Things to start remembering....Some facts on our 1%

Trichs

From the Bank Of Ireland Private Banking Update Report July 2007, The Wealth Of The Nation


"We estimate that the top 1% of the population holds 20% of the wealth, the top 2% holds 30% and the top 5% holds 40%. However, if we exclude the value of housing wealth and focus primarily on financial wealth, the concentration of wealth increases. In this instance, 1% of the population accounts for around 34% of the wealth."



http://www.finfacts.ie/biz10/WealthNationReportJuly07.pdf

DrumSteve

Trichs wrote: »

From the Bank Of Ireland Private Banking Update Report July 2007, The Wealth Of The Nation


"We estimate that the top 1% of the population holds 20% of the wealth, the top 2% holds 30% and the top 5% holds 40%. However, if we exclude the value of housing wealth and focus primarily on financial wealth, the concentration of wealth increases. In this instance, 1% of the population accounts for around 34% of the wealth."



http://www.finfacts.ie/biz10/WealthNationReportJuly07.pdf

And what's your opinion on this?

maccored

are people only realising now - in 2011, that this is the case? Its been like this for decades. why all the protesting now?

Sleepy

And what percentage of the wealth do those who've never generated any have?

antoobrien

Trichs wrote: »

From the Bank Of Ireland Private Banking Update Report July 2007, The Wealth Of The Nation


"We estimate that the top 1% of the population holds 20% of the wealth, the top 2% holds 30% and the top 5% holds 40%. However, if we exclude the value of housing wealth and focus primarily on financial wealth, the concentration of wealth increases. In this instance, 1% of the population accounts for around 34% of the wealth."



http://www.finfacts.ie/biz10/WealthNationReportJuly07.pdf

When you consider the amount of people earning €150,000 or more makes up less than 1% of the population (approx 0.9%), you're complaining about a group that contribute about 30% of the direct taxes generated by the country.

Talk about biting the hand that feeds....

Icepick

And your point is OP?
This is hardly news or surprising.

n97 mini

How dare those people work hard all their lives, innovate and generate employment! Who do they think they are! Let's screw the bastards with tax!:mad:

feicim

n97 mini wrote: »

How dare those people work hard all their lives, innovate and generate employment! Who do they think they are! Let's screw the bastards with tax!:mad:

Doesn't ireland have the lowest corporate tax rate in Europe @ 12.5% ? Its hardly getting screwed with tax is it?

Head The Wall

feicim wrote: »

Doesn't ireland have the lowest corporate tax rate in Europe @ 12.5% ? Its hardly getting screwed with tax is it?

OP is on about individuals not corporate entities

eire4

The figures are even worse in the US with the top 1% controlling 42% of the financial wealth.

marketty

12.5% of the planets have 71% of the mass
#OccupyJupiter

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

jhegarty

Trichs wrote: »

We estimate that the top 1% of the population holds 20% of the wealth

So 99% of the population own 80% of the assets.

Not so shocking that way.

Icepick

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

It's either very similar or inequality might have widened actually.
But it's hard to calculate it accurately with so many (rich) people moving assets abroad.

recedite

A lot of greed on display here, and these aren't even the rich people; just the wannabes. Don't try to tell me all that wealth was accumulated in one lifetime.
Does nobody see merit in the Warren Buffett's idea that every generation of kids should get a fair chance?

Buffett wrote:

I want to give my kids just enough so that they would feel that they could do anything, but not so much that they would feel like doing nothing

Self made (and self destructed) billionaires like Buffett and Quinn are rare exceptions.

antoobrien

recedite wrote: »

Don't try to tell me all that wealth was accumulated in one lifetime.

I'm just going to pick a few names off the Forbes rich list to show up the utter folly of that comment:
Bill Gates (microsoft) $56 bln
Larry Ellison (oracle) $39.5 bln
Larry Paige (google) $19.8 bln
Sergey Brin (google) $19.8 bln
Jeff Bezons (amazon) $18 bln
Michael Dell (dell) $14.6 bln
Steve Ballmer (microsoft) $14.5 bln
Mark Zuckerbuerg (anti privacy activistfacebook) $13.5 bln
Paul Allen (microsoft) $13bln
Robin Li (Baidu - china's answer to google) $9 bln

I've concentrated solely on the wealth of people in IT from the top 100. It's far easier to become "wealthy" now than it ever was at any time in human history.

Trying to paint people the wealthy as robber barrons is very naive - many of the people on that list simply were in the right place at the right time (several were college dropouts).

recedite wrote: »

Self made (and self destructed) billionaires like Buffett

Buffet hasn't self destructed, maybe you should rephrase that sentence.

recedite

antoobrien wrote: »

Buffet hasn't self destructed, maybe you should rephrase that sentence.

That bit referred to Quinn (the name you edited out of the quote)

All your examples refer to foreign pioneers/entrepreneurs of the internet, so obviously they made their money in the 1980's and 1990's.
The OP referred to Irish wealth and where it is concentrated.

antoobrien

recedite wrote: »

That bit referred to Quinn

I know, but the wording you chose was misleading and open to misinterpretation. It could be inferred from your sentence that both Buffet and Quin had self destructed.

recedite wrote: »

All your examples refer to foreign pioneers/entrepreneurs of the internet, so obviously they made their money in the 1980's and 1990's.
The OP referred to Irish wealth and where it is concentrated.

I could have gone for the like of Dennis O'Brien & Dermot Desmond for earnings in this lifetime but, since you saw fit to introduce Buffet the examples I chose are a bit more succinct.

Btw Zuckerberg didn't make his money in the 90s and 10 years ago Bill Gates was valued at $120 bln

Wibbs

recedite wrote: »

Does nobody see merit in the Warren Buffett's idea that every generation of kids should get a fair chance?

Buffett wrote:

I want to give my kids just enough so that they would feel that they could do anything, but not so much that they would feel like doing nothing

I'd be pretty sure his definition of "just enough" to "do anything" is high enough a figure that would have many left wingers wringing their hands and complaining about too much inheritance.

And plenty of people generate wealth in one generation. Never mind the billionaires, but among the lower levels of personal wealth too. I've known men and women that came from literally nothing, who worked and studied hard and became successful professionals and want their kids to have that opportunity and accumulated wealth while they're alive and after they're gone.

K-9

antoobrien wrote: »

I'm just going to pick a few names off the Forbes rich list to show up the utter folly of that comment:
Bill Gates (microsoft) $56 bln
Larry Ellison (oracle) $39.5 bln
Larry Paige (google) $19.8 bln
Sergey Brin (google) $19.8 bln
Jeff Bezons (amazon) $18 bln
Michael Dell (dell) $14.6 bln
Steve Ballmer (microsoft) $14.5 bln
Mark Zuckerbuerg (anti privacy activistfacebook) $13.5 bln
Paul Allen (microsoft) $13bln
Robin Li (Baidu - china's answer to google) $9 bln

I've concentrated solely on the wealth of people in IT from the top 100. It's far easier to become "wealthy" now than it ever was at any time in human history.

Trying to paint people the wealthy as robber barrons is very naive - many of the people on that list simply were in the right place at the right time (several were college dropouts).


Buffet hasn't self destructed, maybe you should rephrase that sentence.

Computers are really the new Industrial Revolution, the nouveau riche!

As for the 1%, the top 5% pay about 40-45% of the Income Taxes so they do generally pay their fair share. Many of the tax breaks have been closed or just aren't desirable anymore.

New rules were brought in that any incomes over 500k paid 20% minimum and that is now 30% on over 400k.

There just aren't as many filthy rich people about anymore:

Tax experts said the that figures from the Revenue last year showed that 3,000 people would earn more than €500,000.
Another 608 were expected to earn between €1m and €2m, with 188 people earning more than €2m.

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/high-earners-only-forced-to-pay-at-least-20pc-tax-on-income-2835589.html


The tax system needs to be careful as well. As left wing as I am I'd prefer wealth like that going on investments in wind farms, technology and R&D rather than punitive tax rates. This is where Government policy should be leading the way, like Urban Renewal did in the 90's. Encourage Investors to target growth areas with tax breaks, encouraging enterprise, investment and employment.



An extra couple of hundred of million in tax revenue might be far better invested in Green technology, R&D etc. than in the Public Sector and paying interest. Far better chance of getting extra employment.

recedite

20% or 30% is hardly punitive, and anyway, the likes of Denis O' Brien are classed as tax exiles, and pay no income tax at all in this country.

Wibbs wrote: »

I've known men and women that came from literally nothing.... and want their kids to have that opportunity

See what you are saying there...:)

K-9

recedite wrote: »

20% or 30% is hardly punitive, and anyway, the likes of Denis O' Brien are classed as tax exiles, and pay no income tax at all in this country.

That's why I said the country needs to be careful it doesn't start getting punitive.

Say we increase it to 50% above 100k, is the extra taxes worth the opportunity cost?

And as the top 5% pay 40-45% of the Income Taxes the 95% aren't getting that bad a deal!

I'd stop free 3rd level fees and childrens allowance for the 5% myself! Mighn't bring in as much but fairness is worth it!

nesf

K-9 wrote: »

Say we increase it to 50% above 100k, is the extra taxes worth the opportunity cost?

The marginal rate of tax up there is already over 50%.

K-9

nesf wrote: »

The marginal rate of tax up there is already over 50%.

Yeah and anymore raises will start putting it at German and Nordic rates, without the services and infrastructure for it.

Wibbs

recedite wrote: »

See what you are saying there...:)

Yes I am and I don't see why their kids need to be reset to year zero.

Bannasidhe

Wibbs wrote: »

Yes I am and I don't see why their kids need to be reset to year zero.

I don't think setting the clock back to zero in terms of not having everything handed to one on a plate is a bad thing. For various reasons I know a great many very, very wealthy people (including some from 'Royal' families). The vast majority of these 'trust fund' children I have met have no idea - and couldn't care less - about how the majority of people live. They exist in a world of spoilt privilege yet are generally disaffected moaners who pout and stamp their feet when they don't get their way. With few exceptions most behave like proto- Paris Hiltons. I honestly think one is not doing ones children any good when giving them the impression that they need never do an honest days work for an honest days pay, that the possession of money is a sign of superiority, that ones every whim must be indulged and that if one has enough money the ordinary rules of society can be ignored to a great extent.
As I said, I have met a few exceptions to the trust fund spoilt brat sterotype but sadly not many.

recedite

Nobody really wants to see their kids start from nothing and achieve great things. Great if it happens, but its a bit too risky.
People want their kids to get a quality education, and then go on to reach their full potential. The Nordic model aims to achieve that for all citizens, but it requires the most successful citizens to pay more into the system to fund that ideal.
The American model aims to maintain the ideal only for the offspring of those who fund it. We have been moving slowly in the direction of the American model during the last few years.

antoobrien

recedite wrote: »

The American model aims to maintain the ideal only for the offspring of those who fund it. We have been moving slowly in the direction of the American model during the last few years.

What free education & free 3rd level fees (without which I wouldn't have been able to get my degrees) don't count?

irish brit

e-petition

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/23916

Consider whether the Bank of Ireland is fit and proper to hold a UK banking licence and operate the UK Post Office savings business
Responsible department: Her Majesty's Treasury

The Irish Finance Ministry announced that it is considering using legislation to write down the savings of thousands of UK citizens invested in PIBS of Bristol & West Building Society, which was taken over by the Bank of Ireland in 1997, by up to 100%. The Irish Finance Minister has recently stated that the Bank is, if anything, over-capitalised and amongst the strongest capitalised banks in the world. There is no justification for the proposed confiscation of savings invested in the former Bristol & West PIBS. These investments should only be at risk once the ordinary and preference shareholders have been written down. In the case of the Bank of Ireland neither has happened. The UK government should consider whether the Bank of Ireland, being subject to such actions by the Irish government, is fit and proper to hold a UK banking licence or to conduct the savings business of such a trusted brand as the UK Post Office.

Godge

irish brit wrote: »

e-petition

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/23916

Consider whether the Bank of Ireland is fit and proper to hold a UK banking licence and operate the UK Post Office savings business
Responsible department: Her Majesty's Treasury

The Irish Finance Ministry announced that it is considering using legislation to write down the savings of thousands of UK citizens invested in PIBS of Bristol & West Building Society, which was taken over by the Bank of Ireland in 1997, by up to 100%. The Irish Finance Minister has recently stated that the Bank is, if anything, over-capitalised and amongst the strongest capitalised banks in the world. There is no justification for the proposed confiscation of savings invested in the former Bristol & West PIBS. These investments should only be at risk once the ordinary and preference shareholders have been written down. In the case of the Bank of Ireland neither has happened. The UK government should consider whether the Bank of Ireland, being subject to such actions by the Irish government, is fit and proper to hold a UK banking licence or to conduct the savings business of such a trusted brand as the UK Post Office.

Why would anyone in Ireland want to sign this petition? If successful, it would cost the Irish taxpayer more money on top of the money already poured into the banks.

And why is it posted here?

goose2005

recedite wrote: »

A lot of greed on display here, and these aren't even the rich people; just the wannabes. Don't try to tell me all that wealth was accumulated in one lifetime.

Most of the property elite came from moderately well-off farming or business backgrounds

n97 mini wrote: »

How dare those people work hard all their lives, innovate and generate employment! Who do they think they are! Let's screw the bastards with tax!:mad:

The problem is that Irish business leaders don't work hard, don't innovate and destroy employment.

K-9 wrote: »

That's why I said the country needs to be careful it doesn't start getting punitive.

Say we increase it to 50% above 100k, is the extra taxes worth the opportunity cost?

And as the top 5% pay 40-45% of the Income Taxes the 95% aren't getting that bad a deal!

I'd stop free 3rd level fees and childrens allowance for the 5% myself! Mighn't bring in as much but fairness is worth it!

Income tax only makes up a small portion of state income anyway; the poor still have to pay VAT, excise, tolls, car tax, TV license, etc etc.

K-9

goose2005 wrote: »

Most of the property elite came from moderately well-off farming or business backgrounds



The problem is that Irish business leaders don't work hard, don't innovate and destroy employment.



Income tax only makes up a small portion of state income anyway; the poor still have to pay VAT, excise, tolls, car tax, TV license, etc etc.

Fair point, the rich too.

It's an interesting point that gets missed in these debates, Ireland is a low direct tax country, high indirect taxes.

VAT receipts are down, maybe down to the end of the scrappage scheme. I don't think the poor were buying many cars. I've never seen to many reports on how it works. I assume its elastic for the wealthy and pretty inelastic for poorer sections.

irish brit

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-24014373-bank-of-ireland-used-post-office-savings-of-22-million-people-to-prop-itself-up-during-credit-crunch.do