Despite making up 4.2% of the global population, 58% of USians made up the global top 10% of wealth owners.
https://web.archive.org/web/20171005043016/https://www.wider.unu.edu/publication/global-distribution-household-wealth
https://web.archive.org/web/20171005043016/https://www.wider.unu.edu/publication/global-distribution-household-wealth
If the real wages (accounts for monetary deflation) of the Middle East, Western Europe, Rich Asia Pacific (Singapore, HK, Taiwan, Japan) and Western Offshoots (US, Canada, Australia, NZ) were to go down to being worth 10 times whatever it takes in the local currency to achieve a standard of living as that of the EU mean, then the wage ratios of everyone else would go up to being worth at least 10 times as much as the cost of basic needs too.
Just this by itself will make the 47-57% of humanity who don't even have wages worth 1 times whatever it takes to meet their basic needs live with at least 10 times as much.
https://www.oecd.org/wise/how-was-life-9789264214262-en.htm
Just this by itself will make the 47-57% of humanity who don't even have wages worth 1 times whatever it takes to meet their basic needs live with at least 10 times as much.
https://www.oecd.org/wise/how-was-life-9789264214262-en.htm
π5
T]he English proletariat is actually becoming more and more bourgeois, so that the ultimate aim of this most bourgeois of all nations would appear to be the possession, alongside the bourgeoisie, of a bourgeois aristocracy and a bourgeois proletariat. In the case of a nation which exploits the entire world this is, of course, justified to some extent.
https://marxists.architexturez.net/archive/marx/works/1858/letters/58_10_07.htm
π4
You ask me what the English workers think about colonial policy. Well, exactly the same as they think about politics in general: the same as what the bourgeois think. There is no workers' party here, there are only Conservatives and Liberal-Radicals, and the workers gaily share the feast of England's monopoly of the world market and the colonies.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1882/letters/82_09_12.htm
The truth is this: during the period of Englandβs industrial monopoly the English working-class have, to a certain extent, shared in the benefits of the monopoly. These benefits were very unequally parcelled out amongst them; the privileged minority pocketed most, but even the great mass had, at least, a temporary share now and then. And that is the reason why, since the dying-out of Owenism, there has been no Socialism in England.
With the breakdown of that monopoly, the English working-class will lose that privileged position; it will find itself generally β the privileged and leading minority not excepted β on a level with its fellow-workers abroad. And that is the reason why there will be Socialism again in England.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1885/03/01.htm
www.marxists.org
Letters: Marx-Engels Correspondence 1882
[A]part from the unexpected--a really general workers' movement will only come into existence here when the workers are made to feel the fact that England's world monopoly is broken. Participation in the domination of the world market was and is the basis of the political nullity of the English workers. The tail of the bourgeoisie in the economic exploitation of this monopoly but nevertheless sharing in its advantages, politically they are naturally the tail of the "great Liberal Party," which for its part pays them small attentions, recognises trade unions and strikes as legitimate factors, has relinquished the fight for an unlimited working day and has given the mass of better placed workers the vote. But once America and the united competition of the other industrial countries have made a decent breach in this monopoly (and in iron this is coming rapidly, in cotton unfortunately not as yet) you will see something here.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1883/letters/83_08_30.htm
Their prediction that the heart of the imperial core would cease to exist with the rise of imperialist competition and therefore colonial chauvinism wouldn't be a problem anymore turned out to be wrong.
Britain did lose it's rank as the heart of the core and it's monopoly on the world market, but only for that rank to be taken up by the US. Ever since then, they have also given up on competing with each and rather merged their structures of imperial domination into the singular collective world system, thereby all sharing the monopoly power over the world market.
What they prescribed as a solution to a problem then under those conditions may not apply to the present day under different conditions but their analysis of the problem and the problem still does, even more so than it did back then.
www.marxists.org
Letters: Marx-Engels Correspondence 1883
once [China] and the united competition of the other industrial countries [periphery] have made a decent breach in this monopoly you will see something here.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2022.102467
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2022.102467