What individual needs a billion dollars? Let's bring this huge injustice to an end by encouraging the world's first lottery winner billionaire to lead by example. Let's make this victory the beginning of the end to the unjustifiable acceptance of individuals having a billion dollars US -or more- in assets.

The median annual household income worldwide is $9,733, and the median per-capita household income is $2,920, according to Gallup metrics from Dec 16, 2013.

Nearly half the world's population, 2.8 billion people, survive on less than $2 a day. About 20 percent of the world's population, 1.2 billion people, live on less than $1 a day. Nearly 1 billion people are illiterate and 1 billion do not have safe water. (Google search: how many people live on less than dollar a day, Jan 10, 2016) 

Some 795 million people in the world do not have enough food to lead a healthy active life. That's about one in nine people on earth. The vast majority of the world's hungry people live in developing countries, where 12.9 percent of the population is undernourished. (Hunger Statistics - World Food Programme https://www.wfp.org/hunger/stats)

How many of these people do you think are victims of human trafficking? How many of them do you think work twice as many hours as you do every day in far worse working conditions? What makes us more entitled than they are just because of where we were born? To make more money, play big lotteries and win millions - now a billion - just because of where we live.

It is no surprise why so many of our brothers and sisters living in poverty would risk their lives to move to a country with such splendor as ours, with so much opportunity - that for us may seem overrated but for them immediately transforms their whole life's meaning and ambition.

Take for example the recent migrant from Senegal who won $436,000 in a Spanish lottery: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35170963

Why can't developing countries finally develop, with all the money being hoarded and re-invested in to already developed nations? Why can't more opportunities be had in developing countries, allowing migrants to find hope and take pride in their own countries? Is it the developed governments that want these countries (their petty governments) and their people forever wrapped around their fingers? Or is it the rich brothers and sisters of the human family who find an unjustifiable need for the billion(s) that they have, who find more reason for hoarding and investing for MORE, tomorrow, rather than sharing to save millions of lives, today? Is it because they prefer to live life to the fullest in the limited time they have here on earth, for various reasons, including disbelief in eternal life? Most billionaires do donate - we'd sure hope so! However, they have all remained billionaires. See more on the aim of this petition, below. The aim of this petition is to raise awareness and possibly bring about an international agreement against the existence of billionaires, or at the very least, far greater integrity and generosity of billionaires at the personal, free-will level in regards to charitable donations. The Powerball Jackpot is the perfect opportunity for us to voice our concerns, gain awareness and potentially even bring about this change!

Debate.org's page for "stealing from the rich to give to the poor" demonstrates how the majority of us support the broad idea of enforcing some sort of social responsibility for the rich. This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. The petition asks: What should the commitment be for billionaires? And how do we introduce tax or charity initiatives without regulations to make things fair for the entire demographic? The issues raised through this petition thus relate to the very small group of billionaires in the world, and it suggests that research is done and political debate is commenced regarding redistributing all billionaire monies over $999,999,999 US in a very short term; as well, this petition proposes any additional research and debate necessary for the consideration and possible introduction of international regulations preventing anyone from surpassing a billion dollar net worth in the future. Here's the link for the debate page in case you're interested: http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-it-right-to-steal-from-the-rich-to-give-to-the-poor

Do the world's greedy and selfish know they're greedy and selfish? If so, do they try to justify their overabundance, choke-holding further aid and development for those (countries) with less? What year are we living in where this is still justified? Where the many arguments for greed still "outweigh" those for sharing just a little bit? Warren Buffett is probably the biggest individual donor in the US, pledging 21.5 billion by 2015 (Time.com); however, when you are worth 66.7 billion, is this enough? Buffett has committed to donating 99% of his wealth by the time of his death, however, what does so much money controlled by one person for so many years mean for the poor people of the world? Is this money taking from the development of their countries while inflating the power of and over-developing the West, Europe and Asia? 

Is this way of donating as honorable as it is made out to be? Forget whether or not the average person has donated the same percentage of their net worth to date, because we don't have yachts, islands and financial freedom. There is a very stark difference between being a billionaire and a hundred-millionaire, let alone a billionaire and someone who makes under $75,000 per year. There's no sense in comparing between asset brackets, or apples to oranges. We are therefore calling for a short-term global transformation of billionaires in to millionaires (US dollars) and preventing future billionaires from becoming; we are also calling for immediate redistribution of billionaire wealth in order to re-strengthen the financial stability of lower "classes" (and their communal infrastructure and services), particularly the middle classes of developing AND developed nations; as well, we are calling for a minimized impact of outlier, billionaire assets on market inflation by, for example, the donation of billionaire billions to both national and international NPO's and government services and infrastructure. The many additional positive implications would include and not be limited to:

- reduced global poverty and inequality (water, shelter, food security)

- relief for much of the national and international political tensions that have developed since the onset of Crony Capitalism - between average citizens and governments, and between scholars and parties in the politcal sphere

- minimization of the significantly common, out-of-control and extremely dangerous income gap and distribution of wealth

- minimization of mass migration and the resulting political tensions, civil unrest and loss of lives from failed voyages

- retained and increased power and control of good governments, keeping key decisions and resources at the hands and benefit of the populace, for the populace.

It's a win-win request for billionaires. Current billionaires would STILL BE the world's richest and would STILL HAVE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS (reward, merit, freedom etc.)!!

Many politicians, movements, international organizations and people of distinction in the West including the Vatican are constantly voicing concern for the unjustifiable income gap and wealth distribution imbalance that has been steadily increasing since the 90's. If all billionaires become hundred-millionaires, governments, economists and bankers shouldn't be too concerned, since, ALL markets would be corrected and current top-markets would remain on top, since the current billions invested by individuals would simply change to hundred-millions invested by the same, and markets would still excel relevant to amounts invested.

"We have reached a tipping point. Inequality can no longer be treated as an afterthought. We need to focus the debate on how the benefits of growth are distributed. Our report ‘In it Together’ and our work on inclusive growth have clearly shown that there doesn’t have to be a trade-off between growth and equality. On the contrary, the opening up of opportunity can spur stronger economic performance and improve living standards across the board!" OECD Secretary-General

Pope Francis' "root of all evil" tweet: inequality undercuts virtually everything the international community is working to achieve.

"Everyone agrees on the need to eradicate extreme poverty. Yet the evidence shows that this cannot be done without addressing economic inequality (pdf). This is especially true now that most of the world's poor live in middle-income countries, where there may be enough money and resources to go around but they are piling up in the hands of a few." This is a fabulous short article with many links to academic reports and articles. http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/poverty-matters/2014/jul/01/mind-gap-un-development-goals-economic-inequality 

United Nations: "Additionally, while income inequality between countries may have been reduced, inequality within countries has risen. There is growing consensus that economic growth is not sufficient to reduce poverty if it is not inclusive and if it does not involve the three dimensions of sustainable development – economic, social and environmental." http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/inequality/

The reports go on, and on. But how do all of these organizations and social economists ignore the billions of dollars in assets held by the world's richest? I couldn't find any direct conversation or proposals on the topic, yet it seems like the pressing and abundant cries for aid and wealth redistribution can be dealt with, while causing zero perceivable harm to those involved.

Should your next door neighbor be able to afford his or her own military? Country? Several mansions, planes etc.? It all sounds fine and dandy when you think about it being you, you want your freedoms, we get it; however, if you think logically, if the chances of getting struck by lightening are greater than winning the average million-dollar lottery, what in the world are the chances of you becoming one of the world's 1,645 billionaires? And who needs a military, castle or plane more than a million hard-working Senegalians need houses with roofs over their heads? At what point will we finally draw the line between freedoms and social moral justice for the greater good?

Wouldn't it be much easier and prophetic for you to support a precedent-setting movement - a global call for change on the proceeds of record-setting lotteries and even on the acceptance of billion-dollar private portfolios? Great work deserves recognition, and maybe even wealth, but a billion dollars is unjustifiable and highly unnecessary in the impoverished, extremely unequal world we live in, in this day and age. For spending a few dollars on a ticket? For picking random numbers? 949595049393 - I have the right to be a billionaire now! For living in one country instead of another? "Start rowing you poor souls!!" ; "We're building a wall! Stay out!" Is this the message for the poor that we are allowing? The aid of the "far more entitled billionaires" to citizens of countries with poor standards of living?

Nicola Tesla, Einstein and Kant weren't millionaires. Real men and women aren't remembered or acknowledged for how much money they made, but by how much justice and advancement they brought to the world - the populace, not to their bubbled-in castles or to their bank accounts. Sadly, however, the world's billionaires consciously choose to live in greed, over-abundance, selfishness and inconsideration rather than settle as millionaires, using their billion(s) to help others, instead of only their loved ones and businesses, to help one or more of the many causes - even at the national level, and to be remembered as saints/humanitarians and righteous, respectable people. How can someone in this day and age possibly choose to live in such greed? Moreso, how can they do so and continue to live without a global outrage?

An article from the NY Times demonstrates how billionaires are indeed well aware of the injustice, they do feel a threat abound, and accept that the trends won't last forever, however, as Alan Feuer puts it in his article: "...it may be that some of these outspoken billionaires are not responding to politics so much as playing it themselves. “I’m not surprised to hear the wealthy saying these things, but talk is cheap,” said Dennis Kelleher, the president of Better Markets, which advocates financial reform. “These people know exactly how to move the levers of power and, until that happens, whatever they say is nothing but empty words.” http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/05/opinion/sunday/billionaires-to-the-barricades.html?_r=0

The Giving Pledge - a pledge founded by Gates and Buffett for billionaires to donate a majority of their wealth has had some success - but not enough. 141 individuals and/or couples were listed as pledgers on the official website by December 2015 (Wikipedia.org), however, In April 2012, The Huffington Post reported that only 81 billionaires had committed to donating half of their wealth by the time they die - of the now 1,645 billionaires in the world. It's a great effort and gesture on the part of Gates and Buffett, however, this petition calls for the end of billionaire status altogether.

I believe that more and more people aren't becoming filthy rich because of harder work, greater intelligence, technological advancements or a combination of these, but rather, because of a growing culture or more common conscience of greed and selfishness that is widely accepted in our modern culture. This does not mean that it is just or righteous, or that anyone other than a billionaire would still think it is justifiable after researching and learning more on the subject. Is it a surprise that the number of filthy rich people in the world has increased steadily over the same time period that morals and ethics in economics, commerce and science has decreased (or even disappeared at various times and places)? Why does our media not have this conversation? Has the unjustified power of the 1% resulted in an unjustified censorship of our media? So how could the culture of tolerance ever change? Via your support for this petition??

Check out this great article on how the rich drive our culture of disillusion and acceptance through self-suited politics and the reciprocating increase in inequality that is still unjustifiably worsening. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2014/01/07/millionaires-run-our-government-heres-why-that-matters/

A recent article in the Washington Post says "...inequality fails to trigger the expected political consequences because most people just don’t know how large the gap is between the wealthy and the rest of us. That’s the explanation we suggest in a recent paper (link below). If people don’t know how much they stand to gain and at what cost, why would they take political action?" It's no surprise that the vast majority of the world's poorest are also the least educated, as mentioned in the first paragraph stats. Therefore, we can't possibly expect them to do much for themselves, can we? Especially since, continentally speaking, billionaires and the world's poorest live very far away from each other. Find the Post's paper mentioned above and more great info on how the ignorance of the masses on this topic is a valid but unacceptable and very changeable barrier to greater global wealth equality: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2015/06/11/why-dont-democracies-take-from-the-rich-and-give-to-the-poor/

"Alongside more egalitarian Europeans, Americans still seem relatively relaxed about income inequality. But that might be changing. The percentage of U.S. respondents who say that the “growing gap between the rich and poor” is the greatest threat to the world — more dangerous even than nuclear weapons, infectious diseases, and religious hatred — jumped from 14 percent in 2002 to 27 percent last year (2014). And if they knew how high inequality actually was…" (Washington Post, 2015). The article ended open-ended like that. Sorry.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To the 1.3 billion jackpot recipient(s): Don't do it for us, yourself/yourselves, our families, your families, our communities or yours. Do it for OUR family. OUR community and for the legacy of YOU. The 1 billion without safe water and the 795 million without food. For the reputation of mankind - the human race that we all want to be proud of and the place that we all aspire to proudly call home. Don't fall in to the trap of thinking that being a billionaire in today's broken world is acceptable or 'prestigious.' You are better than that! Do it for social justice and to be remembered for your great works. Also for the immense recognition and honor you will receive for the rest of your life/lives and for centuries to come.

Each and every one of us behind this petition would give away at least a billion and settle with the rest. That is a lot of people! WHY??? Because we aren't the ones who won? Let me put your money where my mouth is. Money from a lottery is just as surprising as money from a lottery winner. The only way I can prove that I would practice what I preach is by donating 100% of any winnings you'd like to share with me. Anyone who signs this petition would do the same. We are not people who just talk the talk.

Or - Donate it yourself because you don't need us to prove ourselves and because you're Better than a Billionaire!

Congratulations!

Yours,

Gianfranco R