5% population owns 95% wealth?

[flobadob]

Is this true and if so, why is there a financial problem? Surely the wealth could be dispersed more fairly.

[factor-fiction]

how would you do that? govts have tried to do this for years with progressive tax but the gap widens.

[Whickerman]

That figure could be true on a grand scale, I think in Western Europe the figure is somewhere like 20% owns 60%. In any case, what you're suggesting is socialism and is not the prevailing political or cultural system in this part of the world.

If you earn £20,000 a year, you are in the top 4% of the richest people on earth
http://www.globalrichlist.com/

Sooooo.... Should a figure, say £300 a week, be taken from a person earning £400 and distributed to the poor in the world? It'd still leave that person relatively wealthy, but it'd be impossible to survive with any quality of life

[David Black]

I think the real issue is only 5% of people save and 95% spend everything?

Complaining about people who save used to becalled socialism or is that theft?

[redcrx]

if they took everyones money and assets and shared then equally, it wouldnt take long before the money was back in the same hands again.

[squarebear]

"Surely the wealth could be dispersed more fairly. "

I doubt you would have the same attitude, if it was you who had the wealth.

Why not give some of your money to the people who doss around at home not even looking for work?

[jednbutter]

Every country in the world has a similar situation, its not a British issue its a world wide fact that in times of poverty the rich get richer.

[Twenty20]

Communism doesn't work. It never worked in the Soviet Union and it still doesn't work in China. The rich in China are very rich and the poor are extremely poor.

An awful lot of people work very hard to become wealthy (a minority don't). Why should they give away everything they've worked hard for to someone who can't be bothered to work?

[flobadob]

There are load of people who can't find work. It just seems that those who could afford to pay extra without it having any effect on their lives could do so, as that contribution would have a major effect on the poorest people's lives.

[shivvy]

I think this might be similar to the 80 20 rule. More info here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle

[joggerjayne]

Does it never occur to the whingers that of us who pay quite a lot of tax are actually the only ones paying for EVERYTHING in this country ...

Police, schools, hospitals, defence, social services ... WE are paying for them.

If we're talking about "fairness", maybe those of us who actually pay for the hospitals etc, should get first call on them when we need them !!!

[Whoever]

Somebody once made a very sarcastic comment to a well-off friend of mine because she'd made an expensive purchase, exclaiming "How the other half live !!"
She immediately responded with the comment "Yes, and you ought to see how the other half work too."

I think that sums it up. Many of those who got their wealth, started off with nothing when they left education and built it up over a lifetime of increasing their skills, working hard and saving or investing prudently. I don't see anything wrong with that.

What I do see wrong with it is that the government now wants to rob them, via a massive Capital Gains Tax increase, of profits they've made out of investments made with money which has already been taxed once at source when it was first earned.

If those people had spent their money on expensiveholidays, booge, cigarettes or an otherwise luxurious lifestyle until they were broke and then had to be subsidised by state benefits they would have been treated better. I don't see how on earth this country will ever flourish if those who invest their savings in shares or other investments are treated worse than those who blue them on the 3.30 at Cheltenham.

[sandyRoe]

All property is theft. In a fair society all would have enough for their needs.