Forbes has released its annual World Billionaires list and a record 3,028 people control an ungodly amount of wealth. That’s 247 more billionaires than last year. In fact, they are worth £12.4 trillion – more than the GDP of every country in the world, other than the US and China (193 countries). And their net worth is £1.54 trillion more than a year ago.
That means, according to Oxfam figures, just 3,000 people (the 0.000036%) have more wealth than 99% of the planet – around eight billion people.
Billionaires: a bit ridiculous, surely
This set up is entirely undemocratic. One point to note is that most of a billionaires’ wealth is tied up in assets. For Elon Musk, his wealth largely derives from his ownership shares in companies like Tesla and SpaceX. At the same time, Musk can at any point sell such shares and literally have £262 billion in cash.
One way to address such grotesque inequality is for companies to transition to public-private partnerships. That’s once they reach a certain threshold of revenue and profit. Companies could reach different grades whereby once they become a certain size they have to meet certain social responsibility rules, they must pay all staff relative to profits and they must lower prices for consumers. This could keep a balance between social responsibility and the risk a company is taking. It would also mean that small businesses would still be viable as the scheme would not require them to pay staff as high wages.
A more radical way to address such inequality would be for much of the economy to be in the commons and to foster a culture where people work towards social good (while still being paid for their efforts). Figuring out what defines ‘social good’ in a world of different tastes might be more difficult to organise.
Cooperation versus competition
Still, like the publicly funded Research and Development (R&D) teams of the present, people could still work towards innovation and greater quality, but cooperatively rather than competitively. Or perhaps competitively between nations. An issue with that as an absolute is that some nations are a lot more resource rich than others. For example, while climate change demands we move away from oil, Saudi Arabia is the third richest country when it comes to resources. At the same time, it is the 48th largest country in terms of population.
Either way, it’s clear essentials like energy and water should be in public ownership. It’s a risk free investment for the government to make, because we know people will always need energy, water and other essentials. This delivers lower bills across the board for people and businesses. On top of that, the UK government in the 1960s and 70s made billions per year through its public utilities, which could then be reinvested.
Featured image via the Canary
