The Richest 1% Will Own Two-Thirds Of Global Wealth By 2030, Report Finds

Back in November, Credit Suisse highlighted an alarming - yet altogether unsurprising - milestone in the increasing concentration of global wealth that has been perhaps the most influential force behind the populist revolts that rocked the US in 2016 and have continued to unfurl across Europe. According to the Swiss bank's annual "global wealth pyramid," for the first time, the wealthiest 1% of the world's population had accumulated more than half of its aggregate household wealth.

Credit Suisse's researchers describe in stark terms how global wealth inequality had actually improved somewhat in the years between the start of the new millennium and the financial crisis - but in the years after, the gap between the world's richest and poorest individuals widened dramatically, one of the most pernicious aspects of the Fed and the global cabal of central banks pumping easy money into the global financial system.

Pyramid

The researchers said that "our calculations show that the top 1% of global wealth holders started the millennium with 45.5% of all household wealth. This share was about the same until 2006, then fell to 42.5% two years later. The downward trend reversed after 2008 and the share of the top one percent has been on an upward path ever since, passing the 2000 level in 2013 and achieving new peaks every year thereafter. According to our latest estimates, the top one percent own 50.1 percent of all household wealth in the world.”

But while CS's report was unequivocally dire, a recent report published by the UK Parliament is even more harrowing.

According to the Guardian, projections produced by the House of Commons library suggest that the top 1% of the world's wealthiest individuals will own roughly 64% of the planet's wealth by 2030.

An alarming projection produced by the House of Commons library suggests that if trends seen since the 2008 financial crash were to continue, then the top 1% will hold 64% of the world’s wealth by 2030. Even taking the financial crash into account, and measuring their assets over a longer period, they would still hold more than half of all wealth.

Since 2008, the wealth of the richest 1% has been growing at an average of 6% a year – much faster than the 3% growth in wealth of the remaining 99% of the world’s population. Should that continue, the top 1% would hold wealth equating to $305tn (£216.5tn) – up from $140tn today.

Analysts suggest wealth has become concentrated at the top because of recent income inequality, higher rates of saving among the wealthy, and the accumulation of assets. The wealthy also invested a large amount of equity in businesses, stocks and other financial assets, which have handed them disproportionate benefits.

The study was the brainchild of Liam Byrne, a former Labour cabinet minister, who hopes it will factor into the discussion when the financial chiefs of the world's largest countries meet in Buenos Aires late this year for a G-20 summit.

"If we don’t take steps to rewrite the rules of how our economies work, then we condemn ourselves to a future that remains unequal for good," he said. "That’s morally bad, and economically disastrous, risking a new explosion in instability, corruption and poverty."

Unfortunately, the public is extremely sensitive to growing wealth disparity, and polls show most people in the UK are growing increasingly cynical about the prospects for change. Already a plurality of Britons believe the superrich have more influence and power than national governments.

New polling by Opinium suggests that voters perceive a major problem with the influence exerted by the very wealthy. Asked to select a group that would have the most power in 2030, most (34%) said the super-rich, while 28% opted for national governments. In a sign of falling levels of trust, those surveyed said they feared the consequences of wealth inequality would be rising levels of corruption (41%) or the “super-rich enjoying unfair influence on government policy” (43%).

Indeed, even if the incomes of the wealthiest individuals were frozen at 2017 levels, their share of the world's wealth would still expand thanks to returns on their investments, according to Danny Dorling, a professor at Oxford.

"Even if the income of the wealthiest people in the world stops rising dramatically in the future, their wealth will still grow for some time," he said. "The last peak of income inequality was in 1913. We are near that again, but even if we reduce inequality now it will continue to grow for one to two more decades."

One Tory MP quoted by the Guardian pointed out that while wealth inequality remains a problem, liberal capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty than any other system of government. Though this overlooks the fact that, while this holds true in most of the biggest developing countries, in the developed world, the working and middle class are at risk of seeing their standard of living decline vs. that of their parents' generation.

George Freeman, the Tory MP and former head of the prime minister’s policy board, said: “While mankind has never seen such income inequality, it is also true that mankind has never experienced such rapid increases in living standards. Around the world billions of people are being lifted out of poverty at a pace never seen before. But the extraordinary concentration of global wealth today – fuelled by the pace of technological innovation and globalisation – poses serious challenges.

"If the system of capitalist liberal democracy which has triumphed in the west is to pass the big test of globalisation – and the assault from radical Islam as well as its own internal pressures from post-crash austerity – we need some new thinking on ways to widen opportunity, share ownership and philanthropy. Fast."

Demands for action from the group include improving productivity to ensure wages rise and reform of capital markets to promote greater equality.

While this sounds like a plausible plan, the obstacles to it being put into practice are myriad - including opposition from corporations and the wealthy, who might prove reluctant to part with what they've gained. And even once central banks retract their stimulus and securities valuations inevitably fall, it remains unclear whether this trend can ever be reversed.

One thing's for sure: While pundits have been eager to call the end of the populist wave, as long as the wealth divide continues to widen, anger toward the status quo will continue to metastasize.

Comments

Endgame Napoleon JRobby Mon, 04/09/2018 - 07:32 Permalink

It is hard to have a Republic when so much of a nation’s resources reside in so few hands. By just making a move, any one of the shadow royals can shift the economic tectonic plates. Their power does override elected government—it buys government—and it also stymies economic progress for the many who lack access to capital. 

All of the myths that helped previous generations resist concentrated power are in shreds, too, replaced by narratives like Obama, the humble community organizer from an oppressed group who started out as a mere six-figure employee, with a wife from the same oppressed group paid $450k as a community outreach hospital administrator and well over $100k when working part time after having kids. 

Obama started out in an upper “middle class” situation—i.e. middle class as defined in the era of middle-class downsizing and assortative mating, which concentrates the non-job-creating wealth in fewer households—but by the end of the 2008 housing collapse period, the rags-to-riches President Obama was worth well over $45 million.

And surprise, Obama supported the status-quo economic policy of the Neoliberal Uniparty all the way, with the mainstream media pitching the narrative that he was a community organizer and a force for change due to skin pigmentation and the hope-and-change theme with an identity politics overlay, with zero analysis of his neoliberal policy choices. 

 

In reply to by JRobby

Theosebes Goodfellow cheka Mon, 04/09/2018 - 11:35 Permalink

After I kick the bucket 100% of everything I own will be owned by somebody else. That said, it will be my daughter, or her children. Did I ever mention that Tennessee has something called a "Dynasty Trust"? Good for up to 360 years. Look it up.

"Free trade bitchez"

Is that like "Free Jon Corzine"? You know that big "J" Justice will be back in town the day that bastard is rotting in a jail cell.

In reply to by cheka

Stuck on Zero kralizec Mon, 04/09/2018 - 09:44 Permalink

"Analysts suggest wealth has become concentrated at the top because of recent income inequality, higher rates of saving among the wealthy, and the accumulation of assets. The wealthy also invested a large amount of equity in businesses, stocks and other financial assets, which have handed them disproportionate benefits."

B.S. Most of the world's wealthy are supercharged by government corruption.

In reply to by kralizec

PrivetHedge Quantify Mon, 04/09/2018 - 06:18 Permalink

There are very few 'successful' people, the rich is a class who has bought influence so they pay no tax and we pay all of it. That's something we can clearly blame them for.

You gonna setup a firm to compete with Google? Good luck with that - you won't get the 0% interest loans, the tax breaks, the cushy government and military contracts: they will. You'll run out of money and fail. That's why you'll never be 'successful'.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/how-billionaires-become-billionaires/5612…

Also if you are not a pharisee you'll be treated as a 2nd class citizen by the pharisee establishment.

In reply to by Quantify

Memedada PrivetHedge Mon, 04/09/2018 - 06:56 Permalink

Quantify is obviously a well-indoctrinated serf. Just like the serfs of former feudal societies that believed his lords: “It’s our God given rights”! He probably also believes in all the other illusions about meritocracy, competition, rule by law (and that all are equal in the eyes of the law), democracy, freedom of speech etc. etc. – in other words: he is still lost in the matrix of propaganda.

In reply to by PrivetHedge

GreatUncle Quantify Mon, 04/09/2018 - 07:09 Permalink

Give me a FIAT printing press and I could be just as successful.

The point is ... I am not allowed to am I? Also those doing this are often no more than scum of the earth just hegemony and banksters rehypothecating debt to keep the world enslaved.

So taking the piss out of annoyed people calling them Marxist because they do not have a FIAT printing press is more ignorant IMHO.

 

In reply to by Quantify

Cloud9.5 Quantify Mon, 04/09/2018 - 08:41 Permalink

We here in fly over country have no problem with success.  We do have a problem when the third and fourth generation of inherited wealth uses their wealth and status to buy up the levers of power and shut off access to the political process to the rest of us.   The railroad interests and the captains of industry launched us on the road to international imperialism.  This process has been running full tilt for the last 150 years.  We have a full blown fascist state.  Nothing in it resembles capitalism and the existence of a free market.

In reply to by Quantify

uhland62 Mon, 04/09/2018 - 02:53 Permalink

They keep publishing this = old hat.

That's what the system is set up to do = make money through investing.

Those who have no money to invest = no make zhe profits. 

It's a distribution issue. Even when government manages something like German reunification, the land gets allocated to rich people (in France) not those whose ancestors toiled for it. The land is Prenzlauer Promenade 191 in Berlin.

Rich people own it now, my family was f1cked. 

TheEndIsNear Mon, 04/09/2018 - 03:18 Permalink

This article is bullshit. One million dollars is chicken feed these days. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the pyramid chart, but it must take a hell of a lot more than one million fiat US dollars to be in the top 1%. I live like a pauper and definitely am NOT in the upper 1%. 

Canadian Dirtlump TheEndIsNear Mon, 04/09/2018 - 03:43 Permalink

If you are one of the comparably fortunate to have some cheese saved then I would shut my face and realize what rare air you're in.

The information about how most westerners have next to nothing saved, and the stats showing the growth in employment has been dominated by people 55+ who should be retiring, clearly shows that there is a structural problem with savings.

If you have that kind of cheese saved then whether it was luck or not, at least have the self awareness to know you are in the minority and keep it quiet.

I'm a divorced dad, and despite being tagged a financial pack mule, my legacy position in a holding company comprising mostly of physical assets ( construction equipment ), as well as a healthy position in precious metals - I know that Im in a better place than are most Canadians.

If you have a cogently countable collection of assets anywhere near a million dollars, I'd be thankful, and quiet, while knowing the happy dance - and realizing most others are lost.

In reply to by TheEndIsNear

GreatUncle Canadian Dirtlump Mon, 04/09/2018 - 07:18 Permalink

+1 For calling out the insitutional savings route is worthless more so as the world has fallen into low growth where those investing the money demand more in fees than you will achieve through saving.

The system is NIRP, but even at ZIRP the last decade has destroyed the ability for people to retire.

If anything the snowflakes and millennials do not realise, those future job openings and promotions do not happen in a world of ZIRP and even more so when NIRP.

In reply to by Canadian Dirtlump

Atalanta Mon, 04/09/2018 - 03:48 Permalink

Lifted out of poverty. It is an old tactic used for animals. The useful, for human purpose, are called horse, cow, pig, and chicken, to name a few. Others are locked up in a zoo to be happy. Socialism introduced the road for humans to be happy and feed in time by the one percent, owning everything.   

War, like always, will be the useful slaughter period needed to control numbers.

PrivetHedge Atalanta Mon, 04/09/2018 - 06:14 Permalink

Socialism is the reality in Iran and it works when applied correctly.

You are correct however that in the west it's merely another prison tool.

Inequality is not a result of ‘technology’ and ‘education’- contemporary euphemisms for the ruling class cult of superiority – as liberals and conservative economists and journalists like to claim. Inequalities are a result of low wages, based on big profits, financial swindles, multi-trillion dollar public handouts and multi-billion-dollar tax evasion.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/how-billionaires-become-billionaires/5612…

Socialism - i.e. the working class forming unions and cooperatives are the only way to defeat the robber barons. Russia and China have the advantages of benevolent dictators, in the west we are the food for the ruling pharisees and our protections such as unions and pension funds are being stripped away: we are defenceless.

In reply to by Atalanta

SmittyinLA Mon, 04/09/2018 - 04:35 Permalink

That's why Able danger was killed, it revealed a little too much information, like the elite financing both sides of every war, and not paying taxes.

webmatex Mon, 04/09/2018 - 05:10 Permalink

They own it, they print it.

Why should you get some?

Sounds about right to me, if we don't want to own it ourselves we really can't expect them to give it away.

If we put it in their bank we know they can take it.

Stop whining and accept that we don't deserve their money.

 

Ghost who Walks Mon, 04/09/2018 - 05:46 Permalink

Maybe the projections of inequality will cause some changes? Its always easier to do the changes before it becomes all or nothing?

Most ZHers are familiar with Herb Stein's quote "If something cannot go on forever, it will stop," https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Stein

I found this link from the St Louis Fed https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2016/june/how-has-income-inequality-changed-years

and this quote on their findings;

Conclusion

The authors concluded that economists have found that, in 2013, income inequality reached its highest level since the 1920s. They wrote: “Understanding the facts about inequality is the first step in assessing what can and should be done.”

 

I do not believe that this inequality will continue as per the current trend. It is both economically and politically unsustainable.

PrivetHedge Mon, 04/09/2018 - 06:09 Permalink

This is a quality article on the subject

Contrary to the propaganda pushed by the business press, between 67% and 72% percent of corporations had zero tax liabilities after credits and exemptions … while their workers and employees paid between 25 – 30% in taxes. The rate for the minority of corporations, which paid any tax, was 14%.

According to the US Internal Revenue Service, billionaire tax evasion amounts to $458 billion dollars in lost public revenues every year – almost a trillion dollars every two years by this conservative estimate.

The largest US corporations sheltered over $2.5 trillion dollars in overseas tax havens where they paid no taxes or single digit tax rates.

Meanwhile US corporations in crisis received over $14.4 trillion dollars (Bloomberg claimed 12.8 trillion) in public bailout money, split between the US Treasury and the Federal Reserve, mostly from US tax payers, who are overwhelmingly workers, employees and pensioners.

The recipient bankers invested their interest-free or low interest US bailout funds and earned billions in profits, most resulting from mortgage foreclosures of working class households.

Through favorable legal rulings and illegal foreclosures, the bankers evicted 9.3 million families. Over 20 million individuals lost their properties, often due to illegal or fraudulent debts.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/how-billionaires-become-billionaires/5612…

It's a little blunt even for the cynical - but it seems a pretty good description of reality.

To Hell In A H… PrivetHedge Mon, 04/09/2018 - 06:23 Permalink

The dumb MAGA inspired Trumptards, will rile to the heavens about government mismanagement and poor spending, but when their beloved private sector robs the public purse, they are not so vociferous in there repeated condemnation. They will curse 100000x more at EBT card mum and her spending habits, than the top 1% owning 2/3rds of the world off our backs and the FIAT money scam. Such is the brainwashing to hate certain groups, instead of seeing the bigger picture.

In reply to by PrivetHedge

To Hell In A H… Mon, 04/09/2018 - 06:18 Permalink

It's the American way. Private good, public bad, is the brainwashing. Inequality? Pfftt.  How many reports have we all been subjected to, detailing the effects of Quantitative Easing? It has been the biggest transfer of wealth to the top, in the history of man and boy, has there been some plunders in the history of man.

This forum has been to preoccupied by the affairs of the Spic and the Dindu, to realise that a vastly more dangerous and formidable  adversary needs our undivided attention more. The world has been robbed and scalped by the Anglo-Zionist empire and they have spared no-one but themselves and Israel.

All the inheritance from previous generations have almost all but sold off into private hands. Who benefited from QE? Nobody on this fucking forum, I tell you that much. Freemoney to invest how I want and to speculate on ZIRP and NIRP? lol The plebs are subjected to Capital One and Payday loan rates and the plebs always give these policies their blessing. Why? "The problem with most Americans, is that they believe they are all millionaires, who have temporarily fallen on hard times"

So the American retards sanction these policies that benefit to super rich to their own detriment, in the fucking deluded belief, they too will benefit from these rules one day. Average IQ morons. Hence why I so strongly believe, if you do not have a 120+ IQ, you should not be allowed the fucking vote in a national election and if you are not above 110 IQ, you should not be allowed to vote in local/state elections. Bellow these IQ's is simply not smart enough, hence an acronym like MAGA, can inspire an electoral base. lol  How's the wall? Yeah, I thought so.

SJ158 Mon, 04/09/2018 - 06:42 Permalink

As long as purchasing power is created out of thin air, inequality will rise far above of what it would be considered healthty for a market economy. Unfortunately most analysts cant and/or dont want to grasp that simple fact.

BraceforImpact Mon, 04/09/2018 - 06:42 Permalink

I think one of the hardest moments of my life was realizing we never had to live like this,  we choose it. Every day, staring at screen, earning worthless and depreciating fiat currency by force, then making it to the weekend, where we celebrate making it through another week of something we either don't enjoy or doesn't pay well.

 

It's just hard knowing the cards are stacked against you and your family and friends.

 

Furthermore, there is no way out but total collapse. They don't teach you this in high school on purpose. You can't recognize a problem and fix it if you're completely unaware of it.

 

Hurts me knowing good,  kind, hard working people are getting screwed every single day, globally.

 

 

RedBaron616 Mon, 04/09/2018 - 07:14 Permalink

NO ONE knows what 2030 will hold. This is just an article to make everyone envious. Reports like this belong in the round file, aka the trash can. Quit spending every penny you make and save so you can have a future. I guarantee you that most on here complaining are eating out a lot instead of cooking at home. Buying new cars instead of used ones. Rich people didn't get rich by spending everything they made.