"Money Makes The World Go Round"

[M. Ward]

My mother works for a third world childrens organisation. This past October, she spent some time in Haiti. Ive seen video and pictures of this trip. I thought it was bad when the street I live on was a little dirty. To give you an idea of what Haitian streets look like..

http://www.ccare.ca/db_m_1.jpg

The point of this thread is not the situation in Haiti, however. I used it as more of an eye opener. What I want to bring up is the way the world is. While reading my Social Studies text book, one of the "bubbles" said that there were 460 Billionaires in the world, and they, combinded, had over half of the total income of the world. 460 people. 6,369,507,634 people in the world. Does that sound right to you?

[condor888000]

It's not right, it's not logical, but it's how the world works.

[JGallagher]

You have money you can have just about any thing you want. I would have alot of stuff.

[CONtroversial_subject]

thats capitalism. Rich get richer, poor get poorer. Even those who do come up from the projects, some billionare is still taking 90% of whatever they are really earning for whatever they do.

[Wood]

Its not fair, but its not just the billionaires. If everyone on the planet could sit here typing on their computer and have a television a closet full of clothes and all the other luxuries you and me enjoy then the human race would have already have died off. The world can't support us. When it comes down to it we're all living in luxury because someone else is living in poverty.

[Earlam]

Its not fair, but its not just the billionaires. If everyone on the planet could sit here typing on their computer and have a television a closet full of clothes and all the other luxuries you and me enjoy then the human race would have already have died off. The world can't support us. When it comes down to it we're all living in luxury because someone else is living in poverty.

I believe there is enough wealth in the good 'ole Earth to support our population. But it's never going to happen.
If it did, the First World would have to drop its standard of living by... I dunno..... say 70%? Everyone could survive, nobody would be comfortable.

"When it comes down to it we're all living in luxury because someone else is living in poverty."
And that's just the way we like it, though we don't often care to admit it.

[The Blue Tory]

meh... I was lucky enough to be born in a developed nation... therefore I should take full advantage it. They were unlucky to be born in an undeveloped or developing nation, though there are always those who care and try to make a difference... though those people are few...

[Wood]

I'm not an economics major or anything like that, but I'll just put my assessment of the situation into this. The actual money isn't really important, its the what you can buy with that money. The billionaires money was probably made mostly by selling stuff, to people meaning that the real stuff isn't in the billionaires home but right here in our own homes. So really what you have is stagnant money at least as far as the world's resources are concerned. The world could not support all their money being turned into something real, even food, do you think the world could afford to double its food production, and then its wood and oil and mining and a whole lit of things. Probably not. In real terms the billionaires money pretty much just supports our economic system, but since they don't put it into something that involves providing themselves with huge amount of resources (merely other people) its kind of irrelevant. Well at least that's my incomprehensible analysis, in any case I put the blame on myself, how much could a poor african tribe done with a nice lab top to organize themselfs?

I've always heard that if everyone lived like Canadians we'd need 100 earths to support us.

[The Blue Tory]

I'm not an economics major or anything like that, but I'll just put my assessment of the situation into this. The actual money isn't really important, its the what you can buy with that money. The billionaires money was probably made mostly by selling stuff, to people meaning that the real stuff isn't in the billionaires home but right here in our own homes. So really what you have is stagnant money at least as far as the world's resources are concerned. The world could not support all their money being turned into something real, even food, do you think the world could afford to double its food production, and then its wood and oil and mining and a whole lit of things. Probably not. In real terms the billionaires money pretty much just supports our economic system, but since they don't put it into something that involves providing themselves with huge amount of resources (merely other people) its kind of irrelevant. Well at least that's my incomprehensible analysis, in any case I put the blame on myself, how much could a poor african tribe done with a nice lab top to organize themselfs?

I've always heard that if everyone lived like Canadians we'd need 100 earths to support us.
using your situation... a laptop wouldn't help a poor african tribe, since they'd have no electricity or way to power it, no internet connection, nothing to keep it from the elements... Housing and food would be better options... unless the said laptop is a symbol of $3,000

[piper]

Thats how the world works. There are haves and have-nots. Maybye its not right, but thats how it is. There will never be equality.

[Wood]

The world may always be unequal but there are degrees of inequality, there's a difference between slavery and two lesbians not being aboe to make out in a bar, and there's a difference between living in extreme poverty and not owning your own jet.

No the laptop wan't supposed to be symbolic of $3000 as I said money isn't really that important to be pumping into the third world. It will stop meaning anything because we'll run out of resources.

Hey, I never said I was the entire problem. I'll get them a labtop that's my part, and you can pull all the wires out of your home ;). Does anyone have a nuclear power station on their basement to donate? :D

Besides labtops have batteries, someone will just have to replace them for them when they run out....

[CONtroversial_subject]

Thats how the world works. There are haves and have-nots. Maybye its not right, but thats how it is. There will never be equality.


Yea see the man always says **** just like that. But everybody seen what happened with the brothers when they decided it wasn't gonna be like that no more. Eventually everybody is gonna say to hell with this poor ****. Thats where wars come from, and what our gov't does is shut em up, which is how it works, its also how La Cosa Nostra works.

[piper]

That post made absolutally no sense. Again, haves and have nots. But that post was a little different from one you made in another forum where you said, basically, 'to hell with the poor people, make me another pair of nikes!!'. A little hipocracy there?

[CONtroversial_subject]

no I said I dont care about them, I didn't say different here. I just said they are going to get to the point where they wont put up with it anymore. I cant go around caring about every other poor starving family in the world, I worry about making sure that my family has food on the table, I could care less about anybody else's family.

[Wood]

no I said I dont care about them, I didn't say different here. I just said they are going to get to the point where they wont put up with it anymore. I cant go around caring about every other poor starving family in the world, I worry about making sure that my family has food on the table, I could care less about anybody else's family.

All I can say is what comes around goes around. Histroy is full of the revolutions and upheavels, when it comes down to it the world problems will become your problems.

[CONtroversial_subject]

No it aint gonna be my problem. If they wanna stand up and fight for their freedom, good for them. We as a race will find a way to produce **** without manual labor, we'll have to one everybody stands up for themselves, ive said that how many times? but if you get off on twisting with my words go ahead, whatever does it for you.

[Wood]

How did I twist your words? Maybe I just couldn't understand what you're trying to express. My only point is that when you ignore people they get mad, things build up and happen. Terrorist attacks and wars being the far extreme, inconviencing your life through protests and such being the minor side.

[CONtroversial_subject]

of course things happen, I think I said that in another topic, that things WILL happen over the cheap labor issue, but thats their fight. Im not American, I fight my battles, not everybody else's. I'll support anybody who wants to stand up for their freedom, that doesn't mean im gonna fight their battle for them though, thats their problem.

[Svejk]

Some interesting discussion but obviously the Points are being made with mostly reference to what is taught in public education with a collectivist bias (socialist/fascist/communist) bias.

What we think of as "capitalist" isn't: even Canada and the US have adopted at least 6 out of 10 Karl Marx's plan. (I will add a link later but don't have the Time to find it now). Under true capitalism the Have-nots would have more:the pie grows.

Poor countries, more often than not, are poor because they have no property rights and are in constant upheaval due to Collectivist "Revolutions" and the Weak Will of the People. Amusingly, Canadians have very little property rights.

What exactly has happened: "But everybody seen what happened with the brothers when they decided it wasn't gonna be like that no more. Eventually everybody is gonna say to hell with this poor ****." Centralizing into race based ghettos, and enforcing cultural norms of "ebonics" and " uncle toms" to ensure that people can't improve their situation.

I will post more when I have more time. Get Thomas Sowell's Book "Basic Economics" for the Real Deal instead of what the Collectivist Value Stealers want you to think.

As the Maple so the Sapling.

[CONtroversial_subject]

In true capitalism, the government becomes obsolute, it is the system of money rules all. I would think that the ammount of poor people would increase as a result of that, not decrease.



Some interesting discussion but obviously the Points are being made with mostly reference to what is taught in public education


Sorry we all aren't as priveledged to be able to afford private schooling. Capitalism is great for those who HAVE money, but you need money to make money, thats how its setup.

[Earlam]

Sorry we all aren't as priveledged to be able to afford private schooling. Capitalism is great for those who HAVE money, but you need money to make money, thats how its setup.

Not neccessarily.....
But having a bundle to start with doesn't hurt any.

[Dick]

Some interesting discussion but obviously the Points are being made with mostly reference to what is taught in public education with a collectivist bias (socialist/fascist/communist) bias
I suck because I have a public education. :( dang.

[Svejk]

I have a public school education as well. Since my parents came as imigrants we aren't made of money.

I just see that it does have an anti-liberty collectivist slant. A free enterprise system is the best for the Rich and the Poor. It is the Only System so far that allows you to raise your own quality of life and that is fully sustainable: every iother system steals someone else's property.

More people have been killed by their own governments than from foriegn invaders.

[CONtroversial_subject]

Svejk does have a point there. For all the flaws, the US and Canadian systems are the best ones we've come up with so far. That dont mean there aint room for improvement though.

[Ching]

I suck because I have a public education. :( dang.
No, that's not why, Richard. You just do. :)

[Svejk]

The World can't Support Us? Wrong. We just haven't necessarily developed the Technologies to do so. How do you think they can reopen King Solomon's Mines for gold mining after 1 thousand years? New technology that makes resources cheaper to extract. After we can't extract anymore, we find substitutes, or recycle. Not saying we should be wasteful but the Pie grows larger as civilization advances.

The Reason that people are starving isn't that we can't grow enough food, it is that the World doesn't have an efficient distribution system and that people are starved as a tool of war and oppression. Free enterprise economies have the Least Average Starvation than do others.

Its all about the Politics controlled by the Collectivists.

[CONtroversial_subject]

Yet the world rejects countries like the United States when they try to spread democracy? you can't help those who dont wanna be saved.

[wb256]

[QUOTE=Svejk]every iother system steals someone else's property.QUOTE]


Private Property is a cultural variable...it's socially constructed, not an essentialist concept. The idea that greater amoubnts of private property result ina better life for everyone is not a fact, it's an opinion.

Poor countries, more often than not, are poor due to historical processes FAR more complex than simply blaiming it on lack of a free market.

The formation of the 3rd world has many other major influences. The process of colonial expansion limited the type of economic expansion the current 3rd (or less developed) world could undergo (since their economies were controlled by europe). Also, their economies were completely dependant upon europe.

Upon independance this relationship of dependance had not ended. Money, skilled workers, teachers, doctors, materials, etc were all required from the former colonial powers. This resulted in the need for loans.

With the Oil crisis in the 70's, more loans were obviously required. Now loans were being taken out for simple survival (to purchase medicine, food, etc), rather than to promote economic expansion. By this time, the LDW was in SERIOUS debt.

All of this combined with the conditions of the loans they took (from the WB and IMF) made it impossible to break this relationship of dependancy. The terms of these loans (controlling the ways in which governments should be run, the type of crops that should be grown, who the crops should be grown for, etc) has semeted their role in the global economy.

Worsening this situation is the subsidies given to 1st world farmers. The current situation allows 1st world farmers to sell their surplus crops in the LDW for prices below that of local farmers.

[Svejk]

Smarter minds than ours debate these issues to no firm conclusion but...

There is a very strong correlation between long term wealth and strong private property rights.

Yes, the Poverty Process is complex but free enterprise is a major factor, if not only, factor in building long term wealth.

Yes, the Third World is on the Debt cycle, just like we are, but just like Aid packages it is misspent by the Collectivists on weapons etc. When you support Aid Packages you are actually supporting dictaorships.

Debt can help though: take a look at "microfinance" programs. These are very effective packages of aid where the Third World Client Person, not money sucking bureaucrat, is loaned, at market rates, around $300 to improve their business. The Lender makes money, the Client makes money, and the Client can become trained to lend money as well. I don't have the Reference Book, but I can find it. Free enterprise rules.

I agree with the Statements on the WB and IMF. These are tools of enslavment that are dressed up as Aid Packages. The Terms and Conditions of IMF and kill priavte property rights. There is a movie about the IMF and Jamaica but I can't find a reference to it on the Internet. I will post it if I can find it. Subsidies, including the BSE Handouts, are the Governemnt robbing you and me to pay bad businesspeople.

Democracy (Tyranny of the Majority) should not be the Goal: Liberty should be. It was a democracy that had Socrates poison himself. Just because it is a majority doesn't make it right.

[wb256]

Many free market economies are still in a state of poverty. Look at Chile under pinochet.

Also, claiming that all aid packages support dictators is a slight generalization. There are poor nations with democracy, however once a democracy becomes poor the citizens are generally suseptible to the promises of a dictator. Dictators are more successful if the democracy is relativly new as well (as they are in the entire post-colonial world). A good example of how dictators play off of the fears of an unstable economy would be the nazi takeover of Germany, or the Fascist takeover of Italy. Dictators don't necessarily cause economic hardships, many times it's the economic hardships that cause the dictator.

Another point against free market systems is that free trade is (for the most part) NOT fair trade. There's no way small countries can develop themselves without bending over backwards to the wishes of multi national and trans national corporations. This obviously results in the loss of culture on a widespread scale and enviromental and human rights abuses.

Also, in a free market system these major corporations can provide goods (tax free) to the people of these third world nations at costs far lower than domestic manufacturers can. This takes away any market that domestic companies have and means (as stated above) that development can only come by allowing TNC's and MNC's to set up shop.

[offguard96]

I just see that it does have an anti-liberty collectivist slant. A free enterprise system is the best for the Rich and the Poor. It is the Only System so far that allows you to raise your own quality of life and that is fully sustainable: every iother system steals someone else's property.

When has the world known this truly free enterprise system, and where was it practiced?


The World can't Support Us? Wrong.

The world can support us, but not our lifestyles. Given current technology, if everyone was to have a house, two cars in the garage, and the kind of energy-gulping luxuries we have in the West, the Earth would not be able to cope. This is becoming evident in China, as more and more cars are purchased by average-Joe consumers. Yes, there may be hope in technology, but for now that's the way it is.


Subsidies, including the BSE Handouts, are the Governemnt robbing you and me to pay bad businesspeople.

If I understand correctly, I disagree. I don't think mad cow disease is a result of bad business. Bad example, though your point is valid that the Government paying bad business to stay in business with our money is a bad thing.


Democracy (Tyranny of the Majority) should not be the Goal: Liberty should be. It was a democracy that had Socrates poison himself. Just because it is a majority doesn't make it right.

Agreed.

[wb256]

If I understand correctly, I disagree. I don't think mad cow disease is a result of bad business. Bad example, though your point is valid that the Government paying bad business to stay in business with our money is a bad thing.

I think he was referring to the money given to farmers effected by BSE by the government. Subsidies such as these make it impossible for LDW farmers to compete in the cash crop market, even in their home countries. It dooms many farmers to a lifestyle of subsistence farming.