Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > Other Topics > Politics
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-07-2006, 02:59 AM
SNOWBALL SNOWBALL is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Where the citizens kneel 4 sex
Posts: 7,795
Default 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?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-07-2006, 03:03 AM
AlexM AlexM is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Imaginationland
Posts: 5,200
Default 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.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-07-2006, 03:07 AM
SNOWBALL SNOWBALL is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Where the citizens kneel 4 sex
Posts: 7,795
Default 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.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-07-2006, 03:14 AM
Poofler Poofler is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Just making a little Earl Grey
Posts: 2,768
Default 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?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-07-2006, 03:15 AM
BCPVP BCPVP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,759
Default 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.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-07-2006, 03:17 AM
AlexM AlexM is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Imaginationland
Posts: 5,200
Default 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.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-07-2006, 03:17 AM
MidGe MidGe is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Shame on you, Blackwater!
Posts: 3,908
Default 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]
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-07-2006, 03:19 AM
BCPVP BCPVP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,759
Default 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?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-07-2006, 03:23 AM
MidGe MidGe is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Shame on you, Blackwater!
Posts: 3,908
Default 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]
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-07-2006, 03:25 AM
AlexM AlexM is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Imaginationland
Posts: 5,200
Default 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.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.