World's eight richest people have same wealth as poorest 50%

The world’s eight richest billionaires control the same wealth between them as the poorest half of the globe’s population, according to a charity warning of an ever-increasing and dangerous concentration of wealth.

In a report published to coincide with the start of the week-long World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Oxfam said it was “beyond grotesque” that a handful of rich men headed by the Microsoft founder Bill Gates are worth $426bn (£350bn), equivalent to the wealth of 3.6 billion people.

The development charity called for a new economic model to reverse an inequality trend that it said helped to explain Brexit and Donald Trump’s victory in the US presidential election.

Oxfam blamed rising inequality on aggressive wage restraint, tax dodging and the squeezing of producers by companies, adding that businesses were too focused on delivering ever-higher returns to wealthy owners and top executives.

The World Economic Forum (WEF) said last week that rising inequality and social polarisation posed two of the biggest risks to the global economy in 2017 and could result in the rolling back of globalisation.

Oxfam said the world’s poorest 50% owned the same in assets as the $426bn owned by a group headed by Gates, Amancio Ortega, the founder of the Spanish fashion chain Zara, and Warren Buffett, the renowned investor and chief executive of Berkshire Hathaway.

The others are Carlos Slim Helú: the Mexican telecoms tycoon and owner of conglomerate Grupo Carso; Jeff Bezos: the founder of Amazon; Mark Zuckerberg: the founder of Facebook; Larry Ellison, chief executive of US tech firm Oracle; and Michael Bloomberg; a former mayor of New York and founder and owner of the Bloomberg news and financial information service.

Last year, Oxfam said the world’s 62 richest billionaires were as wealthy as half the world’s population. However, the number has dropped to eight in 2017 because new information shows that poverty in China and India is worse than previously thought, making the bottom 50% even worse off and widening the gap between rich and poor.

With members of the forum due to arrive on Monday in Switzerland, where guests will range from the Chinese president Xi Jinping, to pop star Shakira, the WEF released its own inclusive growth and development report in which it said median income had fallen by an average of 2.4% between 2008 and 2013 across 26 advanced nations.

Norway, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Iceland and Denmark filled the top five places in the WEF’s inclusive development index, with Britain 21st and the US 23rd. The body that organises the Davos event said rising inequality was not an “iron law of capitalism”, but a matter of making the right policy choices.

The WEF report found that 51% of the 103 countries for which data was available saw their inclusive development index scores decline over the past five years, “attesting to the legitimacy of public concern and the challenge facing policymakers regarding the difficulty of translating economic growth into broad social progress”.

Basing its research on the Forbes rich list and data provided by investment bank Credit Suisse, Oxfam said

the vast majority of people in the bottom half of the world’s population were facing a daily struggle to survive, with 70% of them living in low-income countries.

It was four years since the WEF had first identified inequality as a threat to social stability, but that the gap between rich and poor has continued to widen, Oxfam added.

“From Brexit to the success of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, a worrying rise in racism and the widespread disillusionment with mainstream politics, there are increasing signs that more and more people in rich countries are no longer willing to tolerate the status quo,” the report said.

The charity said new information had shown that poor people in China and India owned even fewer assets than previously thought, making the wealth gap more pronounced than it thought a year ago, when it announced that 62 billionaires owned the same wealth as the poorest half of the global population.

Mark Goldring, chief executive of Oxfam GB, said: “This year’s snapshot of inequality is clearer, more accurate and more shocking than ever before. It is beyond grotesque that a group of men who could easily fit in a single golf buggy own more than the poorest half of humanity.

“While one in nine people on the planet will go to bed hungry tonight, a small handful of billionaires have so much wealth they would need several lifetimes to spend it. The fact that a super-rich elite are able to prosper at the expense of the rest of us at home and overseas shows how warped our economy has become.”

Other urls found in this thread:

Mark Littlewood, director general at the Institute of Economic Affairs thinktank, said: “Once again Oxfam have come out with a report that demonises capitalism, conveniently skimming over the fact that free markets have helped over 100 million people rise out of poverty in the last year alone.”

The Oxfam report added that since 2015 the richest 1% has owned more wealth than the rest of the planet. It said that over the next 20 years, 500 people will hand over $2.1tn to their heirs – a sum larger than the annual GDP of India, a country with 1.3 billion people. Between 1988 and 2011 the incomes of the poorest 10% increased by just $65, while the incomes of the richest 1% grew by $11,800 – 182 times as much.

Oxfam called for fundamental change to ensure that economies worked for everyone, not just “a muh privileged few”.


How much ideology do you have to be on to believe that the goal of Oxfam which releases its reports to please what's often called the Davo's class (super-rich banking elite) is out to demonize capitalism?

Must be hard working 875.000.000 times harder and smarter than the rest of us :^)

8 people = 3.5 billion people

we are going to take your shit and kill you, bucko

Hey, if the poor Africans in the slums of the Central African Republic would just apply themselves and learn Basic Economics, they too could achieve such wealth!



Thanks porky for making the revolution sooner.

How does anyone think capitalism is ok after hearing that. News in my country covered this with a "just stop tax evasion and it'll be ok" angle.

I mean who cares about human trafficking, imperialism, war, etc, victims. They should just learn how to invest properly. It's their own fault really.


If only someone can gas the Rothschild and take all their wealth.

Did you know that the total amount paid in Wall Street bonuses was double the combined earnings of all full time minimum wage employees in the US? Shits fucked fellas.



It was 62 people who had that much wealth, shit is getting even worse

We neo-feudalism now

Next time when someone says feudalism evolves into capitalism, smack them right in the head.

It's the same shit.



The trickle down shit is so stupid I am amused anyone can actually believe it without lobotomizing themselves first

What are the odds that one of them has cloned themselves or built a robot body to inhabit, so they can keep exploiting people forever?

Ask the Rothschild, they are a very large family.

David Rockefeller had 7 heart transplants



8 people! 8 Fucking people! Goddamn I just did a report about income and wealth inequality in early november for my macro class and it's already grossly inaccurate. What the ever loving fuck!

Eight people is a very easy number of people to merk

Class war when?

This is good, it'll encourage poor people to work harder so they can be just as successful

They are all just lazy and stupid and drug addicts and alcoholics,they deserved it :^)
Why should the evil state steal MY money to give to people who do not work

Ring that webm with of a news show where a fat rich fuck says it's a good thing that wealth inequality is so bad because it will make people work harder because they want to be like him

You got some cocaine on your nose, might want to brush that off before someone notices

They earned it because they worked 450 millions times harder than those lazy bums. That's just basic economics.

Damn they are really ramping it up aren't they. Wasnt it 68 a few months ago?


What's the Jew/Goy breakdown?

Fuck off Asser.


Can't point out the real muh privilege I suppose. You will NEVER get to where you want to without resolving the JQ, this is not a wind up, It's bizare people cannot see it.
There is a reason the party members were all taking over property that was not Jewish, it's why communism in America is DOA unless this issue is confronted.

when do we start killing porkies

When the next crisis hits. Should happen in about 1 to 2 years.



Thanks comrade

And more fuel on the fire that webm was talking about the richest 85 and now it's 8

Have another good one

Kevin O’Leary? He might be Canada's Trump




This webm made me a socialist

O'leary would never promise to roll back free trade or have even the most transparent sympathy for the working class, he's an unapologetic fiend.

Charlie Munger can suck in and cope with a bullet to the forehead.

Jesus Christ, this guy shouldn't be hanged, he needs to be strapped down and given the blood eagle.

eat the rich, too much meat would go to waste.



Nothing boils my blood like thinktanks. Look them up, look nearly all of them up and they exist to promote free-market ideology. The IFS was created purely out of rage at Harold Wilson introducing corporation tax.

There is nothing on this earth that annoys me more than the collapse of postwar Keynesianism. Sure, it was capitalism, sure, it was inherently exploitative. I don't care. It's the best capitalism has ever been - it had to be - and they destroyed it. They tore it apart using memetics and lies.

Cost-Pull inflation from Saudi Oil jiggery and the crazy end of capital controls (which really, was the beginning of the end anyway. impose capital controls and you naturally limit the ability of the obscenely wealthy to overtake the entire planet.) lead to stagflation, and then Friedmanite ideology is pushed to get rid of it. The cure for the disease is more of the disease. Cure inflation with mass unemployment, this is what's efficient. Madness.

Thatcher failed on inflation. It was higher when she left power than when she obtained it. Lasting low inflation came only in the 90s after the collapse of the USSR. (And I'll admit I'm not quite well read enough to understand why it did eventually fall. My wager is the expansion of exploitation in China, Russia, etc.)

I'm convinced the 1970s were the last chance anyone had to save capitalism, perhaps to save humanity. We were warned about energy, we didn't listen. We had all the signs that neoliberalism would be a disaster, we didn't listen. We chose greater consumption.

I can see two futures ahead now, realistically (i.e. pessimistically.)
1. Neoliberalism continues forward. It becomes a perverse oligarchy worse than feudalism. Western living standards are brought in line with those of sweatshops elsewhere, and mass starvation may come about as a preventative measure against any uprisings. They get into space and exploit the infinite resources there. This nightmare capitalism lasts until the end of humanity.

2. is broadly accurate. Cheap energy runs out on earth before widespread space exploitation. A lack of forward thinking renders most solutions unworkable, and we sink back to the 19th century or before in terms of progress. Fortunately, the end of cheap energy - and thus communication - fragments the world and we pull back from the abyss. This will probably last until the end of Earth by the expanding sun, at which point mankind will die with their planet.

I hold out a hope. Perhaps the system will break, the workers of the world elsewhere will unite and bring this nightmare down. I consider it a naive hope-beyond-hope. My sanity begins to seep: I want to stave off #1 at any price.

My boiling blood could power fully automated luxury communism for centuries if only they'd hook it up to a steam turbine.

mostly democrats, senpai


There's also that whole climate change thing too.

I pray that the transhumanists are right, so that we can engineer technological torments for this man far crueler than anything that natural biology could create.

There is no upper bound on how much people like this deserve to suffer.

Explains the whole 'progressive' capitalism. Also, no Soros Waltons or Khochs? That's a surprise.

Honestly, I was a little surprised seeing only 2 people on the list who werent American.

Just goes to show you how we live in a plutocracy.

Also, 3 of the 5 democrats on the list made their fortune by selling off all of their customers personal information to advertisers Bezos allowing US gov't unfettered access to their data Zuckerberg, or giving the US govt backdoors into their software so that at any moment your computer can become part of the NSA botnet Gates

Zuckerberg and Bezo's are politically ambiguous, but Bezo's has supported lolbertian shit, while Zukerberg has no strong political convictions.

I had an argument with about this with someone from Holla Forums earlier where I went over the top 10 richest people, and most of them were centre-right, or conservatives.

Also, Bloomberg isn't even in the top 10 richest people. This infograph is pretty off the mark.

Isn't there a rumour that Zuckerberg might run for president?

I think if that happens, even though I'm not American, I should vow in advance to kill myself if he wins. That would be the greatest indicator in history that we are in a world run by an actively malevolent god.

This could be. I could only find articles from fake news websites (washington post, uspolitics) which claimed a political affiliation for them

Not according to my source

Sorry wrong file. it wont upload the correct one. heres source

I second that motion. Zuckerberg is evil. He made his wealth by selling every bit of information he can from his users. But he doesnt stop there, he gives the US Gov't interests unfettered access to their servers and lets the NSA operate massive Facebook bot nets which are used to sway public opinion and keep the American consumer docile and content

This. It's why China refuses to let him into their country and why the US desperately wants him in there.

My mistake, I didn't know Ingvar Kamprad's networth fell so much.

Bezo's has donated to both Democrats and Republicans, but the policies he's supported are typically conservative. The most supported Zuckerberg has ever expressed for a Democrat is posting something like "Go Obama" on facebook, but his "likes" on facebook also include the likes of Chris Christie. I don't think Zuckerberg really cares, Facebook is pretty much a platform for world intelligence agencies to aggressively gather intel.

I doubt it. Zuckerberg seems like an awful orator and he has enough money to buy most of the football teams in America. Probably just that - a rumor.

I agree with you that FB is an intel gathering platform…

But its also the single greatest feat of social engineering ever undertaken. There are millions of bot accounts used to influence the public at large.

Arab spring uprising? Social media Bots started it to further US interests.

Total users? FB claims 1.9 billion. This would mean by FB's count, one out of every four people worldwide personally uses facebook…. Trust me, many of these are bots. the real number of users is a fraction of 1.8 billion

tfw you purge the bourg

nice meme. as a percentage more synagogues in the USSR were closed than churches or mosques

Whats the source on this?


K I don't know why ==red text== never works for me. How about italics.

The wealthy have been trying to recast Hitler as a lower class populist for decades now.

Sounds like Nazi talk to me.

this seems really misleading.

The bottom 50% of people either have literally nothing or are in debt. 450 billion dollars isn't that much money either. i don't know why anyone is shocked about this.

But guys, those billionaires EARNED their money! If you took it from them you would be turning people into WELFARE LEECHES! Say no to SOCIALISM, BIG GOVERNMENT and COMMUNIST GENOCIDE! Like and share if you love America! 1 like = 1 prayer!

your ilk are the ones that made all these tech billionaires as rich as they are.

did you even read the post? DEBT is not an ASSET. Therefore, it doesn't count debt.

Pretty sure exploiting the wealth produced by their workers did that.

debt actually is an asset, whether they counted it or not.

regardless, there are more than 3 billion people in africa, india and china with no monetary assets so my point is of course very few of the richest people would be equivalent. its really not a major revelation.

those exploited workers are probably richer than 100,000 poor africans

The wealth of the Waltons and Kochs is split between multiple family members. From a quick Google the two Koch brothers are worth ~$45 billion each while the various Walton heirs are around $35 billion each.

But from another Google it appears the Kochs are in the top 10 wealthiest

No he didn't

No, it isn't.

It's a liability. Holy fuck this is econ 101.

you can own someones debt you fucking idiot

Except those poor Africans are the ones mining the rare metals that Bill Gates puts in his computers.

china produces ~90% of rare earths

more like ~95%-97%
Its extremely dirty to refine rare earth metals from raw ore due to the very low concentration of the rare earths.

Prolly one of the reasons Chinas so fucked up environmentally

one of many, yes


indeed. such as how the chinese regularly poop in their streets

did you forget what you wrote?

If they are "IN DEBT", that is not THEIR ASSET.

🍀🍀🍀Bloomberg🍀🍀🍀, 🍀🍀🍀Ellison🍀🍀🍀, and (Zuckerfuck🍀🍀🍀

Bezos, Slim, Buffet, Gates and Ortega are Huwhyte men

He just said you could own someones debt.

this is true.

debt is only an asset to the person who is owed the debt. to the debtor, the debt is… a debt

no, its an asset

that's a separate point, i brought it up because it really brings the "bottom 50%" average down

well if its their culture, who am i to judge, am i rite?

debt is an asset to the debtor and a liability to the indebted.

debts may bet transferred between debtors as assets or between the indebted as liability.

not hard guys.

You commies crack me up. How do you not see it?
4 of 8 of these guys are Jews. That's 50%, despite the fact that Jews are less than 0.1% of the world's population.
Just a coincidence right? Maybe that's why Jews don't eat Porky.

You Nazis crack me up. Why are you focused on the fact that they are Jewish instead of them being a parasitic rich elite? You know if Jews didn't exist another group would just take their place.


Are you retarded? This actually means that both jews and non-jews are involved in the world economic elite, but somehow you consider it a proof about your stupid conspiracy theories?

Fucking retarded nazis.

Excellent maymay, comrade.
Jews aren't "workers" like you and me. They don't do anything with a manual component. That's why they import dumb goyim to Israel to work for free on their farms.

You white nationalists crack me up. How do you not see it? 6 out of 8 of these guys were burgers. The eternal burger is real.


Jews are overrepresented in the "elite" by a factor of 1000x, and are coincidentally the main ethnic group behind the promotion of communist ideology from its inception until now. How are you not getting it yet?

Maybe jews are the actual master race hmmmmmmm…..

Jews always migrate to the richest target, especially if they can blend in. In 50 years, they might all be Chinese nationals if the U.S. economy declines. They have no loyalty to a state, not even Israel.

You don't even make sense. I mean you just say the just this and the jews that but I se a lot of Americans, jews or not, some latinos, some europeans.

Why are you so obsessed with jews and not with Americans, or Europeans who are also rich and a small proportion of the world? It's like you have a mental problem or something that is clouding your reasoning.

Nation-States are a spook


Much more interesting is their promotion of neoliberal or libertarian ideology.

Mises, Rothbard, Rand, Friedman…

More striking is that Keynes was not a jew.

Good catch, you're right. Libertarianism is almost as Jewish as communism. What they both have in common is encouraging their adherents to drop any concept of the importance of your ethnic group, culture and religion, and replace it with their own dogma.

I'm not even a Nazi or an aut-rightist and I can't see this actually happening. Besides, China is more insular xenophobic then any Western society, Jews would not integrate into China easily. It has a very strong sense of ethnic nationalism.

You say it like thats a bad thing

What you should notice is the fact that while they sell you on that particular concept, they themselves are extremely tight knit and exercise a remarkably strong in-group preference. What good for the goose is evidently not good for the gandersteins.

Hold up - the fuck you mean a "jewish" ideology? Are you implying that the person who thinks up an ideology has their personal identity ingrained into the ideology itself?

That's retarded. It's like if Mao was blind and vegetarian; "Maoism is a blind-person vegetarian ideology"

Thanks for the cancer

It's slightly broader than that: If the majority of Maoist thinkers were blind vegetarians it would arouse suspicion.

Personally I'm wondering what the non-Trivial explanation for the number of Jewish lolbertarians is. My working hypothesis is that for various reasons (i.e. states keep persecuting Jews) they're drawn towards anti-Statism philosophically, which in turn gives you MUH NAP.

It could simply be cherrypicking, mind you. Noticing Jewishness only because the question is raised so often, while ignoring other common traits that are recognized as Trivial, like being ugly or evil.

It's ok to admit when you have no good answer bud.

Wipe that drool from your chin.

The main post is that you are fucking retarded

National-socialism is also jewish

So if the vast majority of people promoting Maoism were blind vegetarians, you wouldn't find that to be a puzzling coincidence? Be honest with yourself.

It's interesting that you are the first person to bring up Not Socialism.
And yes, in fact Israel is possibly the closest adherent to the idea of Not Socialism. You have to take a blood test to become a citizen. Meanwhile, they want you to believe race is a spook, or at the very least an unimportant component of a person's identity.


What was the argument in your post, exactly? I'm not seeing it.

And as a result, israel is a fucking shithole, literally every nation with a strong sense of nationalism is one

No, Not Socialism

Exactly, because you see an argument in the complete non-post you made earlier.

My argument was that Jews are promoting to you the exact opposite of what they themselves practice in the their own lives. You failed to provide an explanation for this. I suspect you will continue to fail.

Also irrelevant shiting is technically banned there.

Jews are selling both communism and libertarianism. One is the franchise they sell to people who are jealous of other success and have low self esteem, the latter franchise is what they sell to people who are ambitious but need a philosophical way to blame their shortcomings on external forces outside their control. I suspect there's a lot of overlap.

Okay, let's get this An Argument off the ground, what makes communism inherently Jewish? What is a Jewish trait? Is it "Marx is a Jew, even though he wasn't a practicing Jew, and didn't even really like Jews"? Or is there a feature of it that makes it Jewish?

Excellent! That means that if Socialist revolutions became a reality, I for one would support the overthrow and dismantling of their state ideology, and I'm sure there are others that would feel the same.

Also, posts like this really give off the implication that you niggers want Nat-Soc states out of jealousy for Jews.

You didn't provide an argument. You made an assertion. You abstracted, to reach this conceptual "Jew", and then went on to claim that in this lies a malevolent contradiction. I will humor your idiocy, and make an effort to reply.

The majority of Jewish libertarian and communist philosophers who are "Jewish", were secular Jews. Karl Marx, Leon Trotsky, Rosa Luxemburg, Bookchin etc - were all atheistic and Marx was actually baptized as a child. Likewise, Murray Rothbard is an anti-semite was secular, Friedman was secular, Ayn Rand - I could go on. The point is none of these people fit into the box you want to put them in, so abstracting from them to reach a societal "Jew" full of inherent contradictions and thus, parasitism isn't worth being dignified with a response, let alone an argument.

But I did it anyway.

But that's the problem when trying to argue with Stormniggers about this bullshit: they put themselves in an impenetrable barrier of circular-reasoning by rejecting your argument because the Jews "may claim to be atheists but actually practice Judaism in secret!"

Being secular doesn't really mean anything regarding Jewish identity.

I mean, most identities are pretty arbitrary. (As you can tell by the way that more and more, we're coming to identify with the products of consumerism.)
The Jewish religion is basically irrelevant, what's relevant is this shared identity. Even secular Jews can take in elements of Jewish culture.

It's actually rather fascinating. None of this means they've got an evil plot, but it's definitely a fascinating edge case - Religion, Culture, Nation ("Zionism is Jewish self-determination.")

There it is.

The leftist ones were atheistic and almost none of Jewish culture seeped through into their analysis. Rothbard was even friendly with Holocaust deniers.

I'm not a stormfag.

You still seem to be assuming I'm implying there's anything of actual relevance here, beyond the Jewish identity.

Which is - like all identities - arbitrary. Just because they reject or accept it personally has no baring on the ability of others to foist it on them, and if there are generally accepted heuristics (like just following Jewish Religious law or whatever it is that basically says Jewish Mother = Jew.) then collective agreement can be reached by doing just that.

I'm reminded of the Federal-Reserve Irishmen image, although I'm not sure if that was actually made in jest. It's a good example - again, it could be pure coincidence or even outright fabrication, but it's a novel correlation - if one we've been preconditioned to notice in lieu of other things that theoretically should be just as novel.

He'll be sorry he lives in the same country as me. Come on guys, a few proles with machine guns could take Canadian parliament no problem.

I am from a Jewish family but do not consider myself Jewish, so I kind of understand what you mean. I remember I told a family friend once Marx was actually baptized, and he replied that he still had "a Jewish brain". The Jewish culture has a lot of in-grouping - I don't think anyone denies that. I was referring to the stormfag notion that because someone was born into that identity, they are compelled and do, partake in nepotism.

Holy shit did they eat the other 54? Last time they reported it as 62 people owning as much wealth as the bottom half.

One year, according Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, and HSBC's warnings last October.

I saw that 6 out of the 8 were Americans, and 5 out of those 6 were democrats.

Which 4 are jews? the only ones with jewish surnames are Bloomberg and Zuckergberg.


Simply not true.

I've got sour news for you

Here's hoping 2017 has a red October

You mean, like most people in a post-industrial service economy?

Many Jews in industrial countries were manual laborers. At the start of the 20th century, more than half of New York's Jewish labor force worked in the garment industry.

What do YOU do for a living?

Only tangentially related, but saw this on half/pol/ and it made me think.

It's impressive that Ancaps meme about how Pinochet was a free-marketeer when he basically told them to go fuck themselves after 1982, and they only got back into the country after he'd left.

Hopefully Friedman's nonsense will die sooner rather than later.

3 of them are jews, Bezos, Slim, Buffet and Gates aren't Jews at all

Bloomberg, Ellison and Zuckerberg are jews

lol those dubs say otherwise

the Fed and SCOTUS were exlcusively chaired by WASP's every single year until the mid 1960's

A WASP invented the idea for the Fed (Aldrich), and a WASP created the blueprints for the Fed (Hamilton), WASP's gave Israel to the Jews, WASP's turned their backs on Hitler's anti Bolshevik crusade, WASP's were the chief proponents of the EU and Euro, WASP's have closest ties to Saudi Arabia and Eugenics, WASP's are the archetypal miserly lords (Scrooge is a britishman not a jew), it was WASP's who pushed for compulsory attendance and public education (Peabody, Kennedy, Rockefeller, Carnegie) and WASP's who founded the CFR, Trilateral Commission and Masons. What you believe is retarded, not just because its untrue but because i know for a fact you did not do your due diligence in researching these ideas and patterns

please fuck yourself

These 8 people are still just relatively small fries. Honestly. If you can trace money back to individuals it is not a lot at all. The real players are the oil and financial industry giants. The Rothschilds, I don't like the antisemitism that spreads from them but its true, are possibly the most powerful and rich family on the planet right now. They just hide their assets better. If tomorrow all people were to know just how much capital is in their hands there would be riot on the streets.

fuck this guy

I never said Jews made the Fed. I drew analogy to the image highlighting the IRISHMEN in the Fed.
Irishmen are, as you may note (or dispute if you're from Holla Forums) white.

What do you think I believe?

I can't believe this guy is going to run for the Conservative Party of Canada. Dear God. We're fucked. This is so scary now that this is happening to Canada.

Ah, here we go.
No idea how how accurate it actually is (I'm wagering the image is a joke, so for all I know they've taken a bunch of vaguely Irish names and relied on the fact nobody will Google it.)

But even assuming they are all genuinely Irish, that doesn't have to mean anything. It's just a novel correlation.

So is the second image, which is a spurious correlation. I like to think there's a link somewhere since Neoliberalism rose after the collapse of the Keynesian consensus because porky took advantage of the oil crisis, which could in turn have some cultural-decline effects as represented by the fact something is falling oh no for rock music. This is another novel correlation that probably doesn't actually mean anything (except "time moves forward") but draws my personal attention because of the way I think.

Finally the third picture is just completely spurious, but also non-novel. Nothing has really "conditioned" anyone to even think that this correlation may not mean anything.

I posted this fact on /liberty/ and they responded just like that, and they meant it.

or we could just make a television show about them and sell commercial air time to sell products to the masses worshiping the wealth.. oh wait, someone already did something similar.