- Tweeter
republish
On the eve of the Davos forum, Oxfam publishes shocking figures to denounce the increase in inequalities in the world. The NGO wants to shake up the big economic and political decision-makers who meet every year in this temple of capitalism to officially " improve the state of the world ".
From our special correspondent in Davos,
It has become a ritual. Every year on the eve of the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum, which brings together bosses of multinationals, political leaders and civil society figures in Davos, Oxfam publishes its report on inequalities in the world. And again this year the NGO seeks through shocking figures to hit the spirits on the increase in these inequalities, responsible according to it for the decline in the fight against poverty. Since 2013, in fact, according to the latest data from the World Bank, the pace of poverty reduction in the world has been halved.
And there is no shortage of shock comparisons . The NGO thus notes that the richest 1% of the planet has more than twice the wealth of 90% of the world population. She also points out that the 22 wealthiest men hold more wealth than the entire female population in Africa. Or that Bill Gates , who has nevertheless dedicated part of his heritage to humanitarian causes, has seen his fortune double since he left the management of Microsoft. An " absurdity " for Pauline Leclère, spokesperson for Oxfam France, who denounces " a failing and dysfunctional economic system ". “ It is not admissible that an extreme wealth which is concentrated in the hands of a handful of billionaires rub shoulders with still too great poverty. Today almost half of the world's population lives on less than five euros a day, the poverty line as defined by the World Bank . ”
" Inordinate " profitability for the wealthy
Oxfam's report thus reveals that the wealthy have become increasingly wealthy. Over the past decade, their fortunes have benefited from an average annual return of 7.4%. " Inordinate profitability " due, according to the NGO, to " a lowering of the tax system for large fortunes and multinationals and a tenacious desire to evade taxes ". This is how only 4% of the world's taxation comes from wealth tax. Oxfam also denounces tax evasion which, according to it, allows very large fortunes to "shirk their tax obligations by up to 30%".
For Oxfam, these inequalities are not inevitable but rather " the result of social and fiscal policies that reduce the participation of the wealthiest - businesses and individuals - in the solidarity effort through taxes ". Policies which, according to Pauline Leclère, " weaken public services, be they transport, education or health when they are nevertheless decisive in the fight against poverty ".
Extreme wealth is sexist
Oxfam also deplores that extreme wealth " also relies on sexism ". She has also chosen to devote a large part of her report this year entitled " those that matter " to women. The latter are indeed on the front lines of inequality and poverty. " They are the big losers in our failing, sexist and unjust economic system ", denounces Pauline Leclère, who recalls that globally, women provide ¾ of unpaid domestic work, be it household, cooking, budget management, caring for loved ones or even collecting wood and water in southern countries.
The NGO has therefore calculated the economic value represented by this “care work”. " This absolutely does not mean that we want this work to be remunerated but it is a question of realizing what it really represents ", specifies Pauline Leclère. And for good reason, according to Oxfam, this sector weighs no less than 10.8 trillion dollars, or three times the value of the digital sector in the world, a booming sector that creates a lot of wealth. In France, it represents 15% of GDP, a figure validated by the International Labor Organization.
What the NGO seeks above all to highlight is that this work is poorly shared. It is indeed women who are mainly assigned to its tasks. Consequences, laments Pauline Leclère, " they are less economically independent because for lack of time they cannot invest in the professional, associative or even political sector ".