General > General Technical Chat
I have the feeling that the whole trade war starts from a pile of nonsense.
<< < (77/145) > >>
SparkyFX:

--- Quote from: Simon on June 04, 2019, 06:50:00 am ---160 characters is not enough to quote sources, is that enough of an excuse?
--- End quote ---
Enough to start a war, but not enough for the reason.


--- Quote ---It is somehow appropriate to compare economical equality to thermal entropy, if we think thermal energy as wealth. The global minimum of entropy - perfect inequality - is the Big Bang, and the global maximum of entropy - perfect equality - is heat death of the universe, neither of which is a pleasant state to be in.
--- End quote ---
No one said money or income must be the unit in which these are measured. It might actually be misleading to fix this on income, instead of effective living standards.

Anyway, even communism and socialism - that in its core definition try/tried to put everyone on a similar economic standard - suffered the problem that people always thrive toward more power, more influence, higher living standard, luxury goods, creating inequality in the process, it´s what was sarcastically said "being more similar than all the others". If the question was about loyalty to the state... it was being more loyal. Well, that and the totalitarian approach that justified it or was developed in the process. So capitalism and greed might create a financial inequality, but not necessarily needs to cross other lines. By no means justifies suffering hunger and basic needs although working fulltime.

That´s why i would argue that such questions are not related to income, it is strongly tied to competitive behavior of people or group psychology/behaviour in groups in general. It is not even a new thing, remember back in the days, when people used to live in caves, these snobs spared no expenses for these wall drawings.

Regarding the poverty line, i heard many people simply don´t apply for all programs available to improve their situation and are somewhat lost in the system. It is not optimal, but takes some stress out. Blaming others while not using all options would be rather unjustified, blaming the people that need it for the existence of those options would be unjustified, blaming it on immigrants is totally unjustified (there are some videos on it why).
So the complaints rather go toward the welfare state and the impending socialism by people that might not even be affected by whatever needs to be done. I´ve recently seen a video on the "captains of industry" and their influence on politics, it was basically by spreading rumors and spectre scenarios.
Simon:
Well in a free and open society with a an exchange system based on money, money is the easiest measure to use and so long as you can get money by working and use money to buy the goods and services you need money is the obvious measure of how well "compensated" people are for their work and how good thoir standard of living can be with that income because they have to use money to purchase evrything they want.

The problem with money is when it stops being a means of exchange of goods and services and is used in a more unatural way. People who see themselves mesured by what they earn will want to earn more, not because they need the money to live but because it bolsters their prestige and position in society. Ultimately it is about power and money buys power too and this is the problem. When money stops being a means to buy goods and services but becomes a means to aquire power it use becomes detremental.
apis:

--- Quote from: technix on June 04, 2019, 02:56:28 am ---
--- Quote from: windsmurf on June 03, 2019, 06:00:30 am ---Good video, lays out what Bernie Sanders, AOC, etc are battling. 
Trump blamed that on immigration, unfair trade, etc. and the country fell for it while he increased the level of inequity. 

--- End quote ---
AFAIK a capitalistic world needs some income equality and some inflation to pump growth, but it is never a good idea to overshoot it. US might have overshot the income inequality here.

--- End quote ---
It's not the income inequality in that graph, it's the wealth inequality (or wealth distribution). The income inequality in the US is also very high but it's not the same thing. Some countries have low income inequality but very large wealth inequality and vice versa.

For example, from the article posted before:
"the 62 richest billionaires own as much wealth as the poorer half of the world’s population."
and
"1% of people own more wealth than the other 99% combined."
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jan/18/richest-62-billionaires-wealthy-half-world-population-combined

Those 62 billionaires can have 0 income, but they are still doing quite well, because they have a lot of gold in the bank.

A little bit of income inequality might be good, so that those who work more get rewarded, but I think it's crazy the way it is now. If you were to redistribute all the wealth in america, everyone would be as rich as the richest 80%! And despite that people often say the world can not afford to pay a few extra $$ for some food and medicine for the poor and sick.
Simon:
Well the system is supposed to or logically should be based on those that are born intelligent get on well and make money. They can buy themselves a decent standard af living and they won't have to spend silly hours working so they have time to nuture their offspring who in turn if intelligent will do well and so there is natural selection. But then society came along and it's oh so inconvenient when the offspring of the rich are not so clever after all but we sweep that under the carpet and give them qualifications from prestigious institutions that are more about bringing them up into their class than teaching them. And then oh dear they realize that with all of this family fortune they can make it into politics, I mean they have had the upbringning for public life the fact that they are too stupid to get basic systems engineering (our society run correctly) does not matter they just seek to further their own interests and of people like them.

Others that if they were not already trodden down could have achievud the same potential sometimes helped by the ability to get the correct artificial credentials the system likes do well to some degree but are kept in constant fear of being booted into poverty are easily turned on the poor who in turn languishing in complete ignorance are given other convenient targets like immigrants and so you have the class system.

I have listened on the radio to people crying about how they lost their job and now can't affort their lifestyle or to keep their expensive house. They reiterate that while they look rich because of their house etc they have no income to sustain it and i think, surely if you could afford that house, you could afford one just a bit cheaper and build yourself a years worth of rainy day fund? but no. Every one is trying to get ahead oy each other and will max out their income on assets to display to society. So it starts with cars. I have seen great cars parked outside shithole houses and though, surely you want to buy a better house first? but no, your work collegues see you in your car but they don't see your house so you buy the car instead to show off and so it goes on.
apis:

--- Quote from: Simon on June 04, 2019, 08:29:20 pm ---Well the system is supposed to or logically should be based on those that are born intelligent get on well and make money. They can buy themselves a decent standard af living and they won't have to spend silly hours working so they have time to nuture their offspring who in turn if intelligent will do well and so there is natural selection. But then society came along and it's oh so inconvenient when the offspring of the rich are not so clever after all but we sweep that under the carpet and give them qualifications from prestigious institutions that are more about bringing them up into their class than teaching them. And then oh dear they realize that with all of this family fortune they can make it into politics, I mean they have had the upbringning for public life the fact that they are too stupid to get basic systems engineering (our society run correctly) does not matter they just seek to further their own interests and of people like them.

--- End quote ---
I agree but I don't think was supposed to be one thing or another, it just is, there is no intention behind it. Sort of like, rocks fall down toward the ground, not because they are supposed to, it just happens to be that way. People who got a head start (not necessarily because they were more intelligent, maybe they where more ruthless, or maybe just dumb luck, etc.) set up the system so that they would benefit and to make it easier for their offspring. And then that repeated, until we ended up with what we have now. I.e. a system that only benefits the richest and their families. It's sort of the natural evolution of things, but there's nothing saying it couldn't or shouldn't be different.


--- Quote from: Simon on June 04, 2019, 08:29:20 pm ---Every one is trying to get ahead oy each other and will max out their income on assets to display to society. So it starts with cars. I have seen great cars parked outside shithole houses and though, surely you want to buy a better house first? but no, your work collegues see you in your car but they don't see your house so you buy the car instead to show off and so it goes on.

--- End quote ---
People are unfortunately people, there's no point in denying human nature. However society shouldn't reward stupid behaviour like it does now. We basically reward those who are greedy and ruthless the most, while a doctor who sets up a clinic for the poor is punished. What that means for society in the long term can't be good.
Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod