donated an estimated total of US$285 billion in 2006.
Charitable giving has become more important in millionaires' overall investment strategies in recent years, Ileana van der Linde, a principal in Capgemini's wealth management practice, said.
'It seems to be much more about leaving a legacy and having influence in the things that they care about,' she said.
Entrepreneurs donated an average of US$232,206, more than double the amount dedicated to philanthropy by those who inherited their riches.
If all ranks of the world's wealthiest decided to give away their combined assets, they could pay off the US federal deficit, 250 times over. Or they could write a check for nearly US$33,000 to every resident of India, though some investors there are faring well on their own.
Wealth among the world's rich is expected to hit US$51.6 trillion by 2011, growing at an annual rate of 6.8 per cent, the study stated. -- AP -
so did the ranks of the extremely poor..
so what's the point of the report? -
The widening of income gap is something that is happening around the world.Originally posted by the Bear:so did the ranks of the extremely poor..
so what's the point of the report?
What is the point? For anti-pap camp to blast our government for not preventing the rich from getting richer? -
"If all men were rich, all men would be poor”
Mark Twain -
Actually, it is the poor (lower income class) remaining as poor. While middle class getting poorer. The rich getting super-rich.
-
no its so typical of you and progahmen folks who do selective copy and paste..at least leave a credit to whom the original article originated from or YOU MIGHT BE THE ONE ENDING UP IN COURT FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT..Originally posted by Gazelle:The widening of income gap is something that is happening around the world.
What is the point? For anti-pap camp to blast our government for not preventing the rich from getting richer?
Instead of summing up all the world's richest total asserts, y dun u post the increasing disparity of the rich n poor in s'pore instead, becuz afterall is it not that matters most? So its easier to put the blame on globalization becuz its a global trend that the rich are getting richer and the poor getting poorer?
I dun think s'pore commoners pay that much to a minister only to see him 'follow global trend'..
y u always like to shoot yourself on your toe? -
Propaganda bullsh][t again. Trying to legitimised the income gap.
UN Gini Coefficient (A Gini index of 0 represents perfect economic equality, and 100 perfect inequality.):
PR of China GDP per capita $2,001 = 44.7
Ecuador GDP per capita $2,987 = 43.7
Ghana GDP per capita $602 = 40.8
Cote d'Ivoire GDP per capita $939 =44.6
Iran GDP per capita $3,046 = 43.0
Kenya GDP per capita $681 = 42.5
Uganda GDP per capita $316 = 43.0
Nicaragua GDP per capita $908 = 43.1
Nigeria GDP per capita $770 = 43.7
Zambia GDP per capita $922 = 42.1
Singapore GDP per capita $29,917 = 42.5
Australia GDP per capita $36,553 = 35.2
Ireland GDP per capita $52,440 = 34.3
Norway GDP per capita $72,306 = 25.8
Switzerland GDP per capita $51,771 = 33.7
Sweden GDP per capita $42,383 = 25
U.K. GDP per capita $39,213 = 36
Source: Gini Coefficients in Wikipedia, per capita GDP in Wikipedia
Singapore, first world GDP, 3rd world income distribution!!!
Instead of redistributing income from the higher income bracket to the lower income bracket (like what most compassionate democratic governments do), they redistribute income from the lower income bracket to the higher income bracket, that's why you see the income gap widening.
The rich gets richer, the poor gets poorer. -
Originally posted by maurizio13:
Please write to business times and tell them the article is bullsh.it
Propaganda bullsh][t again. Trying to legitimised the income gap.
UN Gini Coefficient (A Gini index of 0 represents perfect economic equality, and 100 perfect inequality.):
PR of China GDP per capita $2,001 = 44.7
Ecuador GDP per capita $2,987 = 43.7
Ghana GDP per capita $602 = 40.8
Cote d'Ivoire GDP per capita $939 =44.6
Iran GDP per capita $3,046 = 43.0
Kenya GDP per capita $681 = 42.5
Uganda GDP per capita $316 = 43.0
Nicaragua GDP per capita $908 = 43.1
Nigeria GDP per capita $770 = 43.7
Zambia GDP per capita $922 = 42.1
Singapore GDP per capita $29,917 = 42.5
Australia GDP per capita $36,553 = 35.2
Ireland GDP per capita $52,440 = 34.3
Norway GDP per capita $72,306 = 25.8
Switzerland GDP per capita $51,771 = 33.7
Sweden GDP per capita $42,383 = 25
U.K. GDP per capita $39,213 = 36
Source: Gini Coefficients in Wikipedia, per capita GDP in Wikipedia
[b]Singapore, first world GDP, 3rd world income distribution!!!
Instead of redistributing income from the higher income bracket to the lower income bracket (like what most compassionate democratic governments do), they redistribute income from the lower income bracket to the higher income bracket, that's why you see the income gap widening.
The rich gets richer, the poor gets poorer.
[/b] -
The fallacy in your logic is the same as your previous argument about mean income of Singaporeans. You claim that the mean income for Singaporeans has risen, but you fail to see that it's a lopsided distribution, ie the people in the higher income brackets are making more, while the people in the lower income brackets are making about the same or less.Originally posted by Gazelle:Please write to business times and tell them the article is bullsh.it
Your logic being, the Global Income Gap is widening, therefore it is normal for Singapore's income gap to widen.
The truth, Global Income Gap is widening, widely attributed to 3rd world countries distribution of income (particularly China). The Gini coefficient of highly developed economies like Norway, Australia, Switzerland, Sweden & UK have all managed to maintain their Gini Coefficient from 25 to 35, which is 10 to 20 points below Singapore's.
This is a lame attempt of yours to use news from maybe some news media to justify your flawed logic on the widening income gap. The article did not mention anything about widening income gap, the widening income gap is entirely your own construct.
There are dangers in using averages in analysing data, because if the raw data is skewed (biased) towards a particular direction, you can't decipher from the averages.
A - 10,000 count - $ 20,000
B - 500 count - $ 1,000,000
Average = ($200,000,000 + $500,000,000) / (10,500)
The average for this is $66,666.66
If group A's income level drops by 10% and B's income increases by 10%.
We have:
A - 10,000 count - $ 18,000
B - 500 count - $ 1,100,000
Average = ($180,000,000 + $550,000,000) / (10,500)
The average would have increased to $ 69,523.81.
Does this mean that the income of A has risen because the averages of their income has risen? -
write to business times or ST forum, I am sure the whole singapore would like to read what you have to say..Originally posted by maurizio13:The fallacy in your logic is the same as your previous argument about mean income of Singaporeans. You claim that the mean income for Singaporeans has risen, but you fail to see that it's a lopsided distribution, ie the people in the higher income brackets are making more, while the people in the lower income brackets are making about the same or less.
Your logic being, the Global Income Gap is widening, therefore it is normal for Singapore's income gap to widen.
The truth, Global Income Gap is widening, widely attributed to 3rd world countries distribution of income (particularly China). The Gini coefficient of highly developed economies like Norway, Australia, Switzerland, Sweden & UK have all managed to maintain their Gini Coefficient from 25 to 35, which is 10 to 20 points below Singapore's.
This is a lame attempt of yours to use news from maybe some news media to justify your flawed logic on the widening income gap. The article did not mention anything about widening income gap, the widening income gap is entirely your own construct.
There are dangers in using averages in analysing data, because if the raw data is skewed (biased) towards a particular direction, you can't decipher from the averages.
A - 10,000 count - $ 20,000
B - 500 count - $ 1,000,000
Average = ($200,000,000 + $500,000,000) / (10,500)
The average for this is $66,666.66
If group A's income level drops by 10% and B's income increases by 10%.
We have:
A - 10,000 count - $ 18,000
B - 500 count - $ 1,100,000
Average = ($180,000,000 + $550,000,000) / (10,500)
The average would have increased to $ 69,523.81.
Does this mean that the income of A has risen because the averages of their income has risen?
-
Mr Gazelle. i do agree with you that the widening income gap is a global issue.Originally posted by Gazelle:The widening of income gap is something that is happening around the world.
What is the point? For anti-pap camp to blast our government for not preventing the rich from getting richer?
We do see various government central banks is doing their best to control inflation thus minimise this problem with various monetary policies eg hiking interest rate to control inflation eg ECB, PBOC, RBA.
Notably the US government too are stepping up efforts on this trend too. There are legislative proposals that would tax as corporations all publicly traded partnerships that directly or indirectly derive income from investment adviser or asset management services. As we see from here, that efforts are made ease the burden of the poors by taxing the richs
As for our so "respected " group, efforts too are made
By Increasing Gst (Comsumption tax) as to help the poor ?
By extending the CPF payout to 65 years old ?
By telling the public to tighten their belts and need to learn how to stretch their savings til 65 ?
And of course, increasing their pay check by 20+%
Mr Gazelle, are these your ideas of helping the poor ??? Or should I say narrowing the gap between the rich and the poor ??? -
It looks more like narrowing the gap between the rich & the richer to meOriginally posted by miserable:Mr Gazelle. i do agree with you that the widening income gap is a global issue.
We do see various government central banks is doing their best to control inflation thus minimise this problem with various monetary policies eg hiking interest rate to control inflation eg ECB, PBOC, RBA.
Notably the US government too are stepping up efforts on this trend too. There are legislative proposals that would tax as corporations all publicly traded partnerships that directly or indirectly derive income from investment adviser or asset management services. As we see from here, that efforts are made ease the burden of the poors by taxing the richs
As for our so "respected " group, efforts too are made
By Increasing Gst (Comsumption tax) as to help the poor ?
By extending the CPF payout to 65 years old ?
By telling the public to tighten their belts and need to learn how to stretch their savings til 65 ?
And of course, increasing their pay check by 20+%
Mr Gazelle, are these your ideas of helping the poor ??? Or should I say narrowing the gap between the rich and the poor ??? -
But.... but ......they are paid millions so they will lead us to the New Swiss "Cost" of Living...right ???Originally posted by 4getmenot:It looks more like narrowing the gap between the rich & the richer to me -
why is it the rich are getting richer and the poor getting poorer? is it realli the fact that the rich are exploiting the poor?
u may say they are born rich.. but u muz also give credit to those who work veri hard overcoming all obstacles in setting businesses or leaders in their professional fields.. if they have work veri hard, i dun see why they shldn't be rich. of course not all ppl who work hard succeeds, opportunity is one of the key points but opportunity is to be made not to be found..
to sum it up, there must be something the rich knoes while the poor don't. while the poor continues to whine abt the government not helping the poor, increasing this tax that tax and implementing this and that tax policy.. the rich i supposed are constantly thinking abt how to earn more money.
just my 2cents
-
Originally posted by cloud210:
why is it the rich are getting richer and the poor getting poorer? is it realli the fact that the rich are exploiting the poor?
where do you actually see in this thread that the rich are exploiting the poor? maybe you wanna read more thouroughly and get a clearer picture. and see who is actually the ones exploting who?
u may say they are born rich.. but u muz also give credit to those who work veri hard overcoming all obstacles in setting businesses or leaders in their professional fields.. if they have work veri hard, i dun see why they shldn't be rich. of course not all ppl who work hard succeeds, opportunity is one of the key points but opportunity is to be made not to be found..
true in some sense, but to make an opportunity and make full good use of it, you need resources, does the poor actually have that even little resources to make an opportunity?
to sum it up, there must be something the rich knoes while the poor don't. while the poor continues to whine abt the government not helping the poor, increasing this tax that tax and implementing this and that tax policy.. the rich i supposed are constantly thinking abt how to earn more money.
and the poor are whining just for the sake of whining? if they are no justification to whine, there wouldn't be a need to whine would they? of course the rich are always thinking about ways to earn the money, because they already have the resources.. what do the poor have in place? stagnant wage.. coupled with cheap low costs FT whom they have to fight for a job....rising costs.... -
This is simply pathetic to see a TS being stumped in a poorly planned effort to spite a target group in this Speaker's Corner.Originally posted by Gazelle:
Originally posted by maurizio13:
The fallacy in your logic is the same as your previous argument about mean income of Singaporeans. You claim that the mean income for Singaporeans has risen, but you fail to see that it's a lopsided distribution, ie the people in the higher income brackets are making more, while the people in the lower income brackets are making about the same or less.
Your logic being, the Global Income Gap is widening, therefore it is normal for Singapore's income gap to widen.
The truth, Global Income Gap is widening, widely attributed to 3rd world countries distribution of income (particularly China). The Gini coefficient of highly developed economies like Norway, Australia, Switzerland, Sweden & UK have all managed to maintain their Gini Coefficient from 25 to 35, which is 10 to 20 points below Singapore's.
This is a lame attempt of yours to use news from maybe some news media to justify your flawed logic on the widening income gap. The article did not mention anything about widening income gap, the widening income gap is entirely your own construct.
There are dangers in using averages in analysing data, because if the raw data is skewed (biased) towards a particular direction, you can't decipher from the averages.
A - 10,000 count - $ 20,000
B - 500 count - $ 1,000,000
Average = ($200,000,000 + $500,000,000) / (10,500)
The average for this is $66,666.66
If group A's income level drops by 10% and B's income increases by 10%.
We have:
A - 10,000 count - $ 18,000
B - 500 count - $ 1,100,000
Average = ($180,000,000 + $550,000,000) / (10,500)
The average would have increased to $ 69,523.81.
Does this mean that the income of A has risen because the averages of their income has risen?---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
write to business times or ST forum, I am sure the whole singapore would like to read what you have to say..
What is the use of passing the buck to the Business Times and ST Forum ?
Everyone knows that such a reply - from maurizio13 - will never be printed as it simply goes against the ''Master Deception Plan'' to conceal the True Singapore Picture of struggle and hardship.
Is there any use in denying the reality of the situation in Singapore that the Middle Income group is beginning to feel the pinch from all the Government approved price increases since the May 2006 Election was over ?
It will be interesting to see the outcome of the 2007 report from the Department of Statistics during early 2008, and compare 2007 data with that reported in 2011. -
true in some sense, but to make an opportunity and make full good use of it, you need resources, does the poor actually have that even little resources to make an opportunity?
managing and gathering resources is one of the key skills towards success. large business start from small ones and they have veri little resources. bai shou qi jia if u know chinese. if the person who is unable to accomplish this first task, he does not deserve to be rich. even if by a stroke of luck he manage to get pass the 1st,2nd 3rd pot of gold, how is this luck going to last? will he be able to safeguard his assets and expand his business in the long run?
with technology such as email, internet, ebay, this are cheap means to get ur products and service across to ur customers WORLDWIDE. it all goes down to the individual, whether he had put in his heart and soul
and the poor are whining just for the sake of whining? if they are no justification to whine, there wouldn't be a need to whine would they? of course the rich are always thinking about ways to earn the money, because they already have the resources.. what do the poor have in place? stagnant wage.. coupled with cheap low costs FT whom they have to fight for a job....rising costs....
so if there is justification to whine, den ppl should whine? rather than whining why not use the energy to think of ideas or creating opportunities for urself? when a person whines, his justification of whining will only increase.
why is first class more expensive than economic class? simply bcuz they have better services, legspace and many other priviledges. cheap FTs is juz the trigger to the end result of the workers decreasing wages. the gunpowder is urself, you'r not worth the pay u'r asking for. if u wan more pay, justify it! tell ur employer why you are worth $xxxx/mth bcuz you can help him earn $xxxx x2,3,4,5 so thats why u muz pay me this salary juz like a first class offering more legspace and priviledges.[/quote] -
Originally posted by cloud210:
[/b][/quote]
[b]true in some sense, but to make an opportunity and make full good use of it, you need resources, does the poor actually have that even little resources to make an opportunity?
managing and gathering resources is one of the key skills towards success. large business start from small ones and they have veri little resources. bai shou qi jia if u know chinese. if the person who is unable to accomplish this first task, he does not deserve to be rich. even if by a stroke of luck he manage to get pass the 1st,2nd 3rd pot of gold, how is this luck going to last? will he be able to safeguard his assets and expand his business in the long run?
with technology such as email, internet, ebay, this are cheap means to get ur products and service across to ur customers WORLDWIDE. it all goes down to the individual, whether he had put in his heart and soul
and the poor are whining just for the sake of whining? if they are no justification to whine, there wouldn't be a need to whine would they? of course the rich are always thinking about ways to earn the money, because they already have the resources.. what do the poor have in place? stagnant wage.. coupled with cheap low costs FT whom they have to fight for a job....rising costs....
so if there is justification to whine, den ppl should whine? rather than whining why not use the energy to think of ideas or creating opportunities for urself? when a person whines, his justification of whining will only increase.
why is first class more expensive than economic class? simply bcuz they have better services, legspace and many other priviledges. cheap FTs is juz the trigger to the end result of the workers decreasing wages. the gunpowder is urself, you'r not worth the pay u'r asking for. if u wan more pay, justify it! tell ur employer why you are worth $xxxx/mth bcuz you can help him earn $xxxx x2,3,4,5 so thats why u muz pay me this salary juz like a first class offering more legspace and priviledges.
cloud210,
I like your spirit. I agree with you that all businesses have a beginning and its never easy to make it. So for the businessmen who risked so much of their time and efforts, they should be compensated accordingly. I think in terms of competitiveness, singapore is lacking behind countires like China. We can certainly benefit from more enthusiasm to venture out, take risks and make more money.
However, you are missing some vital points. In society, there are always people of different abilities, their needs and wants are also different. Some are born generals, others maybe the officers, sergeants and even the men. We all have our roles in the society, no matter how big or insignificant, we as a whole, the best, the worst shape up the society.
You need to realise that not everyone are privileged from the start, family upbringing, opportunities and to a very large extent luck plays a big part in shaping a person's life or success.
I can't help but feel that you were alittle insensitive to the poor. The ones hoging out to make ends meet.
Its easy to say, who ask you never work hard? Or you could have studied harder mah, or dont complain, just work harder and earn more lor.
Don't get me wrong, i dont suggest the rich subsidising for the poor, in singapore's case, i think the income gap is really a problem.
I recently found out that the cleaner in macdonald's are getting below 3dollars per hour. I think thats ridiculous!!! Its cheap labour!
What is happening in singapore??? -
[quote]Originally posted by cloud210:
managing and gathering resources is one of the key skills towards success. large business start from small ones and they have veri little resources. bai shou qi jia if u know chinese. if the person who is unable to accomplish this first task, he does not deserve to be rich. even if by a stroke of luck he manage to get pass the 1st,2nd 3rd pot of gold, how is this luck going to last? will he be able to safeguard his assets and expand his business in the long run?
How do you expect one to start building up resources when ones already tied down with all the burdens of life's daily expanses not mentioning the need to support ones family? talking is easier said than done.
with technology such as email, internet, ebay, this are cheap means to get ur products and service across to ur customers WORLDWIDE. it all goes down to the individual, whether he had put in his heart and soul
So you assume that everyone is proficient in the usage of internet in Singapore? Again you miss the complexity of using an internet as a means of doing business, did you really take it into account the means and skills needed to achieve all this and the time? and you think the poor can take advantage and harness it? wow.. then a country like Korea which is hooked up at just about every household would already be selling stuffs on the internet and making money..Again talking is easier said than done...hell maybe i should fire all my internet marketing executives because it sounds so easy i should do it myself.. internet => email => ebay => world domination..
so if there is justification to whine, den ppl should whine? rather than whining why not use the energy to think of ideas or creating opportunities for urself? when a person whines, his justification of whining will only increase.
Rather than telling one to quit whining, you expect them to turn their energy to creating opportunities for oneself? Would you not rather think that becuz there are no more avenues to turn to that the people are starting to whine?
Agin..again.. its easier said than done..
cheap FTs is juz the trigger to the end result of the workers decreasing wages. the gunpowder is urself, you'r not worth the pay u'r asking for. if u wan more pay, justify it! tell ur employer why you are worth $xxxx/mth bcuz you can help him earn $xxxx x2,3,4,5 so thats why u muz pay me this salary juz like a first class offering more legspace and priviledges.
Is that your justification? did you not realised even at the least that the influx of FT's has already somewhat made finding jobs even more difficult for the locals? if the reasoning to justify is as simple as you claim, do the maths like what an employer would - why not hire two when u can for the price of one? coupled with younger age, and virtually no need for any NS commitment, again again again talking is easier said than done.. -
Latest efforts by China to narrow the gap between the rich n the poor !!!
China to raise minimum wages to offset spike in food prices
Minimum wages in China will be increased this year to offset the sharp rise in food prices that has particularly hurt low-income families, state media reported Friday, citing the labour ministry.
Local governments must raise minimum wages before the end of 2007 in regions where salaries have risen slowly or are markedly lower than the average, the Xinhua news agency said, citing the Ministry of Labour and Social Security.
"Local governments must adjust minimum wages in a timely manner and ensure that real standards do not fall with the consumer price index going up," the ministry said.
China's inflation rate rose 3.4 percent in May from a year earlier, above the government's annual target of 3.0 percent, but food prices have accelerated at a much faster pace.
In a circular cited by Xinhua, the labour ministry said low-income families were particularly feeling the heat after meat and poultry prices jumped by 26.5 percent in May and the cost of eggs rose 37.1 percent.
Premier Wen Jiabao also warned in late May that the rising price of pork, the most commonly eaten meat in China, could threaten social stability.
In China, minimum wage standards vary from region to region.
At the end of last year, southern China's Shenzhen city had the highest minimum wage in the country at 810 yuan (105 dollars) per month, while eastern Jiangxi province was bottom with a salary of 270 yuan, Xinhua said.