[rvern]

Do they consume as much as half the world? If the money is invested, where's the problem? Wealth inequality only matters for the well-being of the poor insofar as it affects consumption inequality. Why not talk about how much more they consume than everyone else instead of how much more wealth they have? Because talking about wealth makes for better rhetoric: wealth is understood as an indicator of social status and Oxfam doesn't think the very rich should have that much social status. It has nothing to do with the economic well-being of the poor.

http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2008/07/xxx...

[dpwm]

The assets of those eight are almost certainly going to be invested, so it's not really as if they can spend all the money without changing the value of the assets that make up their wealth.

However, absence of evidence of a consumption inequality comparable match the wealth inequality does not imply there is no consumption inequality -- something which really cannot be denied -- it just won't be as horrific a ratio as with wealth, but it could still be quite eye-opening.

For what it's worth, I very much doubt the eight wealthiest are the top eight consumers.