935
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works to c/world@lemmy.world

Fewer than 60,000 people – 0.001% of the world’s population – control three times as much wealth as the entire bottom half of humanity, according to a report that argues global inequality has reached such extremes that urgent action has become essential.

The authoritative World Inequality Report 2026, based on data compiled by 200 researchers, also found that the top 10% of income-earners earn more than the other 90% combined, while the poorest half captures less than 10% of total global earnings.

Wealth – the value of people’s assets – was even more concentrated than income, or earnings from work and investments, the report found, with the richest 10% of the world’s population owning 75% of wealth and the bottom half just 2%.

In almost every region, the top 1% was wealthier than the bottom 90% combined, the report found, with wealth inequality increasing rapidly around the world.

“The result is a world in which a tiny minority commands unprecedented financial power, while billions remain excluded from even basic economic stability,” the authors, led by Ricardo Gómez-Carrera of the Paris School of Economics, wrote.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] WanderWisley@lemmy.world 7 points 11 hours ago

Those puny little ants outnumber us 100 to 1. And if they ever figure that out, there goes our way of life!

[-] DylanMc6@lemmy.ml 3 points 9 hours ago

we need to organize. seriously!

[-] aeternum 3 points 10 hours ago

what's wrong with a billionaire having $1B worth of yachts, while the rest of us are struggling to feed ourselves? what's wrong with that?? (/s)

[-] PeacefulForest@lemmy.world 12 points 19 hours ago

The French Revolution was a massive uprising in France from 1789 to 1799, driven by anger over inequality, heavy taxes, and the extravagant lifestyle of King Louis XVI and Queen Marie Antoinette. The monarchy’s indifference to the suffering of ordinary people—while they lived in luxury—sparked outrage.

The revolution began with the storming of the Bastille, a symbol of royal tyranny, and led to radical changes: the monarchy was abolished, the king and queen were executed, and France became a republic. It was a chaotic time, with ideals of liberty and equality clashing against violence and instability.

In short, it was a dramatic lesson in what happens when leaders ignore the needs of their people.

It's gone from can't everyone just pay your fair share of taxes?

To can't we at least tax the rich?

How about just the 1%?

Ok..., how about just the 0.001%?

And then somehow conservatives leaders will convince a voter base to take to the streets with pitchforks and torches, claiming it's tyranny, then once they're elected, the leaders will still tax the fucking voter base.

[-] wheezy@lemmy.ml 19 points 1 day ago

I feel like numbers at this point just are pointless. It's like, can we use vocabulary that actually describes the situation instead of updating this every time the decimal point shifts?

Describing it in terms of wealth is kind of dumb. It gives the idea that the systems that caused this (Imperialism, colonialism, capitalism) are the solution. Like, the global South just needs "investment". The numbers are this bad because of a century of western "investment" in its exploitation the global South.

There isn't a number attached to this that somehow fixes the problem when we reach it. This is about what essentially amounts to slavery and subjugation of the majority of this planet. The language of these news articles is so passive. Like it's describing the amount of stars in the galaxy.

[-] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 110 points 1 day ago

Guillotines are surprisingly cheap to build.

[-] Sunflier@lemmy.world 21 points 1 day ago
[-] MisterFrog@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago

The implicit song here goes hard

[-] IronBird@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

.22lr even cheaper and less assembly required

Would need to be able to penetrate their thick skulls.

Maybe we should use a higher caliber bullet?

[-] jmf@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 11 hours ago

It penetrates and ricochets inside instead of exiting, makes for good brain jelly!

[-] Maeve@kbin.earth 62 points 1 day ago

Most of the world is capitalist, and most of the world is poor.

[-] QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 day ago

Yet fewer people are poor because we instituted capitalist policies. Moving away from mercantilism was a great idea and benefitted most to a greater degree than mercantilism provides. Now we need to move beyond capitalism to address the failures of capitalism.

[-] Zombie@feddit.uk 27 points 1 day ago

Because of capitalist policies or because of advancements in science, engineering, and medicine culminating around the same time that just happened to coincide with capitalism's birth?

Capitalism only benefits capitalists.

Fewer people are poor despite the capitalists, not because of.

Their giant hoards of wealth exemplify how many more could have been pulled out of poverty in the last 100-150 years.

[-] helvetpuli@sopuli.xyz 1 points 11 hours ago

The previous poster is more or less quoting Marx and Engles who praised capitalism in the same way and for the same things, while suggesting it was time for it to be superceded in the same way.

Now I know that not everybody has read their work, but you sound like somebody who might be interested.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Bonifratz@piefed.zip 10 points 1 day ago

Too much capitalism does not mean too many capitalists, but too few capitalists. (G. K. Chesterton)

[-] thatradomguy@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago

Remind me again how capitalism isn't the problem? lmao

[-] merc@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 hours ago

Do you think in feudal times things were better?

[-] hedge_lord@lemmy.world 33 points 1 day ago

This seems not conducive to the common wellbeing of humanity I think.

[-] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago

People might think that the extremity is a good thing as it will force change, which may be true, but realistically the world will be in for an extended period of conflict/war/suffering first and that period will probably last the rest of our lives.

Boomers hit that sweet spot. Now they get to check out as things are about to get real bad. Not that boomers everywhere in the world had it good. But a lot of them did.

[-] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 2 points 12 hours ago

If you aren't straight, white or a man you are already suffering.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Boomers hit that sweet spot.

American boomers, maybe. The 60s/70s was real shit for most of the Third World.

Much of our modern Economic Anxiety driving MAGA and the reactionary insanity of our foreign policy is these same Boomers being forced to live in a world that isn't just the car dealerships in Detroit commanding the global economy.

For the 90s Kids, life outside the US hasn't been this good in a century or more. Whether you're in Bogota, Berlin, Beijing, or Bankok, it's a time of unprecedented plenty.

The fact that America isn't this shining city on a hill anymore is what Trumpsters find so galling.

[-] morto@piefed.social 6 points 1 day ago

For the 90s Kids, life outside the US hasn’t been this good in a century or more. Whether you’re in Bogota, Berlin, Beijing, or Bankok, it’s a time of unprecedented plenty.

In some places, like south america, things have not been that great since the start of a wave of right wing governments rising, unfortunately...

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.works 29 points 1 day ago

The fact is money is relative. $100k USD is a lot of money in New Guinea and is not going to buy as much in London. This is why it is perfectly acceptable for someone like Thiel to assemble a private army with his wealth while people starve because they haven’t worked the grind correctly like Musk, Thiel or the Mountbatten-Windsors have /s.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago

You had me in the first half...

[-] nonentity@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 day ago

Financial obesity is an existential threat to any society that tolerates it, and needs to cease being celebrated, rewarded, and positioned as an aspirational goal.

Corporations are the only ‘persons’ which should be subjected to capital punishment, but billionaires should be euthanised through taxation.

[-] Mrkawfee@feddit.uk 38 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

60,000 is way to many. They need to be able to fit on a giga yacht.

[-] shittydwarf@piefed.social 15 points 1 day ago

And then we make an artificial reef out of it

[-] Lembot_0006@programming.dev 10 points 1 day ago

Some pressing and stomping and they will nicely fit to any rusted sea tanker.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] TomArrr@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

Suck on that 0.999% of the 1%!

[-] dangling_cat@piefed.blahaj.zone 10 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I started to feel that’s a mathematical issue, not an economic issue. Since the internet is a thing, a person’s influence and wealth can increase exponentially(benefiting from the networking effect aka power law), while the best tax law can do is still linear.

We need a tax law that grows exponentially. After certain points, it should collect almost 100% of the “controllable assets” (assets you can control, not necessarily owed).

But of course, we will never get it. People who have the will to climb the ladder tend to have less empathy for the masses, and they need to pay back to their stakeholders to help them get on top. It’s another paradox we need to deal with.

TBH the only thing that can fix humanity is extraterrestrial life lol.

[-] LwL@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

I would call it systemic, in fact I'd argue it's the central flaw of capitalism (but one that imo can be mostly fixed with heavy regulation and taxes scaling to near 100% as you say).

When wealth = power, those with wealth will always attract even more wealth.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] partofthevoice@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Does that mean, in a theoretical world where wealth is by all means easily distributed, you’ve got a mere 0.001% that could triple the per-individual wealth of half of the worlds population—if we just took theirs and passed it out?

I’ve heard philosophers say, it’s a figure of authority’s continuous responsibility to justify its existence. Given, wealth is influence and influence is authority, should we not audit cases where wealth is so concentrated and ask ourselves question like ”how is this contributing to the benefit of all?”

I’d.argue, we shouldn’t allow such concentration of wealth in the first place—meaning there should be a preventative plan that Just Works. This can be compatible with whatever else you want, free markets or not. Be it a stronger progressive tax or a cultural change toward worker collectives owning the means to production, there just shouldn’t be such wealthy entities.

The concentration on wealth leads to concentration of influence, meaning politics and media. We’ve had a shrinking number of independent major news organizations since the 1980s. A 1983 analysis showed that about 50 companies “controlled more than half” of U.S. media. Today, there are estimates of a handful of people owning the vast majority. Not to mention, they can apparently choose to purchase massive Social Media platforms (like Twitter) immediately before an election.

Right now, though, we have this problem where such silos already exist. They use their influence, vast as it is, to protect and enrich themselves—PACs, Super PACs, gratuities, lobbying firms, and more recently meme coins. All acting as a conduit to influence politics and legislation. We can’t make progress while these issues continue to stand in our way, can we? So, what do you do?

[-] lechekaflan@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

In the entire existence of humanity, class struggle still has yet to end.

[-] DarkAri 5 points 1 day ago

That's a crazy stat if true, maybe we should just tax those people.

[-] brachiosaurus@mander.xyz 5 points 1 day ago

One of these 0.001% is valve ceo that many here on lemmy praise.

[-] arendjr@programming.dev 5 points 1 day ago

Ah yes, because we should condemn people over a statistic, even when the things they do may actually warrant some praise.

[-] Jimjim@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

Its makes it sound like most people are lazy!

Wait.... most people are lazy... maybe thats why they arent successful?

/s btw...

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Ixoid@aussie.zone 2 points 1 day ago

Sorry to nitpick, but can someone pls explain how a specific subset of people collectively hold 3x(50% of humanities' wealth) - that totals 200% of a finite amount?

[-] mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

find the poorest 50% of the earth's population. determine their collective wealth

look at the wealthiest people on earth, and add them to a list from the top down, one by one. stop when you reach a collective wealth three times that of what you found for the poorest 50% of people. count how many uber wealthy people that was, and calculate what percentage of the population they are

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Grimy@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

Put a maximum net worth. Every dollar over it equals one punch to the kidneys.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Petter1@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 day ago

Just reject fiat and create your own 🤫

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 10 Dec 2025
935 points (100.0% liked)

World News

51245 readers
3039 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS