# Reverse Darwinism? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 14, 2013, 12:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reverse-darwinism/671207 "2013-10-14T12:04:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2013, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reverse-darwinism/671207/101 "2013-10-23T17:25:21Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > Focus on the top 10% or even top 1% does misplace emphasis. In 2011 the top 0.1% earned about 10% of U.S. income. The top 0.01% earned about 5%. > > [I linked to a graph showing this before](http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8369/8494939965_1956d5262d.jpg) and commented: > > This may help explain some of the right-wingers’ confusions. Their sentiment is to defend hard-working lawyers who may be making only a million dollars or so per year. “Left-wing” antipathy isn’t directed against hard-working lawyers so much as against the egregious inherited wealth of the Koch brothers and Walton siblings. “1%” is a poor talking point for that, as I think we agree; it’s much too broad a brush. This is especially true when alleging wide-spread (indeed, [centuries-old](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=16765222&postcount=152)) coordinated oppression by this 1%. > [@jsutter](#): > > Perhaps someone else here can explain it to you. I’m done. Ok. All I asked for was a cite that backed your claim, since the one you provided did not. ---
**Author:** ![jsutter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/8e8cbc/32.png) [@jsutter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsutter)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2013, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reverse-darwinism/671207/102 "2013-10-23T17:43:54Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > "… > Ok. All I asked for was a cite that backed your claim, since the one you provided did not. Well, changed my mind again. 🙂 This by **septimus** [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8369/8494939965\_1956d5262d.jpg](http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8369/8494939965_1956d5262d.jpg) is a better look at things. Let’s call it 1917 if you like. Aloha ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2013, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reverse-darwinism/671207/103 "2013-10-23T18:30:49Z")
> [@jsutter](#): > > Well, changed my mind again. 🙂 > This by **septimus** [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8369/8494939965\_1956d5262d.jpg](http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8369/8494939965_1956d5262d.jpg) is a better look at things. Let’s call it 1917 if you like. Aloha That’s income, not wealth. ---
**Author:** ![jsutter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/8e8cbc/32.png) [@jsutter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsutter)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2013, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reverse-darwinism/671207/104 "2013-10-23T18:59:18Z")
> [@Telemark](#): > > That’s income, not wealth. I do understand the difference but don’t have enough interest in the subject to further research it. Why don’t you? I do think a flat tax on wealth instead of income coupled with a claw-back estate tax would be a good tax reform. Aloha ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2013, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reverse-darwinism/671207/105 "2013-10-23T19:21:21Z")
> [@Telemark](#): > > That’s income, not wealth. 😕 😕 Do you believe wealth inequality would measure as less than income inequality? 😕 😕 I joined the thread _only_ to post the informative graph that shows the very interesting fact that _half the income of the 1% is earned by the top 0.1% … **and half the income of the 0.1% is earned by the top 0.01%** _. And the above is your contribution? 😕 :smack: One finds the statistics one can find. If wealth statistics are so interesting to you (and I didn’t notice any particular interest in them by other posters), why don’t you Google for them? ETA: Hint: IRS publishes income statistics. Wealth is often secret. _ **One finds the statistics one can find.** _ ---
**Author:** ![jsutter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/8e8cbc/32.png) [@jsutter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsutter)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2013, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reverse-darwinism/671207/106 "2013-10-23T19:34:09Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > 😕 😕 Do you believe wealth inequality would measure as less than income inequality? 😕 😕 > > I joined the thread _only_ to post the informative graph that shows the very interesting fact that _half the income of the 1% is earned by the top 0.1% … **and half the income of the 0.1% is earned by the top 0.01%** _. > > And the above is your contribution? 😕 :smack: > > One finds the statistics one can find. If wealth statistics are so interesting to you (and I didn’t notice any particular interest in them by other posters), why don’t you Google for them? > > ETA: Hint: IRS publishes income statistics. Wealth is often secret. _ **One finds the statistics one can find.** _ This! Aloha ---
**Author:** ![jsutter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/8e8cbc/32.png) [@jsutter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsutter)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2013, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reverse-darwinism/671207/107 "2013-10-23T23:38:15Z")
There are 1342 billionaires in the world. [Forbes Billionaires 2023: The Richest People In The World](http://www.forbes.com/billionaires/#page:143_sort:0_direction:asc_search:_filter:All%20industries_filter:All%20countries_filter:All%20states) . 1342 billionaires represent .0000002% of the world’s population of 7 billion. These are the people who run the world and your life. Think not? Think again. Aloha ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2013, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reverse-darwinism/671207/108 "2013-10-24T00:30:03Z")
> [@jsutter](#): > > 1342 billionaires represent .0000002% of the world’s population of 7 billion. These are the people who run the world and your life. Think not? Think again. While this is the forum for witnessing, this is a political debate and your religious belief in that claim is irrelevant without actual supporting evidence. That the wealthiest people are capable of wielding more influence than the poor is nearly tautological. That there are 1342 people in the world who are “controlling” it, even though many of them will be in opposition to each other, while pretending that coalitions of millionaires could not defeat billionaires or that larger coalitions of people who are even less wealthy could have no say in the way the world works is nothing but a religious belief, (or, worse, a common CT). If your belief was true, the Koch brothers would have already gotten Romney elected president and be well on the way to implementing all the Tea Party nonsense that they supported, (having created the Tea Party, to begin with). ---
**Author:** ![jsutter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/8e8cbc/32.png) [@jsutter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsutter)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2013, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reverse-darwinism/671207/109 "2013-10-24T00:47:46Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > While this is the forum for witnessing, … I could easily make a good case for money will out but I won’t continue to highjack the OP which posed the question Is our educational system maladaptive? My answer is that it suits the one percent just fine. Aloha ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2013, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reverse-darwinism/671207/110 "2013-10-24T00:48:51Z")
> [@jsutter](#): > > I could easily make a good case for money will out . . . That was not the claim you made, but I am happy to see you abandon the hijack. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reverse-darwinism/671207.md?page=5)