The Numbers sound alarming: 2.5 billion US-dollars are the super-rich in the past year, wealthy became per day. While their assets rose by twelve per cent, suffered losses in the poorer half of the world’s population of eleven percent.
This is the latest Oxfam report, the gap between the Poor and the rich, the joins every year just in time for the world economic forum (WEF) in Davos on large media echo. But the criticism is not quiet. The aid organization Oxfam and its methods are controversial. We will show whether this is justified.
1. Allegation: Oxfam is rampant in capitalism
The market-liberal Institute of Economic Affairs in London, accuses Oxfam, to authorize the capitalism demon. Other critics refer to the Agency as an anti-capitalist organization. Oxfam itself is not defined in such a way, but makes clear again and again that it considers the unequal distribution of wealth as an effect of the free market. To this allegation, something is off.
“There is no doubt that capitalism and economic growth can play a major role in helping people to lift themselves out of poverty,” explains Oxfam. You, however, wanted to ensure that the System offer is not just for some, but for all people.
2. Allegation: Oxfam ignored that more and more people escape from the poverty
Every day to create worldwide more than 137’000 people out of abject poverty. Max Roser, a researcher at the University of Oxford shows, on his Website OurWorldinData.org. Critics accuse Oxfam, to return to this positive development, under the carpet and only emphasize the Negative.
At this reproach is but little in it. In its Reports, the aid organization points regularly, that the most glaring Form of poverty goes back a total of – so also this time: “One of the great achievements of the last decades was the enormous decrease in the people living in extreme poverty.” However, they criticized that this Trend is slowing. According to the poverty report, the world Bank has halved the pace at which poverty declines, since 2013. In Parts of Africa is increasing, even.
3. Allegation: The data on poverty are not captured correctly, and Reiss and the only way to
simplified 26 people besässen as much as the poorer half of the world’s population, taken together, worked out for Oxfam this year. In 2017, the organization had spoken out of 8 of the richest, 2016 out of the 62 Richest. How can you come within a short period of time to such different results?
Oxfam used other data for the calculation of the assets of the poorest half. Although it pointed to the new method, the results but also as a fact or objective truth. Critics accuse the Agency, therefore, to capture the Figures on poverty correctly, and to simplify Reiss and the only way.
Especially you have to encounter the calculation method for the very poor population. This is based on the data of the “Global Wealth Report” by Credit Suisse. The Swiss Bank defines assets as the sum of private financial assets, Pension and assets such as real estate, however, less of the debt. This resulted in the Definition of poverty to derive, from the point of view of critics, is problematic.
The poorest people are to be attributed to the highly indebted but not poor.
the debt will be considered as a “negative assets”. A high school graduate of a Western industrial country, started a lucrative Job, but still tens of thousands of francs in debt from a student loan has, therefore, has less assets than a debt-free beggars in Bangladesh, may need to come up with $ 1.50 a day.
another example is A Swiss pensioner who has just taken out a small loan to buy a car. The pensioner has no house or other property, is he in the Oxfam calculation is poorer than a farmer in Burundi. Oxfam to expect the poorest people are highly indebted but not poor, say critics.
For the assets of the super-rich, the aid organization uses a different data source: the annual billionaire’s list of Forbes magazine. The Credit Suisse report, keep the critics for a comparison between Apples and pears. Some call in addition, the data-sources as not reliable. These were liable in part on estimates and, depending on the country – gap in official statistics.
“This changes nothing to the basic knowledge.”Oxfam
Oxfam has already responded two years ago to this allegation. With inaccurate values, the daily bread of the Statistician, wrote the organization in a statement. In the case of each opinion poll, Economic forecasts, and also in the calculation of the inflation rate to the appeals which, therefore, extrapolations, mathematical models, mean values and Extrapolation. Crucial for the correct and transparent application of such methods.
In this regard, is to blame for the Agency nothing. It uses, according to his own statement, the best available data bases, the same way that the International monetary Fund. Also in this year’s report, the organization indicates that the values are absolutely comparable with the results of previous years, as there could be minimal Changes to the methodology. She also emphasized that Credit Suisse would refer, in its “Global Wealth Report” itself to the data of the “Forbes”list as a source for the capital calculation of super. The two reports are therefore very well comparable.
the proportion of over-indebted people from industrial countries to the poorer half of the world’s population, Oxfam referred to as “not statistically relevant”. Even if one were to take the poorest tenth of the population of the world from the invoice (because there may be some heavily indebted people in General, rich countries were represented in this group disproportionately), change this nothing on the basic knowledge. Because it is the poorest ten percent would have a large influence on the total of the poorer 50 percent.
Even critics have noted that the unequal distribution of wealth worldwide is massive.
The Figures of the aid organization so to speak. They may not be exactly as they appear on the first Moment. But you describe a serious Problem, which no one doubts. Even vehement Oxfam critics have noted that the unequal distribution of wealth worldwide is massive.
Controversial certainly the media is how the organization prepared the Figures: effective and from the point of view of critics is exaggerated. From the point of view of Oxfam poverty moves in the world but only in this way, the focus of the Public.
*the Material of SDA (editor-in-Tamedia)
Created: 21.01.2019, 12:03 PM
