According to a Swiss bank report, the globe’s most wealthiest 1% own half the world’s wealth


The report also comes with a warning that the future children are unlikely to attain their parents’ levels of wealth.

The world’s wealthiest have seen their share of the globe’s total wealth go up from 42.5 percent in 2008 to 50.1 percent in 2017.

“According to our latest estimates, the top one percent own 50.1 percent of all household wealth in the world.”

“Global wealth inequality has certainly been high and rising in the post-crisis period,” the report continued.

Source: Credit Suisse

‎Corruption‬

You pay ‪taxes‬ and the billionairs pay nothing:


Companies get away with paying nothing while citizens pay for every dollar double taxes while earning their income paying taxes and while spending it.

Large companies paid no income tax in 2014, even though they reported a profit for the year according to USA Today.

That means there are a record 54 U.S. giant corporations that pay no taxes or are at least partially exempt. That’s more than twice the amount five years ago. Most of them actually got tax refunds.

We are talking about some of the biggest businesses in the nation. CBS Corp. (NYSE: CBS), which earned $1.8 billion in 2014, paid no federal tax, and received a $235 million tax refund. (If you look back at the last five years, one more Fortune 500 giant makes the list.General Electric Co. [NYSE: GE] made $33 billion from 2010–2014, paid no taxes, and received $1.4 billion in refunds.)

Let’s take a look at exactly which companies wriggled their way out of paying income taxes in 2014

S&P 500 CORPORATIONS THAT DON’T PAY INCOME TAXES

Company & Net income 2014

CBS Corp. (NYSE: CBS) $1.8 billion

Interpublic Group of Companies Inc. (NYSE: IPG) $365 million

Mattel Inc. (Nasdaq: MAT) $268 million

Owens Corning (NYSE: OC) $106 million

PG&E Corp. (NYSE: PCG) $1.84 billion

PEPCO Holdings Inc. (NYSE: POM) $406 million

Priceline Group Inc. (Nasdaq: PCLN) $73 million

Prudential Financial Inc. (NYSE: PRU) $3.49 billion

QUALCOMM Inc. (Nasdaq: QCOM) $3.21 billion

Ryder System Inc. (NYSE: R) $270 million

Time Warner Inc. (NYSE: TWX) $4.3 billion

Weyerhaeuser Co. (NYSE: WY) $960 million

Xerox Corp. (NYSE: XRX) $629 million

and many more.


Let’s take the money out the politics for the people

Confused about what the heck is going on out there with money in politics? Look no further! Your speed guide to the issue of money in politics is here!
Now including the legal framework!


Bribery of public officials and witnesses: Member of Congress, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner or an officer or employee

U.S. Code › Title 18 › Part I › Chapter 11 › § 201
18 U.S. Code § 201 — Bribery of public officials and witnesses
US Code
Notes


Authorities (CFR)
prev | next
(a) For the purpose of this section —
(1) the term “public official” means Member of Congress, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner, either before or after such official has qualified, or an officer or employee or person acting for or on behalf of the United States, or any department, agency or branch of Government thereof, including the District of Columbia, in any official function, under or by authority of any such department, agency, or branch of Government, or a juror;
(2) the term “person who has been selected to be a public official” means any person who has been nominated or appointed to be a public official, or has been officially informed that such person will be so nominated or appointed; and
(3) the term “official act” means any decision or action on any question, matter, cause, suit, proceeding or controversy, which may at any time be pending, or which may by law be brought before any public official, in such official’s official capacity, or in such official’s place of trust or profit.
(b) Whoever —
(1) directly or indirectly, corruptly gives, offers or promises anything of value to any public official or person who has been selected to be a public official, or offers or promises any public official or any person who has been selected to be a public official to give anything of value to any other person or entity, with intent —
(A) to influence any official act; or
(B) to influence such public official or person who has been selected to be a public official to commit or aid in committing, or collude in, or allow, any fraud, or make opportunity for the commission of any fraud, on the United States; or
(C) to induce such public official or such person who has been selected to be a public official to do or omit to do any act in violation of the lawful duty of such official or person;
(2) being a public official or person selected to be a public official, directly or indirectly, corruptly demands, seeks, receives, accepts, or agrees to receive or accept anything of value personally or for any other person or entity, in return for:
(A) being influenced in the performance of any official act;
(B) being influenced to commit or aid in committing, or to collude in, or allow, any fraud, or make opportunity for the commission of any fraud, on the United States; or
(C) being induced to do or omit to do any act in violation of the official duty of such official or person;
(3) directly or indirectly, corruptly gives, offers, or promises anything of value to any person, or offers or promises such person to give anything of value to any other person or entity, with intent to influence the testimony under oath or affirmation of such first-mentioned person as a witness upon a trial, hearing, or other proceeding, before any court, any committee of either House or both Houses of Congress, or any agency, commission, or officer authorized by the laws of the United States to hear evidence or take testimony, or with intent to influence such person to absent himself therefrom;
(4) directly or indirectly, corruptly demands, seeks, receives, accepts, or agrees to receive or accept anything of value personally or for any other person or entity in return for being influenced in testimony under oath or affirmation as a witness upon any such trial, hearing, or other proceeding, or in return for absenting himself therefrom;
shall be fined under this title or not more than three times the monetary equivalent of the thing of value, whichever is greater, or imprisoned for not more than fifteen years, or both, and may be disqualified from holding any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States.
(c) Whoever —
(1) otherwise than as provided by law for the proper discharge of official duty —
(A) directly or indirectly gives, offers, or promises anything of value to any public official, former public official, or person selected to be a public official, for or because of any official act performed or to be performed by such public official, former public official, or person selected to be a public official; or
(B) being a public official, former public official, or person selected to be a public official, otherwise than as provided by law for the proper discharge of official duty, directly or indirectly demands, seeks, receives, accepts, or agrees to receive or accept anything of value personally for or because of any official act performed or to be performed by such official or person;
(2) directly or indirectly, gives, offers, or promises anything of value to any person, for or because of the testimony under oath or affirmation given or to be given by such person as a witness upon a trial, hearing, or other proceeding, before any court, any committee of either House or both Houses of Congress, or any agency, commission, or officer authorized by the laws of the United States to hear evidence or take testimony, or for or because of such person’s absence therefrom;
(3) directly or indirectly, demands, seeks, receives, accepts, or agrees to receive or accept anything of value personally for or because of the testimony under oath or affirmation given or to be given by such person as a witness upon any such trial, hearing, or other proceeding, or for or because of such person’s absence therefrom;
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than two years, or both.
(d) Paragraphs (3) and (4) of subsection (b) and paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection (c) shall not be construed to prohibit the payment or receipt of witness fees provided by law, or the payment, by the party upon whose behalf a witness is called and receipt by a witness, of the reasonable cost of travel and subsistence incurred and the reasonable value of time lost in attendance at any such trial, hearing, or proceeding, or in the case of expert witnesses, a reasonable fee for time spent in the preparation of such opinion, and in appearing and testifying.
(e) The offenses and penalties prescribed in this section are separate from and in addition to those prescribed in sections 1503, 1504, and 1505 of this title.


Are corporations people?

No. Corporations are not people. “A corporation is a government-defined legal structure for doing business. A corporation is created and defined by state legislatures to advance what the state deems to be in the public interest.” For more information, see Jeff Clements’ book, Corporations Are Not People: Reclaiming Democracy from Big Money and Global Corporations.

How do we fix it?

We need a constitutional amendment declaring:
1) Money is not free speech; and
2) Corporations are not people.
We also need tough anti-corruption legislation that will plug the holes in our political system that an amendment might not catch.

How is that supposed to happen?

An amendment has to be passed by either a ⅔ vote of both houses of Congress or by a constitutional convention convened by the request of ⅔ of state legislatures. The amendment then has to be approved by ¾ of states. So far, 16 states have acted in support of a constitutional amendment to get money out of politics and 160 members of Congress support it too. An amendment is no longer a reformer’s pipe dream; it’s a viable solution to the problem.

What can I do?

We’re building a movement. If Congress isn’t going to do anything about this, we the people have to make ‘em. Politicians still need people to vote for them to win, and when enough people care about an issue and are willing to do something about it, it’s impossible to ignore. That’s why it is so important to help us build the movement to get money out of politics and to get involved. Public polling shows massive support across party lines for an amendment and for limits on campaign spending, so this is a fight we know we can win. Together, we can send a message loud and clear to our elected representatives that we demand change.
Get Campaign Updates

The problem with Congress

Money has always been a part of elections, but in recent years — and especially since the Citizens United decision in 2010 — campaign spending has exploded. The big problem, though, is that elections are now paid for by corporations and the super rich, and politicians do what the people who pay them want. (“Sorry, taxpayers.”)
Why? Because the candidate with the most money wins 94% of the time so politicians care a lot about getting their hands on the money. In 2012, over $7 billion dollars was spent in federal elections alone, and behind that spending was an army of 13,000 lobbyists and 90,000 Washington insiders in the business of influencing our government. When politicians have to pay more attention to them to get elected and stay in office, our government ceases to represent us. And that’s not how our democracy is supposed to work.

How money became free speech

The ruling that money is free speech comes from Buckley v. Valeo, a 1976 Supreme Court decision. Although the court upheld limits on direct contributions to prevent corruption or the appearance of corruption, they conceded that spending money to influence elections is protected speech under the First Amendment. Over the next three decades, several other decisions gave corporations more and more “rights” to political spending in elections, culminating in 2010’s Citizens United decision. Citizens United overturned court precedent by ruling that corporations, specifically, also have a First Amendment right to free speech, eliminating many remaining barriers to political spending. More recently, McCutcheon v. F.E.C, in 2014, overturned aggregate contribution limits, opening the floodgates for corporations and wealthy individuals to infect elections with even more money.

https://www.facebook.com/AMP1828