Forbes 400
 |
This article needs additional citations for verification. (February 2010) |
The Forbes 400 or 400 Richest Americans (first published in 1982) is a list published by Forbes Magazine magazine of the wealthiest 400 Americans, ranked by net worth. The list is published annually in September, and 2011 marks the 30th issue.[1] The 400 was started by Malcolm Forbes in 1982. Peter W. Bernstein and Annalyn Swan describe the Forbes 400 as capturing "a period of extraordinary individual and entrepreneurial energy, a time unlike the extended postwar years, from 1945 to 1982, when American society emphasized the power of corporations." Bernstein and Swan also describe it as representing "a powerful argument - and sometimes a dream - about the social value of wealth in contemporary America."[2]
Contents |
Criteria [edit]
The Forbes 400 reports who dominates the wealth in USA. They annually create a list of the richest people in America to exhibit the shape of the economy. The magazine displays the story of someone's rise to fame, their company, age, industrial residence, and education. The list portrays the financial shift of trends, leadership positions, and growing philanthropy intentions.[3]
First List - 1982 [edit]
In the first Forbes 400 list, there were only 13 billionaires, with 75 Million securing a spot on the list. The 1982 list represented 2.8% of the Gross Domestic Product of the United States. The 1982 Forbes 400 had 22.8% of the list composed of oil fortunes, with 15.3% from manufacturing, 9% from finance and only 3% from technology driven fortunes. The state of New York had the most representation on the list with 77 members followed by California with 48.[4]
2000 List [edit]
In the year 2000, Forbes 400 saw the highest percent of the Gross Domestic Product represented by the list at 12.2% driven by the internet boom.[5]
2010 list [edit]
In 2010, the combined wealth of the 400 was $1.37 trillion, up from $1.27 trillion in 2009 but still below the total in 2008 ($1.57 trillion) and 2007 ($1.54 trillion). The minimum to make the list in 2010 was once again back to $1 billion. It had fallen below $1 billion in 2009 for the first time since 2006.
Bill Gates is the richest man in the US, ranking number one on the 400 list for the 17th year in a row. Gates has been on the list since 1986.[6]
There were 16 new members on the list in 2010 and 18 returnees, including William Ford Sr. The oldest member on the list is David Rockefeller Sr. (#153), age 95. There are 42 women on the Forbes 400 in 2010, with a combined net wealth of $154 billion. California has the most Forbes 400 members, with 83, followed by New York (64), Texas (45) and Florida (26).
The 2010 list has 4 members under the age of 30, 3 members between 30 to 39, 34 members from 40 to 49, 95 members from 50 to 59, 108 members from 60 to 69, 91 members from 70 to 79, 56 members from 80 to 89, and 9 members age 90 and up. There are currently 6 heirs to the Walmart fortune on the list: Tied at #12 Jim Walton, Christie Walton, and S. Robson Walton, #15 Alice Walton, #165 Ann Walton Kroenke, and #204 Nancy Walton Laurie.[7] The Forbes 400 online has political contributions from the past four years for any American billionaire with records in the Federal Election Commissions database, as well as badges to indicate their passion and pursuits.
Demographics [edit]
Over the first 25 years of the Forbes 400 list, 1,302 different people made the list. 97 immigrants and 202 women (15.5%) made the list in that time. Four of the top five richest people in the United States in 2006 were college dropouts: Bill Gates, Sheldon Adelson, Larry Ellison, and Paul Allen.[8]
A few articles draw on data of the Forbes 400 to test an evolutionary hypothesis referred to as the Trivers-Willard hypothesis. This hypothesis predicts that parents of high socioeconomic status have more male offspring than parents of lower socioeconomic status.[9] Whereas an earlier study using data on the Forbes 400 shows a strong effect for U.S. billionaires that is consistent with the Trivers-Willard hypothesis,[10] a more recent study shows some caveats: First, the result is only consistent for male, but not female, billionaires. Second, it can only be found among heirs and not self-made billionaires.[11] This has to do with the timing of wealth accumulation: some self-made billionaires had their children before they were rich, but heirs, by definition, were rich before they ever became parent (see also [12]). Third, the size of the effect was largely overestimated, given that male offspring of billionaires as compared to female offspring is easier to find on the Web: Women sometimes change their last name upon marriage which makes some harder to find. Therefore earlier reports on the male-biase among billionaire offspring were partially an artifact of sample selection.[13]
The Forbes 400 is currently edited by Luisa Kroll.
See also [edit]
References [edit]
- ^ Kroll, Luisa. "The Forbes 400." Forbes Oct. 2010 p.17. Print.
- ^ Bernstein, Peter W., and Annalyn Swan, eds. All the Money In the World: How the Forbes 400 Make and Spend- Their Fortunes. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2007. Print.
- ^ Kroll, Luisa. "The Forbes 400." Forbes Oct. 2010 p.23. Print.
- ^ Kroll, Luisa. "The Forbes 400." Forbes Oct. 2010 p.20. Print.
- ^ Kroll, Luisa. "The Forbes 400." Forbes Oct. 2010 p.19. Print.
- ^ Bernstein, Peter W., and Annalyn Swan, eds. All the Money In the World: How the Forbes 400 Make and Spend- Their Fortunes. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2007. Print.
- ^ Forbes Staff. "The Forbes 400." Forbes.com Forbes LLC., 16 Sep. 2010. Web. 18 Oct. 2010.
- ^ Bernstein, Peter W., and Annalyn Swan, eds. All the Money In the World: How the Forbes 400 Make and Spend- Their Fortunes. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2007. Print.
- ^ JSTOR 1734960
Please expand by hand - ^ Cameron, E. Z.; Dalerum, F. (2009). "A Trivers-Willard Effect in Contemporary Humans: Male-Biased Sex Ratios among Billionaires". In Reby, David. PLoS ONE 4 (1): e4195. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0004195. PMC 2614476. PMID 19142225.
- ^ Schnettler, S. (2013). "Revisiting a Sample of U.S. Billionaires: How Sample Selection and Timing of Maternal Condition Influence Findings on the Trivers-Willard Effect". In Sorci, Gabriele. PLoS ONE 8 (2): e57446. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0057446. PMID 23437389.
- ^ Cameron, E. Z. (2004). "Facultative adjustment of mammalian sex ratios in support of the Trivers-Willard hypothesis: Evidence for a mechanism". Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 271 (1549): 1723–1710. doi:10.1098/rspb.2004.2773.
- ^ Schnettler, S. (2013). "Revisiting a Sample of U.S. Billionaires: How Sample Selection and Timing of Maternal Condition Influence Findings on the Trivers-Willard Effect". In Sorci, Gabriele. PLoS ONE 8 (2): e57446. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0057446. PMID 23437389.
External links [edit]
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
