iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Davos 2012: Income Inequality Becomes An Issue At World Economic Forum For First Time

Davos

EDITH M. LEDERER   01/29/12 06:24 PM ET  AP

DAVOS, Switzerland — Europe's crippling debt crisis dominated the world's foremost gathering of business and political leaders, but for the first time the growing inequality between the planet's haves and have-nots became an issue, thanks largely to the Arab Spring uprisings, the Occupy movement and other protests around the globe.

The mood at the end of the five-day meeting in Davos was somber, and more than 2,500 VIPs headed home Sunday concerned about what lies ahead in 2012. Plenty of champagne flowed in this alpine ski resort – but the atmosphere was flat and the bubbling enthusiasm of some past World Economic Forums was noticeably absent.

Despite some guarded optimism about Europe's latest attempts to stem the eurozone crisis, fears remain that turmoil could return and spill over to the rest of the world. And there were no answers to the widening inequality gap, but a mounting realization that economic growth must include the poor, that job creation is critical, and that affordable food, housing, health care and education need to part of any solution.

Just before the forum began, the International Monetary Fund reduced its forecast for global growth in 2012 to 3.3 percent from the 4 percent pace it projected in September. Many other economic forecasters also predict a slowing economy, including New York University's Nouriel Roubini, who is widely acknowledged to have predicted the crash of 2008 and who said he might be "even slightly more bearish" on the new IMF forecast.

Asia is expected to remain the engine for global growth though at a slower rate, with China leading the way at more than 8 percent, followed by India and Indonesia.

IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde warned that the eurozone crisis is not the region's problem alone.

"It's a crisis that could have collateral effects, spillover effects, around the world," she said. "What I have seen, and what the IMF has seen in numbers and forecasts, is that no country is immune and everybody has an interest in making sure that this crisis is resolved adequately."

The IMF is the world's traditional lender-of-last-resort and Lagarde is trying to increase its resources by $500 billion so it can help if more lending is needed in Europe or elsewhere. European countries have said they're prepared to give the IMF $150 billion, but that means the rest of the world will have to come up with $350 billion.

At a closing panel Sunday, Paul Polman, CEO of Unilever, said a readjustment in Europe is essential "because, if you want to really simplify it, we've lived above our means, and we've done that for too long, and the moment of truth has arrived."

Vikram Pandit, CEO of the global bank Citigroup Inc., said the euro crisis "is costing us about 1 percent in GDP around the world. You do the math. You do the math and say: 'How many jobs is that? How many people are not working because of that? What can we do to go after the biggest question we've got for this decade which is jobs?'"

The world needs 400 million new jobs between now and the end of the decade, not counting the 200 million needed just to get back to full employment, so "that should be our number one priority," he said.

To keep the spotlight on jobs and poverty at the forum, the Occupy movement that began on Wall Street and spread to dozens of cities around the world set up a protest camp in igloos in Davos. They demonstrated in front of City Hall.

In a separate protest, three Ukrainian women were arrested when they stripped off their tops – despite temperatures around freezing – and tried to climb a fence surrounding the invitation-only gathering holding banners saying: "Poor, because of you" and "Gangsters party in Davos."

Citi's Pandit said to create the conditions for growth, economic uncertainty must end and that means quickly resolving the eurozone crisis, ending regulatory uncertainty, and getting the public and private sector together to build infrastructure that can create jobs.

Unilever's Polman said it's unacceptable that more than 1 billion people are hungry every day while another billion are obese.

"How do we pull up the people that are excluded from the work force, at the bottom of the pyramid?" he asked. "That we haven't quite figured out yet."

Sheryl Sandberg, CEO of Facebook, said the Internet sector has been creating hundreds of thousands of jobs and to keep up innovations in technology "great scientists" need to be educated all over the world, investment in infrastructure is critical, and regulations must not stifle growth or access.

Nobel economics laureate Peter Diamond, an economics professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said in an Associated Press interview that in the U.S. there is "an unemployment crisis," especially among young people who aren't accumulating experience. He said the government should fix the Social Security system, fix aging infrastructure, spend on research, and start fixing the education system.

When the forum opened, its normally upbeat founder Klaus Schwab said he remained a deep believer in free markets but that capitalism is out of whack and needs to be fixed "to serve society." He welcomed critics' ideas of how to fix it – including from the Occupy protesters, though they walked out of a side event where a representative had been invited to talk.

This year for the first time, the forum invited about 60 "Global Shapers" – young leaders under 30 – to the forum to try to address issues confronting the generation that will be running the world in decades to come.

Among the younger generation also at Davos were Chelsea Clinton, daughter of the former U.S. president and present secretary of state, who moderated a panel on philanthropy and philanthropist Howard Buffett, son of Warren Buffett, whose foundation focuses on promoting agriculture and fighting hunger, especially in Africa.

The possibility of Iran developing nuclear weapons was among top concerns at Davos this year. There were also several follow-up panels on the Arab Spring and a session moderated by Schwab with Israeli President Shimon Peres and Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, which demonstrated the deep divisions over getting peace negotiations back on track.

But although the conflict in Syria – where the U.N. estimates a crackdown on anti-government protesters has killed some 5,400 people over the past year – came up in the Arab Spring panels, it wasn't a hot issue.

Julia Marton-Lefevre, director general of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, said that this year for the first time at Davos "the environment is not treated so much as separate topic, which I think is a good thing."

"We are moving towards a more integrated approach to the world's challenges," she said. "Environment is not a side issue, it's really a part of everything. For me, of course, nature is a life support system – and finally it is being recognized as being a part of the solution."

(This version CORRECTS Corrects spelling of `Vikram' and first reference to bank as Citigroup Inc. in 10th paragraph. This story is part of AP's general news and financial services.)

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS

DAVOS, Switzerland — Europe's crippling debt crisis dominated the world's foremost gathering of business and political leaders, but for the first time the growing inequality between the planet's...
DAVOS, Switzerland — Europe's crippling debt crisis dominated the world's foremost gathering of business and political leaders, but for the first time the growing inequality between the planet's...
Filed by Maxwell Strachan  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 223
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (6 total)
05:51 PM on 01/30/2012
http://robertreich.org/post/16773820312

The Biggest Risk to the Economy in 2012, and What’s the Economy For Anyway?

Monday, January 30, 2012

Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos a few days ago, said the “critical risks” facing the American economy this year were a worsening of Europe’s chronic sovereign debt crisis and a rise in tensions with Iran that could stoke global oil prices.

What about jobs and wages here at home?
photo
ProgressivesLoveAmerica
Former disciple of Mises, Hayek & Milton Friedman
05:32 PM on 01/30/2012
The truth about income inequality is that it's not just some bleeding-heart liberal cause.

From an objective standpoint, countries with higher income inequality have weaker economies.

The common sense logistice behind this concept are pretty simple:

The greater the gap between rich and poor within a nation, the less Disposable Income people in the middle and at the bottom have to spend in their capacity as a consumer. In a consumer-based economy such as that of the United States, a severly weakened consumer means they cannot afford to go out & buy the things that keep our economy going. Basically, what means that what we have right now is a DEMAND-Side problem. That's why the US recovery is still so weak. People are still paying increasingly more money just to pay for the very basics in life. It doesn't help that the US is one of the few industrialized nations in the planet without universal health coverage for all of its citizens nor a free or affordable college scheme, the way Europe does. Going into debt for health care & education exacerbates these problems by chipping away from disposable income.

After a good 30+ years of it, we've basically exhuasted our options from the Supply-Side (trickle down) school of economics as a country & as a globe.
05:20 PM on 01/30/2012
The problem is shipping jobs to other countries to save a nickel or two and in the end it costs us more than to keep the jobs here.
Not just here but everywhere. Lots of people were happy farming their lands and such but the global elite jumped in to help some corporations help people who did not want or need the help.
Do you think the elite will go back to not taking money from the developed world and handing it over to dictators to ruin the lands. I think not, just another social networking meeting. They should have saved money and used Linked in or Facebook.
02:42 PM on 01/30/2012
As I see it, the real problem is overpopulation. The more people, the worst it will get. As humans compete for resources, more & more will become frustrated to the point of violence, and, you will have a global revolution. Humans are not likely to work together to solve these issues because those who would are not in a position to effect change. Change will come only after great turmoil and suffering, that's the way its always been and humankind is not ready or capable of doing it any other way.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Lloyd Cata
11:35 AM on 01/30/2012
At the risk of being "one-sided" or redundant, I will repeat my comments from last years WEF/Davos meetings;

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Lloyd_Cata/davos-diary-heading-to-th_b_813414_75692358.html

WEF//Davos - where the most intelligen­t, powerful, and rich people on the planet meet to coordinate and calculate their roles in shaping a better world.

There is only one statement that has any credibilty coming from such an
intelligen­t and well-infor­med assemblage­; "THE WORLD CANNOT CONTINUE
TO OPERATE UNDER THE PRESENT ECONOMIC, POLITICAL, AND SOCIAL
DISTORTION­S CURRENTLY IN PLACE."

Barack Obama alluded to this when he stated that, ~"this is not the world of
Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin", yet he cannot escape the legacy; nor can the rest of the world.

The role of shaping that legacy still is too heavily weighted to US and
European "interests­", and as long as the legacy continues there are no plans
or formulatio­ns to correct the distortion­s facing humanity.

So much for the most intelligen­t, powerful, and rich people on the planet.
They are fast approachin­g the point where only the truth will matter. All the armies with all the guns,and all the money will not matter, "because even the poor and illiterate understand injustice when they see it." ...and wasn't it a small injustice in Tunisia that precipitat­ed the fall of a failed attempt at dynasty.”
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Kojak007
11:04 AM on 01/30/2012
Providing a solution to income inequality is not in the best interest of the 1%. They will need a large population of cheap labor to contiue their existance.

www.currentlychicago.com
11:33 AM on 01/30/2012
No American is poor by global standards.

The poorest 5% in America are richer then the richest 5% in India.

America you are not the 99% you are the 1%.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Kojak007
11:48 AM on 01/30/2012
Are you suggesting that we lower our standards or simply be happy with the status quo?

www.currentlychicago.com
07:23 PM on 01/30/2012
India's rich are not that poor... America's poorest 5% could never afford to send their kids to Ivy League American schools or go on vacation to Europe or America, things that affluent Indians are quite capable of doing...

This is a ridiculous and flawed way of looking at things...
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:35 AM on 01/30/2012
We don't want Davos addressing "inequalities".

Instead, we need this clown show SHUT DOWN IMMEDIATELY!!!

And its members brought to just and TBTF be taken into RECEIVERSHIP/BANKRUPTCY NOW!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Moti
Guns 'n Moses
09:10 AM on 01/30/2012
Children have been starving to death in East Africa by the millions your whole lives, but NOW that your friggin' jet ski got repo'd and your liberal arts degree, which you willingly borrowed $ to pay for, won't even land you a flight attendant's job, income inequality is suddenly evil. Hypocrites.
08:55 AM on 01/30/2012
This only about 10 years overdue...it's obvious this economic summit doesn't talk about much that actually affects the world economy if this is the FIRST time this is coming up. Sounds like the conference typically produces crap results...just saying..the world economy is in a horrible state.
redonthehead
Winning trophies for my game face alone
08:30 AM on 01/30/2012
After much thought I have the solution to income inequity.

First appoint an extra special blue ribbon panel of government bureaucrats to decide what people need.

Once that's done, every cent over that amount is charged in tax and redistributed to those below that line.

While we're at it we should eliminate private property because people might figure out a way to use that property to generate extra income that goes against our equality utopia.

All business should be taken over by the state to insure that "excessive" profits aren't generated.

I believe that the Soviets tried a model like this but it didn't work because the rest of the world worked under the capitalist model and eventually bankrupted the state. They had rationing, empty shelves in the stores, food shortages, economic stagnation, very slow to no innovation, but they didn't have income inequality. If it was done on a global level it is sure to succeed

Illustrating the absurd by being absurd.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
hurried harry2
08:39 AM on 01/30/2012
The rest of the world has not operated on the capitalist model - only the parts that were convenient for the richest to succeed - you overlook the huge oil and ag subsidies, the hoarding of capital and investment of capital where it circulates only among the wealthy class, betting on decline with unbacked depositor money and of course the deliberate stagnation of worker's wages to concentrate wealth in the hands of only a few. If you are to defend capitalism, one should make sure it actually exists.
redonthehead
Winning trophies for my game face alone
08:52 AM on 01/30/2012
You're right, the worldwide governments should simply confiscate the oil and food production. It's not fair that businesses actually make a profit from things that people actually need. Further, under the plan described above there would be no "wealthy" class so the problem would be solved. We wouldn't need any banks because people would simply go to the store and take their ration of goods. Workers wages would be set by the government and government should decide what's fair.

Again illustrating the absurd by being absurd.

On a serious note. Subsidies should be eliminated across the board. Government should not be in the business of picking winners and losers. Government should not be subsidizing the oil companies, nor the car companies, nor the solar companies, nor any other industry.
08:57 AM on 01/30/2012
Well said! F&F
redonthehead
Winning trophies for my game face alone
07:57 AM on 01/30/2012
Yet another meeting/conference/protest whining about income equality. Any solutions offered?
07:47 AM on 01/30/2012
Eh -- income inequality is not the way to go, discourse-wise.

Notice that President Obama didn't say a word about income inequality or OWS. A few people lost their jobs, and that's truly unfortunate. But we can't be going around talking income inequality lest the republicans start crying "class warfare". We have to be very careful what we say.

Sure, the democrats aren't perfect, but don't let perfect be the enemy of the good. At least they're not talking about putting children to work like what the REPUBLICANS are saying! Half a loaf of bread is better than none. THERE JUST AREN'T ENOUGH VOTES IN CONGRESS FOR ANYTHING BETTER!

You liberals and OWS'ers are just a tiny minority. The sooner you all realize this and join the democrats and President Obama's real supporters, the better for all of us.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
hurried harry2
08:01 AM on 01/30/2012
Let's see a Republican administration follow through with their promises to repeal health care act when the deal struck was the only method available (given Blue Dog votes) to end pre-existing condition discrimination; and let's see Republican administration follow through to repeal banking reforms (even with their loopholes - it's better than nothing) given the effect US banking system had on other major economies around the world. The only people fooled by Republican rhetoric are the uneducated voters who are led by negative emotional immaturity fueled by ignorance to support them. The world's rich have finally realized that no one can afford their products and their wealth will shrink along with ours - which is why income inequality is now an issue. Liberals, democrats, republican has nothing to do with it. The controlling wealthy ruling class will do what is in their best interest and what is in their best interest is that people are employed to spend money on the crap they advertise as necessary for happiness.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rodrockler
The dark side clouds everything!
07:28 AM on 01/30/2012
Under the current model, capitalism is not sustainable.
It is bound to crash and burn with monetary systems being unstable and non-equivalent.

It is time that those who have the most money learn the difference between capitalism and monopoly. These two cannot coexist and tend to cancel the other out in order to continue to be in place.

I am also glad to hear that OWS has had an effect on a global level...something that many here in the states seem to think lacks any significance despite the duration and diversity of the message.

OWS: is working.
09:00 AM on 01/30/2012
It's also NOT capitalism when the game is rigged in 1 groups favor...it's crony capitalism but it's NOT capitalism. It's not a "free" market it's a "rigged" market.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rodrockler
The dark side clouds everything!
06:07 PM on 01/30/2012
I can say you made a viable elaboration but you also made it arbitrary.

Those who are a part of these systems would define their doings as knowing how to exploit them or play the game better than others.

Problem is on that argument, they have made the 'buy-in' so high, only the rich can play.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robert Frank
My last name is FRANK so thats what I am..
07:13 AM on 01/30/2012
Worldwide revolution where every wealthy person on the planet who doesn't donate to the common good in some way is permanently removed from their position..( permanently meaning whatever nice or horrible thing you can think of)
06:49 AM on 01/30/2012
They should have the supreme leader's wife come and explain why it's important for her and the other "1%'s" to be able to spend $50,000 on lingerie in one shopping trip. I'm sure she can help her lemmings understand why speaking against income inequality is enough, and that "do as I say, and not as I do" should be all you should expect from her.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/9048122/Agent-Provocateur-sales-boosted-by-US-First-Lady-Michelle-Obama.html
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:30 AM on 01/30/2012
This is bogus.