The past 12 years have been extremely good for the ultra-rich. The fortunes of billionaires — a group comprising the 2,640 wealthiest people on the planet, most of whom are men — has more than doubled. The wealth gap between the top 0.01 percent and the bottom half of the world’s population has increased by 50 percent since the 2008 global financial crisis.
The aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine have been particularly lucrative for the ultra-wealthy as they reaped an enormous windfall from pandemic-era stimulus packages and corporate welfare, raked in record profits by raising prices and blaming inflation, and benefited from decades of favorable policies.
A recent report by Oxfam found that the combined wealth of the world’s five richest people — Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Bernard Arnault, Larry Ellison and Warren Buffett — has more than doubled since 2020 to US$869 billion.
Illustration: Mountain People
At the same time, nearly 5 billion people, representing 60 percent of the world’s population, have become poorer. While global income inequality declined gradually, primarily due to rising incomes in China, inequality between countries has increased for the first time in decades, and inequality within most countries has increased, too.
Worryingly, a recent World Bank analysis has found that “the fight against poverty has stalled.”
Given the current trajectory of wealth distribution, the world could have its first trillionaire within a decade, while eradicating global poverty would take 230 years.
While such statistics might no longer be surprising, they should be alarming, for the trend they capture poses a grave threat to democratic governance. While rising inequality is rightly linked to tax policies and debt, we can no longer overlook the crucial role of corporate monopolies in transferring wealth from the working and middle classes to the top 0.1 percent.
In the 12 months up to June last year, 148 of the world’s largest firms earned nearly US$1.8 trillion in profits, a 52 percent increase from their average annual profits between 2018 and 2021.
Corporate gains have come at the expense of workers, as merely 0.4 percent of the world’s 1,600 most influential companies have publicly committed to paying and supporting a living wage.
Meanwhile, rich shareholders are receiving US$82 of every US$100 in profits through dividends and buybacks.
Dominant firms draw workers, consumers and smaller businesses into their orbit, with multinationals’ share of global profits quadrupling over the past 40 years of neoliberal orthodoxy.
According to a recent study by the IMF, the increase in monopoly power accounts for 76 percent of the decline in labor’s share of income in the US manufacturing sector over the second half of the 20th century.
In today’s highly concentrated world economy, the “Big Three” index funds — BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street — control more than US$20 trillion in assets. Even the late John Bogle, Vanguard’s founder, sounded the alarm about the Big Three’s dominance in 2018, warning of a future in which “a handful of giant institutional investors will one day hold voting control of virtually every large US corporation.”
During the original Gilded Age, monopolists such as John D. Rockefeller were synonymous with economic power. In the contemporary iteration, seven of the world’s 10 largest firms either have a billionaire chief executive officer or a billionaire as a principal shareholder, giving Rockefeller’s modern-day counterparts even greater influence over our political economies.
This extreme concentration of wealth and power is reminiscent of what late US Supreme Court justice William Douglas called an “industrial oligarchy,” whereby people’s fortunes are “dependent on the whim or caprice, the political prejudices, the emotional stability of a few self-appointed men.”
However, while this state of affairs might seem bleak, recent developments offer a glimmer of hope.
Consider the US. Since 2020, the top 0.1 percent of Americans, who own 13.9 percent of the country’s wealth, have become more than US$2 trillion richer than the poorest half of the population, which holds just 2.6 percent of the country’s wealth. The racial wealth gap is nearly as large as it was in 1950, with the typical white household owning six times as much as its black counterpart.
Meanwhile, as tens of millions of Americans struggle to make ends meet, hunger has increased to its highest level in nearly a decade.
However, the good news is that low-wage workers have experienced real-wage growth over the past three years and the wealth of the bottom 50 percent has slightly increased. Crucially, there has been a resurgence in labor action, with more than 460,000 workers going on strike last year — the second-highest number since 1986. Striking autoworkers, UPS drivers and Hollywood screenwriters have scored major victories over the past year, showing that progress is possible.
An economic paradigm shift appears to be under way within the US government, exemplified by a reinvigorated anti-monopoly movement.
US Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan and Jonathan Kanter, the head of the US Department of Justice’s antitrust division, have advanced a series of ambitious reforms, rewriting the lax merger guidelines that enabled corporations to amass unprecedented power, proposing a ban on non-compete clauses, and securing landmark victories for patients and consumers.
The commission’s antitrust lawsuit against Amazon, in particular, represents a powerful rebuke to industrial oligarchy.
To be sure, the decades-long dominance of neoliberalism — the handmaiden to soaring inequality in the US — will not be dismantled overnight. To get there, the US Congress must rein in outsize private power and pass legislation capping excess profits, guaranteeing living wages and safeguarding collective bargaining rights.
The US should not act in isolation. Brazil’s G20 presidency offers a unique opportunity to establish international cooperation to combat inequality.
Reimagining public action is vital to advancing this paradigm shift. As US President Joe Biden revives industrial policy, we must ensure that tax dollars are not used to subsidize corporate dominance.
Guarantees and public solutions that uphold people’s interests, such as universal family care and affordable housing, offer promising pathways from oligarchy.
Escaping the new Gilded Age might be a more daunting challenge than escaping the original one was, but as workers, regulators and organizers are showing, the fight against inequality can be won.
Nabil Ahmed is director of economic and racial justice of Oxfam America.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
A Chinese diplomat’s violent threat against Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi following her remarks on defending Taiwan marks a dangerous escalation in East Asian tensions, revealing Beijing’s growing intolerance for dissent and the fragility of regional diplomacy. Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) on Saturday posted a chilling message on X: “the dirty neck that sticks itself in must be cut off,” in reference to Takaichi’s remark to Japanese lawmakers that an attack on Taiwan could threaten Japan’s survival. The post, which was later deleted, was not an isolated outburst. Xue has also amplified other incendiary messages, including one suggesting
Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) on Saturday last week shared a news article on social media about Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s remarks on Taiwan, adding that “the dirty neck that sticks itself in must be cut off.” The previous day in the Japanese House of Representatives, Takaichi said that a Chinese attack on Taiwan could constitute “a situation threatening Japan’s survival,” a reference to a legal legal term introduced in 2015 that allows the prime minister to deploy the Japan Self-Defense Forces. The violent nature of Xue’s comments is notable in that it came from a diplomat,
Before 1945, the most widely spoken language in Taiwan was Tai-gi (also known as Taiwanese, Taiwanese Hokkien or Hoklo). However, due to almost a century of language repression policies, many Taiwanese believe that Tai-gi is at risk of disappearing. To understand this crisis, I interviewed academics and activists about Taiwan’s history of language repression, the major challenges of revitalizing Tai-gi and their policy recommendations. Although Taiwanese were pressured to speak Japanese when Taiwan became a Japanese colony in 1895, most managed to keep their heritage languages alive in their homes. However, starting in 1949, when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) enacted martial law
“Si ambulat loquitur tetrissitatque sicut anas, anas est” is, in customary international law, the three-part test of anatine ambulation, articulation and tetrissitation. And it is essential to Taiwan’s existence. Apocryphally, it can be traced as far back as Suetonius (蘇埃托尼烏斯) in late first-century Rome. Alas, Suetonius was only talking about ducks (anas). But this self-evident principle was codified as a four-part test at the Montevideo Convention in 1934, to which the United States is a party. Article One: “The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government;
RSS