Russian and Indian, two Ruler Class/ Richest of Britain

[Shardul.....the lion]

I bought properties in London, and I know almost all the best parts of the development were bought by Russians````few million pounds seem nothing to them``!
Indians bought a lot in suburban areas, and few in Westend....london Belgravia is almost bought by Arabs and Russians

No no, why suburban areas, Indians though richest of britain live in stations and slum.s in Britain. Happy

 

[India defense]

I bought properties in London, and I know almost all the best parts of the development were bought by Russians````few million pounds seem nothing to them``!
Indians bought a lot in suburban areas, and few in Westend....london Belgravia is almost bought by Arabs and Russians

I wonder ..who is poorest class in UK?

 

[Hello_10]

Indians account for 22% of Britain’s ultra-rich club

Indians account for 22% of Britain

Super-rich Indians account for more than 20% of the wealth of ultra-high net worth (UHNW) individuals in Britain, a new list showed on Tuesday. As a national group, they are second only to expat Russians.

The list, published by the Singapore-based Wealth-X group, places steel magnate and ArcelorMittal chairman Lakshmi Mittal at second place with a fortune of $15.8 billion. Mittal was pushed to the second spot this year by Russian Alisher Burkhanovich Usmanov, who is part owner of the English football club Arsenal and is worth $16.4 billion.

“Mittal has seen his net worth estimate decline along with the stock price of ArcelorMittal, losing at least $30 billion in recent years,” the report said.

The two other Indians on the top 15 list are the Hinduja brothers — Srichand at number 9 with a net worth of $7.6 billion and Gopichand at 12th with $6 billion.

Taken together, the wealth of the three Indian-origin industrialists makes up 22% of the top 15 total of $133.3 billion.

Apart from Usmanov, the two other Russians in the list include Roman Abramovich (at number 3, $12.1 billion) and Leonard Blavatnik (Number 5, $9.5 billion).

According to Wealth-X estimates, there are 10,760 individuals residents in Britain worth $30 million or more, with at least 310 new individuals joining the ranks of the ultra wealthy. On an average, Britain has added one UHNW individual every day since 2011. The combined wealth of the UHNW in Britain stands at an estimated $1.3 trillion.

“The wealth composition of the United Kingdom, London in particular, is diverse,” said David Lincoln, Director of Research at Wealth-X. “This is reflected in our data showing that 31% of the UHNW population in the United Kingdom is considered non-domiciled, with non-resident Indians and West AsianUHNWIs making up a significant proportion of these.”

Indians account for 22% of Britain

The estimates reported in the 2010 American Community Survey revealed that the median salaried household income of India-born immigrants was around $94,700. In comparison, the median household income of native-born Americans was estimated at $51,750.

Indian-born immigrants also reported one of the lowest poverty rates at 4 per cent.

Dollars and sense of American desis | DAWN.COM

Indian Americans: The fastest growing and the highest income group

According to a 2007 census report, there were as many as 2,765,815 persons of Indian origin living in the United states, constituting 0.9% of the total U.S. population. The median household income for US residents born in India is $91,195 against a $50,740 average for the total population, a recent US survey has revealed. According to the same report, the overall median household income for foreign- born and native US residents is $46,881 and $51,249 respectively.

http://www.nritoday.net/national-af...-fastest-growing-and-the-highest-income-group

 

[Hello_10]

Indians account for 22% of Britain’s ultra-rich club

Indians account for 22% of Britain

Super-rich Indians account for more than 20% of the wealth of ultra-high net worth (UHNW) individuals in Britain, a new list showed on Tuesday. As a national group, they are second only to expat Russians.

The list, published by the Singapore-based Wealth-X group, places steel magnate and ArcelorMittal chairman Lakshmi Mittal at second place with a fortune of $15.8 billion. Mittal was pushed to the second spot this year by Russian Alisher Burkhanovich Usmanov, who is part owner of the English football club Arsenal and is worth $16.4 billion.

“Mittal has seen his net worth estimate decline along with the stock price of ArcelorMittal, losing at least $30 billion in recent years,” the report said.

The two other Indians on the top 15 list are the Hinduja brothers — Srichand at number 9 with a net worth of $7.6 billion and Gopichand at 12th with $6 billion.

Taken together, the wealth of the three Indian-origin industrialists makes up 22% of the top 15 total of $133.3 billion.

Apart from Usmanov, the two other Russians in the list include Roman Abramovich (at number 3, $12.1 billion) and Leonard Blavatnik (Number 5, $9.5 billion).

According to Wealth-X estimates, there are 10,760 individuals residents in Britain worth $30 million or more, with at least 310 new individuals joining the ranks of the ultra wealthy. On an average, Britain has added one UHNW individual every day since 2011. The combined wealth of the UHNW in Britain stands at an estimated $1.3 trillion.

“The wealth composition of the United Kingdom, London in particular, is diverse,” said David Lincoln, Director of Research at Wealth-X. “This is reflected in our data showing that 31% of the UHNW population in the United Kingdom is considered non-domiciled, with non-resident Indians and West AsianUHNWIs making up a significant proportion of these.”

Indians account for 22% of Britain

above was the news about High Income Group of UK and below is the news about Low Income Group of UK. here we find, Black Caribbeans are intentionally put with Indians to raise the poverty level of Indians while being with Black Caribbeans. and also, it is to give the whites a sense that they are among the least poor


Low income and ethnicity

UK: low income and ethnicity - The Poverty Site

Around two-fifths of people from ethnic minorities live in low-income households, twice the rate for White people.
Within this, there are big variations by ethnic group. More specifically, the proportion of people who live in low-income households is:

20% for White people.
30% for Indians and Black Caribbeans.
50% for Black Africans.
60% for Pakistanis.
70% for Bangladeshis.

The proportion of people from ethnic minorities who live in low-income households declined during the late 1990s and early 2000s but has been rising since then. The net result is that the proportion in 2008/09 was lower than that of a decade previously, but only by a bit.

Each ethnic group has seen a similar (small) fall over the last decade in the proportion of people from ethnic minorities who live in low-income households. The net results are a) that the gap between the proportion for ethnic minorities and that for White people is the same as a decade ago and b) that the ethnic groups with the greatest risk of low income are the same as a decade ago (i.e. Bangladeshi and Pakistani).

For all ages, people from ethnic minorities are, on average, much more likely to live in low-income households than White people. For example, almost half of all children from ethnic minorities live in low-income households compared to a quarter of White British children. The differences are, however, less for pensioners than for either children or working-age adults.

For all family work statuses, people from ethnic minorities are, on average, more likely to live in low-income households than White people. Whilst these differences are relatively small for workless families, they are proportionally much bigger for working families. In particular, part-working families from ethnic minorities are almost twice as likely to be in low income as part-working White British families: 45% compared to 25%.

Among those in working families, around 65% of Bangladeshis, 50% of Pakistanis and 30% of Black Africans are in low income. These rates are much higher than those for White British (10%), White other, Indians and Black Caribbeans (all 15-20%) .

In all parts of the country, people from ethnic minorities are, on average, more likely to live in low-income households than White British people. The differences are, however, much higher in inner London and the English North and Midlands than in the rest of the United Kingdom.

Although, overall, the rate of low income is much higher in London than in the rest of the country (see the indicator on location of low income), the rate of low income for White British people in London is actually similar to that in the rest of the United Kingdom.

More than half of people living in low-income households in London are from ethnic minorities. This is as a result of the high proportion of people from ethnic minorities in London who are in low income combined with the high proportion of the total population in London who are from ethnic minorities.

For a discussion of the reasons for the differences in poverty rates between ethnic groups, see the 2007 report entitled Poverty among ethnic groups: how and why does it differ? The main conclusion of this report is that around half of the differences are due to differences in family composition and work status but that the other half of the differences must be due to other factors such as the prevalence of low pay.

UK: low income and ethnicity - The Poverty Site

 

[Hello_10]

in India also, one day i calculated at least 340mil Upper Middle Class in India, more than total population at the time of freedom in 1947, post #19, as below:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-...g-problem-indias-democracy-2.html#post2952432

now poverty of India is because of its over population. the population which China could reduce because of their Communist Rule while 'democratic' India still have over 500mil below poverty line, who reduce every measure of poverty of India

 

[rcrmj]

No no, why suburban areas, Indians though richest of britain live in stations and slum.s in Britain. Happy

just based on this, i can assure you are ignorant and have never been out of India```

kid `suburban areas are very nice place (actually the best living places) in Britain, The City is too crowded and too expensive to rent or to buy.....dont believe whatever rubbish your media has been feeding you, because the rest world is way too different from India (espeically city plan and hygen)

 

[Hello_10]

above was the news about High Income Group of UK and below is the news about Low Income Group of UK. here we find, Black Caribbeans are intentionally put with Indians to raise the poverty level of Indians while being with Black Caribbeans. and also, it is to give the whites a sense that they are among the least poor


Low income and ethnicity

UK: low income and ethnicity - The Poverty Site

Around two-fifths of people from ethnic minorities live in low-income households, twice the rate for White people.
Within this, there are big variations by ethnic group. More specifically, the proportion of people who live in low-income households is:

20% for White people.
30% for Indians and Black Caribbeans.
50% for Black Africans.
60% for Pakistanis.
70% for Bangladeshis.

The proportion of people from ethnic minorities who live in low-income households declined during the late 1990s and early 2000s but has been rising since then. The net result is that the proportion in 2008/09 was lower than that of a decade previously, but only by a bit.

Each ethnic group has seen a similar (small) fall over the last decade in the proportion of people from ethnic minorities who live in low-income households. The net results are a) that the gap between the proportion for ethnic minorities and that for White people is the same as a decade ago and b) that the ethnic groups with the greatest risk of low income are the same as a decade ago (i.e. Bangladeshi and Pakistani).

For all ages, people from ethnic minorities are, on average, much more likely to live in low-income households than White people. For example, almost half of all children from ethnic minorities live in low-income households compared to a quarter of White British children. The differences are, however, less for pensioners than for either children or working-age adults.

For all family work statuses, people from ethnic minorities are, on average, more likely to live in low-income households than White people. Whilst these differences are relatively small for workless families, they are proportionally much bigger for working families. In particular, part-working families from ethnic minorities are almost twice as likely to be in low income as part-working White British families: 45% compared to 25%.

Among those in working families, around 65% of Bangladeshis, 50% of Pakistanis and 30% of Black Africans are in low income. These rates are much higher than those for White British (10%), White other, Indians and Black Caribbeans (all 15-20%) .

In all parts of the country, people from ethnic minorities are, on average, more likely to live in low-income households than White British people. The differences are, however, much higher in inner London and the English North and Midlands than in the rest of the United Kingdom.

Although, overall, the rate of low income is much higher in London than in the rest of the country (see the indicator on location of low income), the rate of low income for White British people in London is actually similar to that in the rest of the United Kingdom.

More than half of people living in low-income households in London are from ethnic minorities. This is as a result of the high proportion of people from ethnic minorities in London who are in low income combined with the high proportion of the total population in London who are from ethnic minorities.

For a discussion of the reasons for the differences in poverty rates between ethnic groups, see the 2007 report entitled Poverty among ethnic groups: how and why does it differ? The main conclusion of this report is that around half of the differences are due to differences in family composition and work status but that the other half of the differences must be due to other factors such as the prevalence of low pay.

UK: low income and ethnicity - The Poverty Site

and the facts are, Christian Religious Black Caribbeans are in the same category as Pakistanis and Bangladeshis in Britain, but these Black Christians are put with Indians to hide poverty of Christian background Blacks. these British shiits just manipulate data's to feed their religious and racial mentality

only around 8% Indians in Britain are work less, who can be said to be below of poverty line of Britain, much better than British Shiits and other whites. while Christian Blacks are in the same category of other Blacks as below:

Poverty statistics | Institute of Race Relations

 

[Hello_10]

in between 0.00min to 0.20min, "Indians are killing us." and why, explained in between 0.30min to 2.00min

these Western Shiits dont understand that a country is run by highly qualified people who develop high techs and pay high taxes, like how Indians fall in high tax payer category due to being in high income group. even if population of Indians is around 1% in US, its not only the highest tax paying group with highest qualification from the top ranked universities, but also they are the least dependent on the Welfare money. these western shiits feed generation of Single Mothers/pensioners/unemployed by tax money, not by dating different women. and if they may kill the mostly educated people of US, they will simply get killed by themselves

the same is true in case of Britain where population of Indians is around 1.5% of total population but they are the highest income group, paying highest tax and least unemployed who are dependent on any type of welfare, like my previous post #22. and similar thing we find in case of Canada and Australia also

and here, I do give a weight to the Russians that if they are put aside of whites, they will be found in the highest income category in US also, similar to how they are the highest income people of Britain

 

[IND151]

above was the news about High Income Group of UK and below is the news about Low Income Group of UK. here we find, Black Caribbeans are intentionally put with Indians to raise the poverty level of Indians while being with Black Caribbeans. and also, it is to give the whites a sense that they are among the least poor


Low income and ethnicity



UK: low income and ethnicity - The Poverty Site

Around two-fifths of people from ethnic minorities live in low-income households, twice the rate for White people.
Within this, there are big variations by ethnic group. More specifically, the proportion of people who live in low-income households is:

20% for White people.
30% for Indians and Black Caribbeans.
50% for Black Africans.
60% for Pakistanis.
70% for Bangladeshis.

The proportion of people from ethnic minorities who live in low-income households declined during the late 1990s and early 2000s but has been rising since then. The net result is that the proportion in 2008/09 was lower than that of a decade previously, but only by a bit.

Each ethnic group has seen a similar (small) fall over the last decade in the proportion of people from ethnic minorities who live in low-income households. The net results are a) that the gap between the proportion for ethnic minorities and that for White people is the same as a decade ago and b) that the ethnic groups with the greatest risk of low income are the same as a decade ago (i.e. Bangladeshi and Pakistani).

For all ages, people from ethnic minorities are, on average, much more likely to live in low-income households than White people. For example, almost half of all children from ethnic minorities live in low-income households compared to a quarter of White British children. The differences are, however, less for pensioners than for either children or working-age adults.

For all family work statuses, people from ethnic minorities are, on average, more likely to live in low-income households than White people. Whilst these differences are relatively small for workless families, they are proportionally much bigger for working families. In particular, part-working families from ethnic minorities are almost twice as likely to be in low income as part-working White British families: 45% compared to 25%.

Among those in working families, around 65% of Bangladeshis, 50% of Pakistanis and 30% of Black Africans are in low income. These rates are much higher than those for White British (10%), White other, Indians and Black Caribbeans (all 15-20%) .

In all parts of the country, people from ethnic minorities are, on average, more likely to live in low-income households than White British people. The differences are, however, much higher in inner London and the English North and Midlands than in the rest of the United Kingdom.

Although, overall, the rate of low income is much higher in London than in the rest of the country (see the indicator on location of low income), the rate of low income for White British people in London is actually similar to that in the rest of the United Kingdom.

More than half of people living in low-income households in London are from ethnic minorities. This is as a result of the high proportion of people from ethnic minorities in London who are in low income combined with the high proportion of the total population in London who are from ethnic minorities.

For a discussion of the reasons for the differences in poverty rates between ethnic groups, see the 2007 report entitled Poverty among ethnic groups: how and why does it differ? The main conclusion of this report is that around half of the differences are due to differences in family composition and work status but that the other half of the differences must be due to other factors such as the prevalence of low pay.

UK: low income and ethnicity - The Poverty Site

thanks for finding their manipulation

 

[Hello_10]

thanks for finding their manipulation

do you know how I did that? I have lived with British and British origin Australians for so long that I only try to find out why they are shiits/pigs, rest, I know how much they may think, their level of thinking

 

[Ottoman-Turk]

mate almost all the russians are not even british or lived there for long time , they are oligarches or some gas companies and they just invest in football clubs or something ,

 

[Hello_10]

in India also, one day i calculated at least 340mil Upper Middle Class in India, more than total population at the time of freedom in 1947, post #19, as below:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-...g-problem-indias-democracy-2.html#post2952432

now poverty of India is because of its over population. the population which China could reduce because of their Communist Rule while 'democratic' India still have over 500mil below poverty line, who reduce every measure of poverty of India

in fact because of these over 340mil Upper Middle class of India, now properties of India is among the highest in world. its now cheaper to live in many western countries than in Indian cities

World's Most Expensive 'Residential' Real Estate Markets 2009

Battling for the number 2 position are prime central Moscow and London. Prime central Moscow's US$20,853 per square metre price tag slightly outpaces core Prime London's US$20,756 per square metre, though it is fairer to say the two cities are neck-and-neck.

Completing the top ten most expensive real estate markets are two European cities (Paris at 7th and Rome at 9th) and two other Asian cities (Singapore at 8th and Mumbai at 10th). Average prices range from US$9,000 per sq. m. to US$12,000 per sq. m.

Most expensive real estate markets in 2009

Office rents in Mumbai~ Delhi still among 10 most expensive

Mumbai, which was the world’s second most expensive office market during the last survey in November 2007, is now in fourth place, though its rental of $210.97 per sq ft is still 41 percent higher than it was last November.

Moscow, where office rentals have risen 93 percent since last November to $232.37 per sq ft, is now at second place instead. Delhi is now in seventh place, from eighth last November. Office rentals in Delhi have risen 15.3 percent during this period to $145.16 per sq ft, the survey said.

http://archive.thepeninsulaqatar.com/component/content/article/348-indiaarchiverest/81840.html

 

[Hello_10]

there are few things which I have said on PDF many times but there are always new people who raise the same question and then get confused with few basic things........

first, if you want to measure 'strength' of an economy, not its power to import, then you need its PPP value which adjust exchange rate. here we find GDP of India was $4.45tn in 2011 but its still manipulated by the US/UK since 2006. as, till 2005, we had a different way of measuring GDP on PPP which used to include 'estimated' 'undocumented' part of GDP also. and I remember, this way GDP of high population 'developing' countries was around 60% to 70% higher, of the country like Brazil/Turkey it was around 10% higher. and for the developed nations, the difference was hardly around 1% to 3%. like as below:

for 2005, India's GDP at PPP is estimated at $ 5.16 trillion or $ 3.19 trillion depending on whether the old or new conversion factor is used

It's official: India's a trillion-$ economy - Times Of India

means, GDP of India on PPP was already $5.16tn in 2005 and since then India registered around 9% growth on average for 2006, 2007, 2008 and then around 8% on average in 2009, 2010, 2010 period. (these British SHiiiTs were mainly behind all these manipulating of India's datas, I personally know this.........)

this way, if GDP of India was $4.45tn in 2011 by new method then it would be around $7.5tn on PPP by 2011 if we consider the old method which was in application till 2005

also, its true that population of India is 1.2bil but 850mil people might have hardly $2.0tn share in it, leaving around $5.3tn for rest of 350mil Middle Class with per capita income of around $17,000 on PPP which is close to Very High HDI countries like Argentina, Poland etc. hence you may say, India has 850mil people with per capita income around $2,500 and rest 350mil population with $17,000 on PPP........

when you consider India, you would alway think that even if population of India may become 2.0bil one day, their 350mil middle class is more in number than US also, the so called 'strongest' in your list, with projected growth rate over 7% for next 20 years, the minimum

India GDP Annual Growth Rate

few more on this topic, here we find, average growth rate of India from first quarter 2006 till december qurater 2011, stood at around 8.6%, on 'annual' basis. hence if we consider even 8.5% annual growth rate of india for the six year time between 2006 to 2011, and considering GDP on PPP of India at $5.16tn in 2005, we may calculate its value by 2011 as below:

GDP on PPP of India by end 2011 = 5.16*1.085*1.085*1.085*1.085*1.085*1.085 = $8.42tn

but we would also get to know that PPP value consider value of goods and serivces in US$ term, means we would include the factor of inflation of United States also. and if we consider average 1.5% inflation of US for those six year, with considering an overall factor of just 1.08 only then also, the GDP on PPP of India comes around = 8.42 * 1.08 = $9.1tn by 2011.

and it still hasn't included Value Added effects also. but we also know that the undocumented part of GDP might not have registered the similar growth as the accurate datas which we consider in New Method, so I would put GDP on PPP of India at least at $8.0tn by 2011.

again, for those who have further interests, we know that share of agriculture was aroud 17% in India's GDP in 2011 therefore, we find share of agriculture in indian economy, 0.17 * 8.0 = $1.36tn, on which 52% population of india is dependent. means around 600mil people based in agriculture in india have per capita income = $2,266.

this way, 8.0 - 1.36 = $6.64tn is left for rest of 600mil people based in industry and service in India, with per capita income of around $11,000 on PPP which is higher than Brazil..........

again, we have news that a third of the population of cities are either in slum or in bit better condition only, so we would consider per capita income of 300mil living in cities in low condition at hardly $2,500 which takes a share of $660bil hence we are then left with around 6.64 - 0.65 = $6.00tn, around, for rest of 300 mil people, the so called Middle Class of India with per capita income around $20,000 on PPP. but it is estimated that agriculture sector also have around 50mil Middle Class whose share is more 'undocumented' as agriculture is also non-taxable business in India. so we find total middle class of India around 350mil with per capita income around $18,000 on PPP.......

 

[Hello_10]

Mittal father-son duo to carry Olympics Torch
London, Jul 23, 2012, (PTI)

Indian steel magnate Lakshmi Mittal, who is the main sponsor of the giant AreclorMittal Orbit near the Olympics Stadium, will be among the individuals who will carry the Olympics Torch a day before the Games begin.

The Torch will be carried by various individuals from Camden to Westminster on Thursday.
Mittal's son, Aditya, 36, will also carry the Torch during the day.

The Mittal Champions Trust has been supporting Indian athletes.

Mittal, 62, said: "When I think about parallels between myself and an Olympian, I believe that success in the world of business is underpinned by very similar principles of perseverance and hard work.

"The torch relay is an excellent embodiment of all that the Olympic Games have come to symbolise - a celebration of the human spirit".

He added: "Personally to me, it represents striving to be the best in whatever we do, never giving up despite the odds and a commitment to health and fitness.

"I hope that by carrying the torch I will be representing many other people who share these ideals with me".

Created by Turner Prize-winning artist Anish Kapoor, the ArcelorMittal Orbit is the tallest structure in Britain.

The company, which is one of the sponsors of the Olympics, has contributed 20 million pounds towards the structure.

Located in Olympic Park in Stratford, east London, the ArcelorMittal Orbit has two observation floors, a 455-step spiral staircase, lift and restaurant.

Visitors go up in the lift and walk down the staircase and take in the views and artistic tricks designed by Kapoor.

It is made from 60 per cent scrap metal.

The Mittal Champions Trust has organised a reception for Indian athletes tomorrow.

Mittal father-son duo to carry Olympics Torch

 

[Rig Vedic]

Those are the official statistics. Don't be fooled, the real wealth is hidden and has very deep roots.