5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Economy
In 'Grotesque Billionaire Bonanza,' 41 Energy Tycoons Saw Fortunes Grow by $23.5 Billion Since Trump Launched Iran War
“Conflict devastates countries and costs countless lives, yet for some it is extraordinarily profitable,” said the executive director of Oxfam International.
Jun 15, 2026
While much of the world is holding out hope that the US-Israeli war against Iran may finally be reaching an end amid news of a ceasefire agreement, the billionaire owners of some of the world's largest energy companies may not be so thrilled.
A handful of just 41 energy industry barons in Group of Seven (G7) countries collectively increased their wealth by $23.5 billion since the war was launched in late February, according to a report released by Oxfam International on Monday, as the leaders of the world's largest industrialized economies meet in France this week.
The oil shocks resulting from the war have caused fuel prices to spike dramatically, rippling inflation throughout the global economy and straining the pocketbooks of ordinary people around the world. One April report by the United Nations Development Program projected that, as a result of the conflict, an additional 32 million people would be pushed into poverty by the end of the year.
But between March 1 and May 18, owners of the largest oil and energy companies in Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the US, and the UK were adding $300 million on average per day to their collective wealth, Oxfam found through an analysis of Forbes’ Real-Time Billionaire List.
PRESS RELEASE: G7 energy billionaires pocket $300 million a day since start of unlawful US and Israel war against Iran.
This is equivalent to about $1,000 in the time it takes to blink.
👀https://t.co/UVGHF4a3Tk pic.twitter.com/szSGASCAX8
— Oxfam International Media Team (@newsfromoxfam) June 15, 2026
“Conflict devastates countries and costs countless lives, yet for some it is extraordinarily profitable,” said Oxfam International's executive director Amitabh Behar. “This is a brutal system that redistributes wealth upwards—from workers to shareholders, from the poorest to the richest, from those with the least power to those who already have far too much of it. While families are skipping meals and governments slash life-saving aid, we are witnessing a grotesque billionaire bonanza.”
While their accumulation of wealth cannot solely be attributed to the war, Oxfam noted that the Big Six oil companies—Chevron, Shell, BP, ConocoPhillips, Exxon, and TotalEnergies—are projected to grow their profits this year by 80% above the pre-war forecast, while the average large G7 company in the sample is projected to see just 8% growth.
Global billionaires saw their wealth increase on average by about 0.42% between March and mid-May. During the same period, G7 billionaires in the energy industry grew their riches by 9%, while those in oil and gas specifically became nearly 11% richer.
Oxfam notes that the Iran War has only widened the chasm between the rich and poor that was already gaping, in no small part thanks to nations in the G7.
While billionaire wealth has surged by nearly $10 trillion since 2020, G7 nations, mostly the US under President Donald Trump, have reduced aid to the poorest nations by $48 billion—equivalent to what billionaires in G7 countries accumulated for themselves in just nine days.
Meanwhile, since 2019, the last time France chaired a G7 summit, Oxfam estimated that 44 people per minute have come to be in need of humanitarian aid, based on 2025 data from the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.
.@Oxfam campaigners posing as #G7 leaders stand around a trash can overflowing with discarded files. The labels read: “gender inequality,” “climate,” and “tax the rich” —critical global issues scrubbed from the agenda to secure President Trump’s attendance at the G7 summit.@AP pic.twitter.com/aE7HkMvKFl
— Oxfam International Media Team (@newsfromoxfam) June 15, 2026
Behar said that in order to secure the participation of the US in this week’s summit, French President Emmanuel Macron has chosen to table any discussions that might offend Trump—including the devastating cost of his war in Iran, Israel’s US-backed wars in Gaza and Lebanon, and anything to do with the climate crisis, which Trump has referred to as "a scam."
"Rather than defending collective governance, Macron and his peers are accommodating its destruction. This will have consequences measured in lives," he said.
Oxfam called for the "G6"—all the Group of Seven member countries, excluding the US—to create a comprehensive plan to protect people from the economic turmoil caused by the war and other spiraling global crises.
“The G6 can’t plead powerlessness,” Behar added. “They can cancel debt. They can tax windfall profits and extreme wealth... They can provide poorer countries with aid. Refusing to act simply because Washington will not join them is not diplomacy—it is cowardice. And it will only accelerate the G6’s slide into global irrelevance.”
Keep Reading
Show Less
'This Fight Isn't Over': Opponents Turn to State AGs After DOJ Approves Paramount-Warner Merger
"Now that the federal government has abandoned antitrust enforcement in favor of cronyism and runaway consolidation, state attorneys general must step in to block this deal," said one critic.
Jun 12, 2026
The US Department of Justice on Friday approved Paramount Skydance Corporation's megamerger with Warner Bros. Discovery, prompting opponents of the $110 billion deal to place their hopes of blocking it in the hands of Democratic state attorneys general.
The DOJ's Antitrust Division approved the merger without requiring divestitures or behavioral remedies—a significant win for billionaire Paramount CEO David Ellison. Analysts and critics had suggested the DOJ might require sales of some of the corporation's numerous cable networks, streaming services, film and television studios, sports programming rights, or media outlets.
The DOJ also reportedly declined to impose conduct restrictions on bundling, distribution, licensing commitments, and other areas.
“If we had an uncorrupted Department of Justice, Paramount would not even have tried to merge with Warner Bros. Discovery, in plain violation of the law," Robert Weissman, co-president of the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, said in response to the news of the DOJ approval. "If it had, a Department of Justice that was doing its job would have rushed to court to block the merger the moment it was announced."
“Now, however, a compromised DOJ has rubber-stamped a merger that consolidates power for the Ellisons, one of [President Donald]Trump’s preferred oligarch families," Weissman added. “This merger will jack up prices for consumers, cost workers their jobs and, most importantly, limit the range of viewpoints permitted to air on the major media or appear in movies and creative outlets. Put simply, this is an anti-free speech merger."
This is terrible news for every American who doesn't want Trump-aligned billionaires to control what they watch and how much they pay.The Paramount-Warner Bros. deal has reeked of corruption and influence-peddling.This fight isn't over. State AGs must block this merger.
[image or embed]
— Elizabeth Warren (@warren.senate.gov) June 12, 2026 at 1:48 PM
Craig Aaron, co-CEO of the advocacy group Free Press, said in a statement: “Despite all the talk about conducting a thorough investigation, the fix was in at the Trump Justice Department from the start. Paramount Skydance has fêted, flattered, and promised sweeping changes to news coverage to win the administration’s approval, despite evidence that giving one corporation this much media power—all the movie studios, cable channels, and newsrooms—will undermine competition, destroy jobs, slant the news, and endanger our democracy."
“We've already seen how far Paramount and the Ellison family are willing to go to diminish a once-proud network and news organization like CBS, and they promise to do worse if they get their hands on Warner Bros., HBO, CNN, and all the rest," he added. "The Ellisons aren’t hiding their intentions, and no weak concessions will make this deal any better."
Congressman Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, warned earlier this week that approval of the merger would result in "the same kind of unprecedented pro-MAGA editorial control we have seen at CBS News and '60 Minutes.'"
Raskin also contended that the merger could mean that "American consumers, who already pay an average $69 a month for streaming on top of $100 a month for cable and $78 for internet," will pay "even more for sports, news, and entertainment."
As Politico's Yasmin Khorram reported Friday:
The [DOJ] decision... paves the way for Paramount to combine with the entertainment and media company behind a vast film and television studio, CNN, and the HBO Max streaming service, which would be combined with Paramount+ to create a new offering boasting about 200 million subscribers. The deal, which would upend the Hollywood ecosystem by combining two historic rival studios, is opposed by many in the entertainment industry who fear it could lead to mass layoffs, among other concerns.
The DOJ's reported approval of the merger does not necessarily mean the deal is done. Several states are weighing antitrust challenges, most notably California, where the office of Democratic Attorney General Rob Bonta is conducting what he called a "vigorous" review of the proposed merger to determine how it would impact competition in entertainment, streaming, advertising, and labor markets. Reuters reported earlier this month that California, New York, and other states are preparing a lawsuit aimed at blocking the merger.
“The good news is, this is not the last word on the matter," Weissman said. "Competition authorities in the states and other countries can still follow the law and stand up for the public interest against this media consolidation. Now that the federal government has abandoned antitrust enforcement in favor of cronyism and runaway consolidation, state attorneys general must step in to block this deal."
Aaron said that states "have strong case for blocking this merger, and many brave journalists, filmmakers, and workers in the entertainment industry have spoken out against the dangers of this deal despite threats to their livelihoods."
"They are warning us what will happen if this deal goes through, and we must listen," he added. "The attorney generals have the evidence they need to stop this deal; now the public needs them to take action.”
Last year's merger between Paramount Global, Skydance Media, and National Amusements was itself opposed by critics who sounded similar alarms over corruption, antitrust issues, labor concerns, and attacks on editorial independence.
CBS, a Paramount Global company, announced the cancellation of "The Late Show with Stephen Colbert" during the merger review period. While Paramount claimed the cancellation was a financial decision, critics said its timing suggested at least indirect political pressure, given Colbert's vocal criticism of Trump and the need for merger approval from the Federal Communications Commission. FCC Chair Brendan Carr was appointed by Trump and has been dogged by allegations that he's more loyal to the president's agenda than to his agency's stated mission.
One of the biggest recurring flashpoints involves claims of corporate pressure and censorship at CBS' venerable "60 Minutes" weekly current affairs program. Numerous former "60 Minutes" journalists and others have accused Bari Weiss—the right-wing podcaster who became CBS News editor-in-chief after the merger—of political censorship.
Earlier this month, a coalition of press freedom groups warned that recent firings of "60 Minutes" journalists were a “grotesque effort taken straight from an authoritarian handbook” that posed a much wider threat to democracy, and highlighted that an approved Paramount Skydance-Warner Bros. Discovery merger would hand control of CNN, a Warner Bros. company, to the same billionaire family that now owns CBS.
The coalition argued that the merger “would open the door to improper political meddling in journalists’ editorial decisions" and "alter CNN’s editorial direction (not to mention meddle with HBO’s documentaries) to be more friendly to the [Trump] administration, threatening press freedom."
Keep Reading
Show Less
As Elon Musk Becomes a Trillionaire, Report Highlights 'Darker Realities' of His Texas SpaceX Fiefdom
"Mr. Musk’s bid for planetary reach is about to be turbocharged with billions of dollars of rocket fuel. Who will suffer the fallout if it all blows up?"
Jun 12, 2026
Elon Musk became the world's first trillionaire on Friday, as his private space exploration firm SpaceX became a publicly traded company with a market cap of $2 trillion despite reporting negative net income for two of the last three years.
To mark this occasion, The New York Times published an essay by journalist Amy Gamerman, who has spent the last several months documenting life in Starbase, Texas, a city built by Musk to house SpaceX employees.
Gamerman wrote that it's best to think of Starbase as a corporate fiefdom that has been granted extraordinary treatment by Texas' state government.
"One new Texas law makes interfering with Starbase’s operations potentially punishable with jail time," the journalist explained. "Another allows the company to shut down the highway into town and to the beach at the mayor’s discretion. Another shields SpaceX, and by extension Starbase, from lawsuits by neighbors over nuisance caused by its rockets."
While the community of nearly 600 people appears idyllic, Gamerman found there are several "darker realities" lying beneath the surface, with one resident who wished to remain anonymous saying that Starbase is "like living in a dictatorship" where people fear raising concerns will lead to retaliation by the company.
Another disturbing aspect outlined in Gamerman's essay is the way that Starbase seemingly operates outside the laws and norms of the rest of society.
For example, the city has now erected electronic gates on every single road leading to Starbase Village, the main center of the city where SpaceX employees live and that is cut off from other parts of the community.
"Those who live outside the gates of Starbase Village... often feel shut out," wrote Gamerman. "Amber Pompa said her father, Homer Pompa, a disabled veteran who lives near Starbase Village, has no access to the restaurants or any other buildings there. And as Starbase expands, new gates have gone up in other parts of town."
Gamerman also highlighted the story of Jose Luis Bautista Jr., a 25-year-old construction worker who died in an accident in Starbase last month. When the nearby city of Brownsville dispatched an ambulance to take Bautista to a hospital, Starbase officials denied it access and said their own emergency medical services were handling the situation.
The incident, noted Gamerman, is being investigated by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
Taking a look at the broader picture, Gamerman expressed concern that Musk becoming a trillionaire could allow him to expand his vision of billionaire-owned cities across the US.
"Mr. Musk’s bid for planetary reach is about to be turbocharged with billions of dollars of rocket fuel," the journalist concluded. "Who will suffer the fallout if it all blows up?"
Keep Reading
Show Less
Under Healthcare 'Dystopia' Envisioned by Trump, Cash-Strapped Patients Would Take Out Loans From Insurers
"This could ruin people's finances, while creating a financial incentive for insurers to deny coverage," said one Democratic congresswoman.
Jun 12, 2026
After the Republican Party's decision to terminate subsidies that had significantly reduced healthcare costs under the Affordable Care Act for 22 million people, the White House is considering a new way to—officials claim—"help" Americans who face massive medical bills, either due to high-deductible plans that don't cover routine costs or because of emergency expenses.
The proposal, though, could just shift "who [the patients] owe the debt to," as one doctor and researcher told The New York Times, which reported Thursday on the Trump administration's proposal to allow people to take out loans directly from their health insurance companies when they can't afford to pay a hospital or doctor's office out of pocket—and then pay the insurance company back, likely with interest.
"Hard to top this level of dystopia," said one writer in response to the Times report. "Have health insurance through the ACA? The Trump administration is going to turn your health insurer into a loan shark you borrow money from if you can't afford to pay your portion of medical procedures."
As the newspaper was reported, the provision is buried in a 1,121-page final rule issued last month regarding how the ACA will be regulated next year.
The Trump administration is planning to significantly expand the number of Americans who are eligible for high-deductible "catastrophic" health insurance plans that provide no coverage for day-to-day medical expenses.
"We note that multiyear and 1-year catastrophic plans may be able to offer relief from the high deductible and maximum annual limitation on cost sharing through other mechanisms," reads the final rule. "For example, issuers of catastrophic plans could consider financing the deductible by providing enrollees a loan."
Currently, the average annual deductible for people insured under the ACA is nearly $4,000, and about 40% of enrollees this year have "Bronze" plans, which have an out-of-pocket maximum that's over $10,000 for an individual, likely leaving many people having to pay thousands of dollars in medical expenses despite having coverage.
By 2028, as Common Dreams reported earlier this year, catastrophic plans with lower premiums could have deductibles as high as $31,000 for families.
The plan to shift more people onto expensive plans that provide less coverage for day-to-day medical care—and to push patients to take out loans from their insurers—comes as about one-third of Americans, even those with insurance, report skipping meals or cutting back on other expenses to afford their medical bills.
The Times reported that at least one major health insurer—UnitedHealthcare, the nation's largest—is already equipped to start lending patients money to cover unexpected medical bills. The company operates a bank that administers loans to doctors and offers health savings accounts.
Rep. Shontel Brown (D-Ohio) said the latest proposal from the White House shows that President Donald Trump "is destroying healthcare from all sides."
The advocacy group Protect Our Care said the "suggestion" buried in the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' final rule "is not only out of touch, it is cruel—accruing medical debt only adds to families’ financial burdens."
“While working families drown in the high cost of living, the Trump administration’s answer to the healthcare affordability crisis they created is to throw people an anchor made of medical debt and call it relief," said Leslie Dach, chair of Protect Our Care. "Trump and Republicans had a simple, popular fix sitting right in front of their faces—extending the ACA tax credits—but they killed it anyway, triggering premiums to double, triple, or even quadruple for millions of working families, all to make billionaires and big corporations even richer."
"Americans are being bankrupted by crushing medical debt, and this administration isn’t lifting a finger to help—it’s busy shoveling more people into that hole," said Dach. "Voters will remember this foolishness at the ballot box in November, just you wait.”
Melanie D'Arrigo, executive director of the Campaign for New York Health, which advocates for a universal, single-payer healthcare system for New York state, suggested the proposal makes the latest case for a federal, government-funded healthcare program similar to those in other wealthy countries, which would end the healthcare profit motive by expanding the existing Medicare system to the entire US population.
"Letting Americans take out loans to afford healthcare forces Americans deeper into debt and drives up profits for the health insurance industry," said D'Arrigo. "Abolish the health insurance industry. Demand Medicare for All."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Most Popular