It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

China only trails U.S. in billionaires

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Janky Red

Originally posted by Dermo


China only trails U.S. in billionaires




To be fair as well, if they have a similar amount of Billionaires as the US and their GDP is only just bigger than Germany's..

That is a ridiculous amount of wealth in the hands of such a few.

It doesn't bode well for China as a society in the near future.


Sure it does...

Become like America

then they will start out sourcing EVERYTHING and REALLY become like the US


I'm sure a Chinese billionaire cant say: "I'm gonna take a million yen and start something in another country." They're communists over there. So there has to be some government regulation. So in truth... they dont have real billionaires. They cant be the same as US businessmen that can do whatever they want with their money.

Thats just what I think, I dont know exactly how the system works for them. That being said, why cant the Chinese have billionaires?




posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 06:19 PM
link   
I wonder what the numbers would be if they took those Billions and spread it amongst the 1.6 Billion people. What would that break down to? Like $25.00 per person?



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 08:00 PM
link   
reply to post by 3vilscript
 


I understand your logic, but it isn't true communism anymore. I think it is a type of socialism combined with capitalism. It is clear to see that China has taken a steep turn towards consumerism, and with it arise the elite few who make all the money, when the average person slaves away for the corporations.

I am also being accused of being anti-Chinese, and more. This is about the corruption of industries, countries and the evidence are the billionaires who are living in luxury, when millions are starving, or are on the verge of starvation. How can anyone justify the separation of classes? That is what Democracy sought to prevent.

The dichotomy of the rules the elite and the common people abide by is also evident everywhere you look. Why is it only natural for there to be poor people? Poverty only began to emerge with sedentary lifestyles and the social structures that grew up around it. It is NOT a natural facet of Human development, and that is what I keep seeing that you and a number of others are defending.

Accept poverty? Never. Accept a world where elites who haven't a care for the little people make all the decisions that impact our lives? Not on your life.

If you see these current events as perfectly natural, and acceptable, then you really should at least think about the deeper implications as to why a movie star can have coc aine, beer, weed, in their vehicle, get pulled over and get a slap on the wrist. When the average person will go away for a long time for far less than that.

These are just further symptoms of the social inequalities we face every day, and I see many here defending things as they are. No wonder things have gotten so bad. Read 1984 or watch the movie and see for yourself, we are being used to enslave ourselves.

I don't expect you to agree, make up your own minds, please. Just try to look at this from a different perspective. Our way of life is in jeopardy, and the easiest way to let it happen is to believe that the rich earn their wealth like everyone else. They do so at our expense and contribute scraps to society that they wouldn't even give to their dogs.

This is pre-revolution France all over again, and acceptance of the current social paradigm is suicide. All I ask, if you think this thread is a waste of time, then please don't waste it, but feel free to respond.

[edit on 24-10-2009 by GideonHM]



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3vilscript

Originally posted by Janky Red

Originally posted by Dermo


China only trails U.S. in billionaires




To be fair as well, if they have a similar amount of Billionaires as the US and their GDP is only just bigger than Germany's..

That is a ridiculous amount of wealth in the hands of such a few.

It doesn't bode well for China as a society in the near future.


Sure it does...

Become like America

then they will start out sourcing EVERYTHING and REALLY become like the US


I'm sure a Chinese billionaire cant say: "I'm gonna take a million yen and start something in another country." They're communists over there. So there has to be some government regulation. So in truth... they dont have real billionaires. They cant be the same as US businessmen that can do whatever they want with their money.

Thats just what I think, I dont know exactly how the system works for them. That being said, why cant the Chinese have billionaires?


My point is the reason China has Billionaires (now) is because US industries have been shipping many sectors overseas, China especially. Yes and Hopefully for the China's sake they are not allowed to act like US business interests. In recent times America has
created great multitudes of wealth - for Ceos, share holders and CHINESE BILLIONAIRES.

In my life time we will see mutli Trillionaires and then we will all know America has been blessed with good fortune.

GO TEAM!



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 08:07 PM
link   
reply to post by darkwing81
 


I think it is more like 260 dollars per person, U.S. currency, most likely. Still the super rich sit at the top of the pyramid structure of society and are bleeding everyone dry.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 08:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by darkwing81
I wonder what the numbers would be if they took those Billions and spread it amongst the 1.6 Billion people. What would that break down to? Like $25.00 per person?


YA



RANK NAME NET WORTH ($MIL) AGE RESIDENCE SOURCE
1 William Gates III 50,000 53 Medina Microsoft
2 Warren Buffett 40,000 79 Omaha Berkshire Hathaway
3 Lawrence Ellison 27,000 65 Redwood City Oracle
4 Christy Walton & family 21,500 54 Jackson Wal-Mart
5 Jim C. Walton 19,600 61 Bentonville Wal-Mart
6 Alice Walton 19,300 60 Fort Worth Wal-Mart
7 S. Robson Walton 19,000 65 Bentonville Wal-Mart
8 Michael Bloomberg 17,500 67 New York Bloomberg
9 Charles Koch 16,000 73 Wichita manufacturing, energy
9 David Koch 16,000 69 New York manufacturing, energy
11 Sergey Brin 15,300 36 Palo Alto Google
11 Larry Page 15,300 36 San Francisco Google
13 Michael Dell 14,500 44 Austin Dell
14 Steven Ballmer 13,300 53 Seattle Microsoft
15 George Soros 13,000 79 Westchester hedge funds
16 Donald Bren 12,000 77 Newport Beach real estate
17 Paul Allen 11,500 56 Mercer Island Microsoft, investments
17 Abigail Johnson 11,500 47 Boston Fidelity
19 Forrest Edward Mars 11,000 78 McLean candy, pet food
19 John Mars 11,000 73 Arlington candy, pet food
19 Jacqueline Mars 11,000 70 Bedminster candy, pet food


www.forbes.com...

x's 1,000,000 of course

Wanna see what that split is amongst 330,000,000 million?

[edit on 24-10-2009 by Janky Red]



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Janky Red
 


Trickle down economics hard at work!


Thanks! Glad you posted the list.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 08:41 PM
link   


I am also being accused of being anti-Chinese, and more. This is about the corruption of industries, countries and the evidence are the billionaires who are living in luxury, when millions are starving, or are on the verge of starvation. How can anyone justify the separation of classes? That is what Democracy sought to prevent.


When in the history of the world has this not been the case?




The dichotomy of the rules the elite and the common people abide by is also evident everywhere you look. Why is it only natural for there to be poor people? Poverty only began to emerge with sedentary lifestyles and the social structures that grew up around it. It is NOT a natural facet of Human development, and that is what I keep seeing that you and a number of others are defending.


Poverty began when people started thinking that others could do their work for them for a small price. Maybe food, or gold, or land. In essence poverty began when we stated giving obejects value.




Accept poverty? Never. Accept a world where elites who haven't a care for the little people make all the decisions that impact our lives? Not on your life.


Well I didn't mean it like that. Maybe you live better than me, who knows. I meant that accept the fact that poverty will always exist in our world.




If you see these current events as perfectly natural, and acceptable, then you really should at least think about the deeper implications as to why a movie star can have coc aine, beer, weed, in their vehicle, get pulled over and get a slap on the wrist. When the average person will go away for a long time for far less than that.


Its obvious that its because they have more money than the average person. But when has this not been the case? Our founding Fathers are considered almost divine and they owned slaves. They probably whipped and raped some of them.




These are just further symptoms of the social inequalities we face every day, and I see many here defending things as they are. No wonder things have gotten so bad. Read 1984 or watch the movie and see for yourself, we are being used to enslave ourselves.


I agree with you, and I don't defend it. I simply dont think that being, scarred and outraged contributes to changing anything. In fact I dont think anything can be changed. Maybe I'm a realist, or too much of a cynic. I think we have always been slaves. They just tells us we're not and we believe them.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by 3vilscript
 


Great post!

You have to try to make a difference. What is the quote?

"Evil prevails when good men do nothing."

As long as one person cares, there is hope. Period.

Give up now, and it wastes everything.

P.S. I am a starving college student. No oil exec here.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 10:13 PM
link   
reply to post by GideonHM
 


I mean no disrespect, but we really need more basic economics taught to our people. The concept that the rich become wealthy only by stealing money from the have nots is completely false and is simply propaganda used by communists to advance their agenda.

Wealth creation is not a closed sum game. In modern societies wealth is often created by innovation. You create a service or product that improves the life and productivity of your customers. As an example if you buy a top of the line Intel microprocessor you might pay close to $1000. This processor is worth far more than the sum of it's parts, which is largely a small amount of copper and silicon, found in abundance in sand.

The worthless sand has become more valuable than gold, because of it's utility in our technological society. The value was created through innovation, it was not stolen from anyone.

China is creating billionaires because it has a robust technology that are creating products that the entire world is consuming. It is true that there has been an unprecedented transfer of wealth and technology to China from the West, with the collusion of our corrupt leaders, but their wealth is legitimate inasmuch as it's producing something of value.

The US has many billionaires because they too, at one time were producers in the world. That productivity is being deliberately destroyed, but that is another story.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by SevenThunders
 



The China Hype

Despite an impressive rebound, an innovation shortfall may hobble sustainable growth

By Beijing's own admission, the economic model that has powered China for three decades can no longer be counted on to move it forward. The mainland has prospered largely through construction and by exporting all manner of consumer goods churned out in low-wage factories; workers parked their savings in state-run banks, which then loaned the money to companies to make more stuff.

But technology and managerial knowhow came mostly from multinationals, and the costs—pollution, decaying social services, and a yawning gap between the urban rich and rural poor—were largely ignored. Though that model has fueled phenomenal growth, Hu and others now call it "unbalanced" and "unsustainable."



NO INCUBATOR OF INNOVATION

China has a long way to go, though, in innovation. The mainland has dramatically boosted research spending and boasts the world's biggest pool of science and engineering graduates. But aside from Internet games, the country creates few breakthrough products, due in no small measure to the perennial problem of rampant counterfeiting. China last year exported $416 billion worth of high-tech goods.

But subtract the mainland operations of Taiwanese contract manufacturers and the likes of Nokia (NOK), Samsung, and Hewlett-Packard (HPQ), and China is an electronics lightweight. Beyond Tsingtao beer and low-end Haier refrigerators, "China has zilch brand presence in the U.S.," says Kenneth J. DeWoskin, director of the China Research & Insight Center at Deloitte & Touche. Instead, most mainland companies mine existing technologies and compete on high volume and low cost in commodity goods.


www.skykasper.com...

Bogus data?
China’s data are suspect, to say the least. For instance, the government there considered loans issued to companies by the government as part of the GDP. In other words, billions and billions of dollars worth of stimulus loans suddenly helped to bump up China’s GDP. This questionable way with statistics creates a false image of growth.

Another example of why we should question the extent of China’s “recovery” can be measured by power consumption. When the GDP growth for the first six months was announced, the Chinese also said that overall electricity consumption dropped sharply. How can you have a boom time in manufacturing without using electricity?



posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 12:35 AM
link   


"Evil prevails when good men do nothing."


Hope is the only thing I have left. But that isn't going to make things better. But I suppose you're right in part.




I mean no disrespect, but we really need more basic economics taught to our people. The concept that the rich become wealthy only by stealing money from the have nots is completely false and is simply propaganda used by communists to advance their agenda.


Voicing one's opinion is no disrespect. I don't agree with what you say though. The rich don't become wealthy "only" by stealing from the poor, they have some skills at numbers and economic strategy. The majority however have taken advantage of many people to get to their positions. It's not communist propaganda. The idea that it is, is either religious or western political propaganda. Communism is just a word used to scare people, like 9/11 and gay marriage.

Don't be fooled brother, Communism never made it past the Manifesto.



posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 01:32 AM
link   
reply to post by 3vilscript
 


Yeah, I certainly see your perspective.

I'm just severely depressed over current social, environmental, and world events in general. I don't see the lone ranger anywhere, and superman and batman are busy as well, it seems.

I feel it is almost as hopeless as you do. This sucks.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join