SA Rich List on the increase!

dlk001

Executive Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
7,457
Reaction score
716
Location
Best Country in the world!
More millionaires, more misery for the poor!

6400 new members joined the ranks of the elite in the past year, writes Marcia Klein.

The number of South Africans with over a million US dollars increased by almost 14% — or more than 6400 people — to 55000 last year.

The 2008 Capgemini Merrill Lynch World Wealth Report shows that the growth in the number of South African dollar millionaires far outstripped the global average increase of 6%.

Those South Africans in the prestigious club each had financial assets (only investible assets and excluding property, collectibles and belongings) of R7.9-m illion or more at the current exchange rate.

The Capgemini Merrill Lynch report showed that the rich in emerging markets grew their wealth far faster than those in developed economies and, for the first time, dollar millionaires totalled more than 10 million individuals worldwide.

The report showed a 10% increase in the number of millionaires in Africa — so South Africa also beat the continental average.

However, the biggest increase in dollar millionaires was in the Middle East, where the number was up by 15.6%. In Europe and North America, there was a minimal increase in millionaires — or in their wealth.

Among the ultra-rich, who the researchers said were worth more than 30-million, the biggest increase was in Latin America, followed by Africa.

According to the report:

There are just over 10million people in the world who have financial assets in excess of 1-million. This was 6% higher than the previous year.

ý The combined wealth of the 10 million people who had financial assets in excess of 1-million, was 40.7- trillion, 9.4% up on the previous year. The increase in the wealth of the rich was well ahead of the 5.1% growth in the global economy.

ý The ultra-wealthy grew in both number and wealth — 8.8% more in number and 14.5% in accumulated wealth.

ý The growth in emerging-market wealth was strongest in the Middle East and Latin America, with India, China and Brazil showing the biggest increase in numbers of wealthy people.

ý The world’s millionaires are expected to have a combined wealth of 59.1-trillion by 2012, their wealth growing by about 7.7% a year.

ý The biggest increase in the number of millionaires in 2007 was in India, a startling 22.7%, with China second at 20.3%.

ý The world’s millionaires “assumed a more defensive approach” in a volatile economic climate, opting for safer investment options.

Andrew McGregor, managing director of Who Owns Whom, which compiles the Sunday Times Rich List, said the Capgemini report attributed the disproportionate increase in the number of wealthy in emerging markets to growth in the gross domestic product, “but a further South African nuance is the regulatory impact of state black economic empowerment objectives.

“In the late ’90s, Who Owns Whom identified only eight significant empowerment groups — including Kagiso, Pamodzi, Royal Ba***eng, Shanduka and Thebe — but this year there are 98.”

McGregor said people like mining magnate Patrice Motsepe, who was third on last year’s Sunday Times Rich List with R13.5-billion; the CEO of cellphone company MTN Phuthuma Nhleko (R1.6-billion, ranked 16) and businessman Tokyo Sexwale (R1.3-billion, ranked 20) were probably included in the Capgemini calculation.

He added that an interesting aspect of the report was the burgeoning wealth in the Asia Pacific region, given the recent classification of Chinese South Africans as black for the purposes of empowerment.

“The Who Owns Whom TakeOver Talk database recorded 421 ownership and investment transactions in 2007, of which 59 were empowerment transactions valued at a total of R101-billion. It will be interesting to see what Chinese financial backing does to that trend,” he said.

The report said that trends during 2007 included strong economic growth in the first half and “heightened uncertainty and instability” in the second.

In the second half there was “a distinct and growing divergence between mature and emerging economies — with the advantage going to emerging nations”.

Millionaires hold a significant portion of their wealth on stock exchanges, but the wealthy have become more cautious, moving to safer investments. Deposits and income made up 44% of their assets, well up on the previous year. Internationally, the wealthy continued to decrease their holdings in North America. They increased investments in their own markets, preferring to stick with what was familiar to them.

The wealthy are also turning to green investments, supporting research and development into alternative fuels, renewable energy and other advanced technologies, the research showed.

About 12% of millionaires and 14% of the ultra-rich around the world allocated part of their investment portfolio to green technologies and alternative energy.

They also spent a significant portion on “investments of passion”, including art collections, luxury cars, yachts, sports teams, memorabilia, wine and luxury travel. And the rich remained largely unaffected by the international financial turmoil. Those from emerging markets “demonstrated significant influence in the global luxury marketplace”.

For the first time, orders for Gulfstream jets from overseas buyers surpassed those of North Americans. Russians, meanwhile, became important clients for yacht-builders, while the wealthy in the Middle East and Asia were the biggest buyers of jewellery, gems and watches.

The report quoted David Norman, co-chair of Sotheby’s Impressionist and Modern Art Department, as saying: “We used to think in terms of hedge funds when targeting new customers. Now, we look for barrels of oil.”

According to the report, most of the rich use wealth management companies, but they look for advisors “who understand both the global financial markets and nuances of the local culture”.
 
A few things I don't get:

- How does more millionaires equate to "more misery for the poor", what a load of crap. (If more people are genuinely getting rich that means less people are poor, which is a good thing, what do you think these rich people were before they became rich -- non-existent?) Wealth is not zero-sum, if my neighbour becomes rich it DOES NOT MEAN that I lost something in the process.

- The dollar has weakened a lot in the past year or two --- you could have exactly the same amount of money / purchasing power as before and suddenly be bumped into this "club" just by movements in the exchange rate, and I bet that the majority of new entrants to this so-called "elite" did so in this way.

- Inflation --- again, every year more people will join this club just by virtue of inflation eating into the value of the USD.
 
Last edited:
A few things I don't get:

- How does more millionaires equate to "more misery for the poor", what a load of crap. (If more people are genuinely getting rich that means less people are poor, which is a good thing, what do you think these rich people were before they became rich -- non-existent?) Wealth is not zero-sum, if my neighbour becomes rich it DOES NOT MEAN that I lost something in the process.

- The dollar has weakened a lot in the past year or two --- you could have exactly the same amount of money / purchasing power as before and suddenly be bumped into this "club" just by movements in the exchange rate, and I bet that the majority of new entrants to this so-called "elite" did so in this way.

- Inflation --- again, every year more people will join this club just by virtue of inflation eating into the value of the USD.
I agree, fact is most of the people who get stinking rich often create a whole boatload of jobs in the process.
 
- The dollar has weakened a lot in the past year or two --- you could have exactly the same amount of money / purchasing power as before and suddenly be bumped into this "club" just by movements in the exchange rate, and I bet that the majority of new entrants to this so-called "elite" did so in this way.

The rand has weakened against the dollar though so that doesn't apply to SA.
 
Wealth is not zero-sum, if my neighbour becomes rich it DOES NOT MEAN that I lost something in the process.
.

as a certain way of thinking, it does mean somebody somewhere lost money.

money is borrowed into existence. that is a plain fact. but the interest on the money borrowed has to come from somewhere.

imagine if you will, i have $400billion in the bank
the interest on that, at 6% alone, is $24billion. somebody, somewhere has to get $24billion to give to me each year. normally it is the poor people borrowing more money to pay for their items, to buy stuff, to feed my interest-earning "machine" once you unravel an awfully long loop.

or, another example. i am a new bank. deposits=Rzero.
peter the shopkeeper puts R100 into his account. i owe peter R100+ his interest.

paul comes to me to borrow R100. i give paul R100, which he spends at peter's shop. peter brings me the R100 tomorrow to deposit.

according to peter, he has R200 in his bank account. but there is only R100 physically there.

between the 3 of us we have "created" R100 which we loaned to paul.
i owe peter interest on his money, R200. i give him 3%
paul owes me interest on the R100 he borrowed from me. i lent it at 6%.

if i dont relend this physical R100, i am going to be square...and not have made a penny out of it...pauls 6% will be used to pay peter's 3%, so i have to take advantage of this R100 and lend it out quickly, to someone else at 6%.
this is fractional reserve banking at it's simplest, but the conclusion to this very very long winded game is that one person ends up with all the money.

in my $400 billion example, and awful lot of people have to be doing an awful lot of work, and producing a lot of goods each year to feed me $24billion. and next year, they'll have to feed me more. hopefully, my monster will grow so big that everybody will be working all the time, just to feed me my interest.

that is the end result of capitalist fractional reserve banking. one player will win. everybody else will lose, but have to carry on playing else they will have nothing.
 
Trillion? 40.7 Trillion?

There is only $1Trillion in circulation around the world?
 
Trillion? 40.7 Trillion?

There is only $1Trillion in circulation around the world?

yes, the rest exists as ones and zeroes on an excel spreadsheet. and families will get divorced over that spreadsheet, many will lose their homes and some even commit suicide all because one column has a bunch of numbers and a minus sign with your name next to it.

sometimes, you kinda accidentally delete a whole column, but you can see when that happens here
http://bankimplode.com/
in this section Writedown Rundown & General Distress
 
Pretty much anyone with a paid off house in SA is a Rand millionaire, add pension etc and there's a lot of people here with a Net worth of over R2 million.
R7.9 million is not that far off.
 
in my $400 billion example, and awful lot of people have to be doing an awful lot of work, and producing a lot of goods each year to feed me $24billion. and next year, they'll have to feed me more

Or they could live frugally, pay off their debt, end up with net savings and even earn interest themselves. You make it sound like the only way to obtain money is to borrow it. In fact it's possible in many ways for a person to live their entire adult life without ever actually borrowing money (and not just through being born rich).

I don't see how you've demonstrated that I have lost wealth if my neighbour becomes wealthier (and not just incidentally, but AS A NECESSARY RESULT of my neighbour becoming wealthier). So what if people have to work hard to pay off their voluntary debts? (And please don't conflate money and wealth.) Very loosely speaking, increasing the money supply only deflates my savings - through inflation - if economic production doesn't increase along with the money supply. And even this is just a flaw in fiat currencies, not an inherent flaw with the economic model that suggests one must lose wealth if one's neighbour gains wealth. (And anyway it plays both ways, one can also gain without even working by sitting on a currency if that currency gains value or if goods become cheaper such as due to the China Effect.)
 
Or they could live frugally, pay off their debt, end up with net savings and even earn interest themselves. You make it sound like the only way to obtain money is to borrow it. In fact it's possible in many ways for a person to live their entire adult life without ever actually borrowing money (and not just through being born rich).

i'm not going to go into your whole post, as i feel the following statement will suffice to let you know what i think.

to date, 100% accurate, i have never ever bought a single thing on credit. although my financial standings are my own business, it is suffice to say i am very much in the black, and searching for previous posts by myself will confirm this. but i am in a very very small minority, those who buck the system, the flies in the ointment.

p.s. i didnt get the silver spoon treatment either...I work hard, save, dont buy what I cant afford or dont need etc.
 
I agree, fact is most of the people who get stinking rich often create a whole boatload of jobs in the process.

Yeah a whole load of jobs that pay just enough to stay alive and not enough to get out of the hole it puts you in. Look at history and tell me the rich are not getting richer by keeping others poor. Those boat load of jobs don't do much for the poor. Makes insane profits for the rich people though ^_~
 
i'm not going to go into your whole post, as i feel the following statement will suffice to let you know what i think.

to date, 100% accurate, i have never ever bought a single thing on credit. although my financial standings are my own business, it is suffice to say i am very much in the black, and searching for previous posts by myself will confirm this. but i am in a very very small minority, those who buck the system, the flies in the ointment.

p.s. i didnt get the silver spoon treatment either...I work hard, save, dont buy what I cant afford or dont need etc.


I am impressed, Werner.

I do not know a lot of people who can live like that.

My take on this is that one should not be so deep in debt that you need to 'run away' from your creditors, but on the other hand, I would not mind having some debt if it means actually LIVING my life and enjoying some of the pleasurable things money can buy, instead of being anal about every little penny I give out (not referring to you here, by the way).

My fear for myself and for others is that we do not save enough to provide for the day that we cannot work anymore.
 
Pretty much anyone with a paid off house in SA is a Rand millionaire, add pension etc and there's a lot of people here with a Net worth of over R2 million.
R7.9 million is not that far off.

This survey, excludes property. But in any case, if you have property worth R7.9 million, all paid up. Then you are rich.
 
I am impressed, Werner.

I do not know a lot of people who can live like that.

My take on this is that one should not be so deep in debt that you need to 'run away' from your creditors, but on the other hand, I would not mind having some debt if it means actually LIVING my life and enjoying some of the pleasurable things money can buy, instead of being anal about every little penny I give out (not referring to you here, by the way).

My fear for myself and for others is that we do not save enough to provide for the day that we cannot work anymore.

'strue man, i once read a forum signature on another place that went
" you enter the world with nothing, if you die leaving behind debt you have actually made a profit"

and that is true. but only if you intend to die soon. heck, if i knew i was going to die next week then i would get 20 credit cards, hookers and two kilo's of coke...and a yacht.
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X