I read a good article in the opinion section of the WSJ a couple days ago about corruption in the World Bank's dealing with Kenya. It's an interesting follow-up to my previous post about profit-motivated capitalism being better than philanthropy. The WSJ article highlights several recent examples of how money was being misused by both Kenyan officials and the World Bank themselves. It was that corruption that prompted Paul Wolfowitz in 2006 to withhold $260 million in lending to Kenya in an attempt to link future lending with guarentees of changes in Kenya. Wolfowitz was forced out and lending increased dramatically as he left. And of course, corruption did not abate in Kenya. The problem with disbursing funds without appropriate guarentees of change or oversight to ensure those changes are carried out is that it feeds a culture of corruption. And, as I've mentioned before, it's that corruption and lack of rule of law that is holding people back from helping themselves.
So there's rich, and then there's super rich. I recently read an article in the WSJ about the top 400 taxpayers based on income. Pretty incredible statistics. Those top 400, or what they call the "Fortunate 400", pulled in $85.6 billion in income in 2005. That's over $200 million each ... in one year! Here's a quick graphic to drive that home: Very impressive. There's all the obvious jaw-dropping statistics to go with that. For instance, to make the cut to be in the 400 you had to pull in at least $100 million. With an average of $200 million, that means there's people pulling in well over that number. Obviously, quite crazy numbers, and generally speaking not necessarily anything to be concerned about. I'm all for capitalism. But one of the more disheartening statistics was that adjusting for inflation, the minimum income to make the cutoff into the Fortunate 400 has nearly tripled since 1992. That's probably not a good sign as I imagine that...
Comments