Richest 2% hold half of world\'s assets
 

[ QUOTE ]
Personal wealth is distributed so unevenly across the world that the richest two per cent of adults own more than 50 per cent of the world’s assets while the poorest half hold only 1 per cent of wealth.



[/ QUOTE ]

story continues here


There are a few reactions one can have to this. 1. To support or oppose the economic processes that lead to this condition 2. To support or oppose the results themselves.

I'm a socialist, and I oppose both the process and the results. I imagine many of you are in favor of the process but oppose the results. Are any of you willing to admit that you support both the process and the results?
If so, how bad can the condition of humanity get before your precious capitalist principles become untenable to you?
Is there any limit at all to your worship of capitalism?

Re: Richest 2% hold half of world\'s assets
 

The system leads to this, and it also leads to the innovation that has given us all the technological progress we've had in the past couple centuries. If we were to go back 200 years and make the world a big socialist haven, we'd be lucky to have electricity today.

Re: Richest 2% hold half of world\'s assets
 

[ QUOTE ]
The system leads to this, and it also leads to the innovation that has given us all the technological progress we've had in the past couple centuries. If we were to go back 200 years and make the world a big socialist haven, we'd be lucky to have electricity today.

[/ QUOTE ]

The communist manifesto states, and I agree, that capitalism was useful to build the bridge between feudalism, and socialism. We have already laid the groundwork to have a socialist society. The whole world can easily be fed clothed, schooled, and much more with the incredible productive power that we have now.

Re: Richest 2% hold half of world\'s assets
 

I've never asked a socialist this, so I'm curious. Snowball, why did the USSR collapse?

Re: Richest 2% hold half of world\'s assets
 

I believe that if you redistributed all the wealth in the world evenly, that it would eventually concentrate like this again. Some people are just not as good with capital/wealth/money/whatever as others.

Re: Richest 2% hold half of world\'s assets
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The system leads to this, and it also leads to the innovation that has given us all the technological progress we've had in the past couple centuries. If we were to go back 200 years and make the world a big socialist haven, we'd be lucky to have electricity today.

[/ QUOTE ]

The communist manifesto states, and I agree, that capitalism was useful to build the bridge between feudalism, and socialism. We have already laid the groundwork to have a socialist society. The whole world can easily be fed clothed, schooled, and much more with the incredible productive power that we have now.

[/ QUOTE ]

And never cure AIDS or cancer or explore the stars or acheive virtual reality or find more efficient food sources or a million other things. The scientific progress benifits of capitalism don't just stop because someone invented socialism. Perhaps I should have said television or the personal computer instead of electricity? The car or the airplane? Turn the world socialist and the poor will certainly see an immediate improvement in their condition. The problem is that progess will slow to the point that they'll be much, much worse off than they would have been 100 years from now.

Re: Richest 2% hold half of world\'s assets
 

[ QUOTE ]
The system leads to this, and it also leads to the innovation that has given us all the technological progress we've had in the past couple centuries. If we were to go back 200 years and make the world a big socialist haven, we'd be lucky to have electricity today.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gee, where have I been? Asleep? The communist USSR, although starting a long way behind the USA (from the worst form of feudalism, in fact), was, I thought, the first in space, the first satellite, the first animal in space, the first man in space and simultaneously the first orbiting man. The first USA citizen in space did not orbit and it came after the USSR had successfully launched a manned orbital vehicle. I would see these as some of the greatest technological achievements of the last century and the USA was pwnd! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: Richest 2% hold half of world\'s assets
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The system leads to this, and it also leads to the innovation that has given us all the technological progress we've had in the past couple centuries. If we were to go back 200 years and make the world a big socialist haven, we'd be lucky to have electricity today.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gee, where have I been? Asleep? The communist USSR, although starting a long way behind the USA (from the worst form of feudalism, in fact), was, I thought, the first in space, the first satellite, the first animal in space, the first man in space and simultaneously the first orbiting man. The first USA citizen in space did not orbit and it came after the USSR had successfully launched a manned orbital vehicle. I would see these as some of the greatest technological achievements of the last century and the USA was pwnd! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]
How's the USSR doing these days?

Re: Richest 2% hold half of world\'s assets
 

Probably better than the USA is doing in Iraq. But, hey, who would want to compare? After all the USSR got it tails between its legs in Afghanistan. Wait, the USA took the baton there too! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: Richest 2% hold half of world\'s assets
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The system leads to this, and it also leads to the innovation that has given us all the technological progress we've had in the past couple centuries. If we were to go back 200 years and make the world a big socialist haven, we'd be lucky to have electricity today.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gee, where have I been? Asleep? The communist USSR, although starting a long way behind the USA (from the worst form of feudalism, in fact), was, I thought, the first in space, the first satellite, the first animal in space, the first man in space and simultaneously the first orbiting man. The first USA citizen in space did not orbit and it came after the USSR had successfully launched a manned orbital vehicle. I would see these as some of the greatest technological achievements of the last century and the USA was pwnd! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, a starving population sounds like an exciting trade off. I'll freely admit that endeavors that can't turn a profit (aka, aren't useful to the poor) can suffer under capitalism. None of those things you mentioned actually make the lives of the poor any easier though.