62 Have More $ Than Half The World

62 People Have More Wealth Than Half The World, Top 1% Have More Than Everyone Else

Submitted by Claire Bernish via TheAntiMedia.org,

Just 62 individuals now hold the same amount of wealth as 3.6 billion people, the bottom half of the entire planet — a shocking statistic made even more alarming when considering as recently as 2010, that same half of all wealth was held by 388 people. Now, 80 billionaires collectively hold over $2 trillion, while the bottom half has lost $1 trillion of their wealth — in just five years.

A new report published Monday by Oxfam International — tellingly titled, An Economy For The 1% — reveals a number of jaw-dropping figures that illustrate the struggles resultant from such an exponential increase in the stratification of wealth. According to the study:

“The global inequality crisis is reaching new extremes. The richest 1% now have more wealth than the rest of the world combined. Power and privilege is being used to skew the economic system to increase the gap between the richest and the rest. A global network of tax havens further enables the richest individuals to hide $7.6 trillion. The fight against poverty will not be won until the inequality crisis is tackled.”

In only five years, those 62 billionaires saw their wealth grow 44% — an increase of $542 billion — to a whopping $1.76 trillion. And, of course, the flip side of this concentration of money at the top meant “the wealth of the bottom half fell by just over a trillion dollars in the same period — a drop of 41%.” Half of all global wealth accrued just since the year 2000 ended up in the hands of the 1%, while the poorest half of the planet’s population split a meager 1% of that increase. In nearly 25 years, Oxfam further revealed, the income of the world’s poorest 10% has risen by less than a single cent per day — an increase of less than $3.00 each year.

On average, each adult belonging to the richest 1% on Earth has wealth totaling $1.7 million — a figure 300 times greater than the average held by 90% of people on the planet, “although for many people in the bottom 10 percent their wealth is zero or negative.”

But the poverty-fighting group doesn’t stop with simply listing figures; instead, Oxfam issued a scathing explanation of how such wealth and income disparities became reality.

“Far from trickling down, income and wealth are instead being sucked upwards at an alarming rate. Once there, an ever more elaborate system of tax havens and an industry of wealth managers ensures that it stays there, far from the reach of ordinary citizens and their governments. One recent estimate is that $7.6 trillion of individual wealth — more than the combined gross domestic product (GDP) of the U.K. and Germany — is currently held offshore […]

“Economic policy changes over the past 30 years — including deregulation, privatization, financial secrecy, and globalization, especially of finance — have supercharged the age-old ability of the rich and powerful to use their position to further concentrate their wealth […]

“A powerful example of an economic system that is rigged to work in the interests of the powerful is the global spider’s web of tax havens and the industry of tax avoidance, which has blossomed over recent decades. It has been given intellectual legitimacy by the dominant market fundamentalist world view that low taxes for rich individuals and companies are necessary to spur economic growth and are somehow good news for us all. The system is maintained by a highly paid, industrious bevy of professionals in the private banking, legal, accounting, and investment industries.”

Though there exist perfectly justifiable arguments for the elimination of taxation, in the meantime, these elites and über-rich individuals – and often their corporations – exploit the system for personal benefit in a way not possible for the rest of us. By throwing money into political campaigns, think tanks, lobbying firms, and other means of influence, the ultra-wealthy retain the ability to form policy by proxy. Both dark money and overt funding pressure politicians into legislating for the few. As Jared Bernstein of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities recently pointed out, “There’s this notion that the wealthy use their money to buy politicians; more accurately, it’s that they can buy policy, and specifically, tax policy.”

In fact, in an analysis of 200 top companies, including the World Economic Forum’s strategic partners, as well as picks from some of the world’s largest businesses, Oxfam found nine in ten “have a presence in at least one tax haven” — and with just 50 big banks managing the bulk of “offshore wealth,” havens are unbelievably lucrative. Tax avoidance, in creating strains on world governments’ ability to fund basic social programs — including those meant to aid society’s most vulnerable people — has been termed a “violation of international human rights law” by the International Bar Association.

One crucial finding in the report evidences the systemic disparity in pay between men and women around the globe — in particular, the “acceptability of paying women lower wages … cited as a key factor in increasing profitability.” Money-hungry companies avoid implementing vital fire and safety measures to eke out every possible ounce of profit. Employment of monopolies, intellectual property laws, and industry lobbyists further benefits the few at the expense of the majority.

“The current system did not come about by accident,” Oxfam’s report scolds. “[I]t is the result of deliberate policy choices, of our leaders listening to the 1% and their supporters rather than acting in the interests of the majority. It is time to reject this broken economic model.” Even further, Oxfam asserts, humanity can do better than this, we have the talent, the technology, and the imagination to build a much better world. We have the chance to build a more human economy, where the interests of the majority are put first.”

The question is, will we do it?

SERCO – Most Terrifying Company

Serco. The Biggest Terrifying Company You’ve Never Heard of

Chances are you’ve never heard of the company. If you have heard of the company, chances are you misunderstand the shear enormity of the global company and their contracts. From transport to air traffic control, getting your license in Canada, to running all 7 immigration detention centers in Australia, private prisons in the UK, military base presence, running nuclear arsenals, and running all state schools in Bradford, Serco, somewhere, has played a part in moving, educating, or detaining people.

New contracts awarded to Serco include a Saudi Railway Company, further air traffic control in the US and also IT support services for various European agencies. You can read more on their future projects here

serco

A Very Brief History

Serco’s history began in 1929 as a UK subsidiary, RCA Services Limited to support the cinema industry. In the 1960s the company made a leap into military contracts to maintain the UK Air Force base Ballistic Missile Early Warning System. From there, the company continues to grow. Now trading as Serco Group, 2015 trading as of August 11 2015, maintained a revenue of £3.5 billion, and an underlying trading profit of £90 million. The data was presented at JPMorgan in London.

In 2013 Serco was considered a potential risk, and became a representation of the dangers of outsourcing. The U.K. government developed contingency plans in case Serco went bankrupt. When the concerns came to light, Serco faced bans (along with G4S, another outsourcing contractor) from further bidding on new U.K. government work for six months. It wasn’t until Rupert Soames OBE – Sir Winston Churchill’s grandson – took on the job as Serco’s Chief Executive in 2014, that Serco turned a new corner of profit growth.

Serco Today

Serco today is one of the biggest global companies to exist. They have contracts with:

Alliant – the vehicle for IT services across the Federal IT market;

National Security Personnel System (NSPS) – For “(NSPS) training and facilitating services throughout the Department of Defense (DoD) and agencies that needs NSPS training and implementation services;”

Seaport – The NAVSEA SEAPORT Multiple Award contract focuses on “engineering, technical, and programmatic support services for the Warfare Centers.” This is inclusive of Homeland Security and Force Protection, Strategic Weapons Systems, and multiple warfare systems.

CIP-SP3 Services and Solutions (Cost $20 Billion, expiration date 2022) – biomedical-related IT services with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) with the main objective focused on Biomedical Research and Health Sciences extending to information systems throughout the federal government. Also implementation in several key areas of Biomedical Sciences including legislation and critical infrastructure protection.

The few contracts listed above are among the vast array of transport, detention center and private prison contracts.

Serco, the biggest company you’ve never heard of:

source:
theantimedia.org

Founder of WorldTruth.Tv and WomansVibe.com Eddie (6457 Posts)Eddie L. is the founder and owner of WorldTruth.TV. and Womansvibe.com. Both website are dedicated to educating and informing people with articles on powerful and concealed information from around the world. I have spent the last 36+ years researching Bible, History, Secret Societies, Symbolism and many other topics that are not reported by mainstream media.

Demilitarization of Californian Cops Begins

Demilitarization Begins? California Bill Blocks Police Getting Grenade Launchers, Tanks From Feds

Submitted by Cassius Methyl via TheAntiMedia.org,

A bill to stop the militarization of California police departments received final approval in the state legislature last Thursday. The bill is now on its way to the desk of Governor Jerry Brown.

A.B.36 establishes that California would “prohibit a local agency, other than a local law enforcement agency that is directly under the control of an elected officer, from applying to receive tactical surplus military equipment.”

It bans the transfer of “tracked armored vehicles, weaponized vehicles, firearms or ammunition greater than .50 caliber, grenade launchers, bayonets and camouflage uniforms.”

Introduced by Assemblywoman Nora Campos of San Jose, Assembly Bill 36 (A.B.36) — if enacted into law by the governor — will prevent the transfer of heavy duty weapons of war to local police departments.

Americans are increasingly concerned with the Pentagon’s now prevalent practice of arming local police departments with weapons of war, fromgrenade launchers to M-16 rifles and MRAP armored vehicles.

The bill specifically points out the dangers of police militarization, saying it would “declare that this is a matter of statewide concern.” 

Most military equipment given to local police departments is transferred via the Pentagon’s surplus 1033 program. Through it, the Pentagon donates heavy military weaponry and equipment to local police departments, government agencies, and even school districts.

The program incited alarm when schools received grenade launchers and collections of M-16 rifles. Those in question included the Los Angeles Unified School District’s police and police at the University of Louisiana, Monroe.

The controversies surrounding weapons transfers like these have chipped away at support for the 1033 program.

“Those are weapons for war, they are not for policing communities,” said Ray Robertson, an associate professor of criminal justice at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette — in reference to the University of Louisiana’s stockpile of twelve M-16 rifles.

The transfer of military weapons to local police is considered by many to be reckless as the policy raises the risk for abuse of power.  Assemblywoman Campos highlighted these concerns: “Due to recent events of police brutality, distrust between law enforcement and many of our communities remains at an all-time high,” she said. “Further exacerbating the issue is the recent militarization of law enforcement agencies and a movement away from community policing across the nation.”

The following examples from non-profit news organization The Marshall Project illustrate the scale of the weapons transfer program:

  • “Police in Johnston, R.I., with a population less than 29,000, acquired two bomb disposal robots, 10 tactical trucks, 35 assault rifles, more than 100 infrared gun sights and two pairs of footwear designed to protect against explosive mines. The Johnson police department has 67 sworn officers.
  • The parks division of Delaware’s Department of Natural Resources was given 20 M-16 rifles, while the fish and wildlife enforcement division obtained another 20 M-16s, plus eight M-14 rifles and ten .45-caliber automatic pistols.
  • Campus police at the University of Louisiana, Monroe, received 12 M-16s to help protect the 8,811 students there (or perhaps to keep them in line).
  • The warden service of Maine’s Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife received a small aircraft, 96 night vision goggles, 67 gun sights and seven M-14 rifles.”

Is it a good sign that California lawmakers are concerned about the 1033 program? Why does the Pentagon want to arm these police departments and organizations so heavily in the first place?