“The top 100 billionaires added $240 billion to their wealth in
2012—enough to end world poverty four times over.” This comes from an
international agency (Oxfam) working for equity in wealth in the world. Their
leaders aim to bring down global inequality to 1990 levels. They also report
that the riches one per cent has increased its income by 60% in the last 20
years with the financial crisis accelerating rather slowing the process. They
also say extreme wealth and income is not only unethical it is also
economically inefficient, politically corrosive, socially divisive and
environmentally destructive.
The Executive Director of Oxfam International, Jeremy Hobbs says
“We need a global new deal to reverse decades of increasing inequality…From tax
havens to weak employment laws, the richest benefit from a global economic
system so that it works in the interests of the whole of humanity rather than a
global elite.”
They also say that closing tax havens – which hold as much as $32
trillion or a third of all global wealth –- could yield an additional $189 bn
in additional tax revenues.
---
According to the Institution of
Mechanical Engineers based in England, about half the food produced in the
world is wasted.
---
---
Five different bills coming from four different states were
introduced this year to challenge the teaching of evolutionary biology and
global climate change. They all seem to stem from the Discovery Institute and
it “Teach the Controversy Campaign which seeks to discredit the teaching of
evolution and wants schools to teach creationism and intelligent design. That
is a slew of oxymorons. Go figure the antiscience thinking in our country.
After all these years we need more interdisciplinary discussions rather than
scientists, theologians, and social scientists just talking among themselves.
Or as is said in Christian Century “If
all truth comes from God, people of faith need not fear scientific research.”
The other disciplines need not fear theology either.
---
Finally why would they want to get rid of wrestling in the Olympics?
Is the marathon next?
I'm all for proper priorities for government. And I believe focusing on poverty is a proper one.
ReplyDeleteIf it is really only $240 billion, is that yearly? I will assume so. According to Hobbs' statement on "enough to end world poverty four times over", that means we could end world poverty by spending $60 billion a year.
It is easy to come up with the money for this, in the US alone. Pinpointing complete waste that could be eliminated, such as this $11 billion dollar handout would easily produce a total well over $60 billion.
And this could be done without any governments stealing any more from anyone. Just refocus the already vast, significant, and adequate existing resources (revenues) to the task.
Also, there is some hypocrisy here. The CEO of Oxfam America rakes in hundreds of thousands a year (a take that brings him a million every three years), making it a millionaire's charity: money from the rich and poor alike get paid to the charity to fund lavish excessive pay.
ReplyDeleteA commenter at Charity Navigator wisely says:
"I have been a long time donor to Oxfam because I believed in their work. I should have looked into their finanacial information sooner because I was not aware that they were paying their President so much money. It is way out of line. Organizations with similar missions, size and headquarter locations pay their people much less. These organizations include Partners in Health located in Boston (Exec Director is paid in the low $70K) and Doctors Without Borders located in NYC (Exec Directors is paid in the low $100K). Going forward, those organizations are going to get my donations."
Oxfam ranks a miserable 6.8% at Charity Navigator, which separates the real charities from the scams.
Another commenter said: "It would take 6250 years of my donations [two British pounds] to pay one year of the [Oxfam] CEO's salary. And I am on only 8.6% of his annual pay."
It's clear where their priorities are, and it is pretty low oh someone from a supposed "charity" that writes checks to make the rich richer to demand that the government steal from other rich people. That is real rich.
They would do well to follow the example of charities like this Habitat for Humanity organization
FYI, I have given a lot to charitable efforts working in poor third world countries. With focus paid to "boots on the ground" and personally knowing the people who help. The kind of real charitable efforts that don't involve the charity money going to make people in the top 1% even richer.
ReplyDelete