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.
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.
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.
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and Engles who praised capitalism in the same way and for the same things, while suggesting it was time for it to be superceded in the same way.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.
Because directing more wealth away from feudal authorities/noble families to private individuals was good for increasing wealth distribution. This happened at different times in different places.
Nah, it can benefit the rank and file provided the wealth was poorly distributed before by creating more jobs. This is exactly what happened when it was adopted by most nations in the 19th century.
China’s for-profit business investments in Africa since 2000 are an example if capitalist policies bringing people out of poverty. Im not sure your claim has the validity you think it does.