World Government

[pErvinalia]

@Hermit...

Nah, you're still wrong. Something is excessive if it is... wait for it... excessive. Of course, as you get closer to the poverty line, it becomes a greyer area. But the vast majority of middle and upper class people in the western world have wealth well in excess of what they need to survive. Blind Groper lives in a fantasy world (well, they did film LoTRs there... ) if he thinks everyone on the planet can live a middle class and above western lifestyle.

[mistermack]

The world blew it's best chance of a benevolent world government.

They could have all joined the British Empire.

With lessons in cricket, and a devotion to ''Mama Queen'', the world could have been a civilised place by now.

[laklak]

Those regimental uniforms would be a lot more comfortable now, what with air conditioning and all. Buttoned up wool collars in the Indian heat, sheesh.

[FBM]

http://www.exposingthetruth.co/85-riche ... z2tup1AdSW

85 Richest Individuals Now Own as Much as Half of The Global Population
posted by M Caulfield January 21, 2014

Wealth inequality continues to grow: the world’s 85 richest individuals now own as much, as the poorest half of the global population, according to a report released by Oxfam. The report calls on governments to target international tax dodgers and invest in public institutions like healthcare, and to implement progressive taxes and eradicate opaque political structures that encourage corruption. According to the report, 210 people have become billionaires within the past year, joining a select group of 1,426 individuals who have a combined net worth upwards of $5.4 trillion. The combined wealth of the richest one percent of people in the world now amounts to over $110 trillion.

...

Yeah, it's busted and we need to fix it.

[Blind groper]

Blind Groper lives in a fantasy world (well, they did film LoTRs there... ) if he thinks everyone on the planet can live a middle class and above western lifestyle.

Actually, the average 'poor' person in the USA owns a car and a color TV, and probably a computer. In that sense, he is wealthier than the richest men who lived in the 19th century. In addition, he is probably obese. Poverty no longer means hunger.

To FBM

A suggested alternative to the richest people owning half the planet. The governments of the 200 odd nations get to own half the planet. Would that be better?

[FBM]

Are those the only alternatives you can think of?

[pErvinalia]

Blind Groper lives in a fantasy world (well, they did film LoTRs there... ) if he thinks everyone on the planet can live a middle class and above western lifestyle.

Actually, the average 'poor' person in the USA owns a car and a color TV, and probably a computer. In that sense, he is wealthier than the richest men who lived in the 19th century. In addition, he is probably obese. Poverty no longer means hunger.

That doesn't even address what I've said. It's not about money (per se), it's about resource usage.

[Audley Strange]

http://www.exposingthetruth.co/85-riche ... z2tup1AdSW

85 Richest Individuals Now Own as Much as Half of The Global Population
posted by M Caulfield January 21, 2014

Wealth inequality continues to grow: the world’s 85 richest individuals now own as much, as the poorest half of the global population, according to a report released by Oxfam. The report calls on governments to target international tax dodgers and invest in public institutions like healthcare, and to implement progressive taxes and eradicate opaque political structures that encourage corruption. According to the report, 210 people have become billionaires within the past year, joining a select group of 1,426 individuals who have a combined net worth upwards of $5.4 trillion. The combined wealth of the richest one percent of people in the world now amounts to over $110 trillion.

...

Yeah, it's busted and we need to fix it.

So what about person 86? Free pass? or person 1427? I wonder how much I own in comparison to the poor half, I'm frugal with money but worked hard and saved enough that I'm probably better off than most of the folk (other than drug dealers) in my neighbourhood. At what point do we stop "fixing the problem." How do we "Fix" it?

And how much does the head of Oxfam get paid, part of the problem or the solution? How much do they spend on advertising?

Also the old adage about teaching a man to fish is one thing, but if said man lives with 25,000 others and they all fish the same spot, do we then have to teach them to share or dump more fishing rods on them? Its a complex problem which sounds good to talk about solving, but I don't see any solutions forthcoming from anyone.

[Audley Strange]

http://www.exposingthetruth.co/85-riche ... z2tup1AdSW

85 Richest Individuals Now Own as Much as Half of The Global Population
posted by M Caulfield January 21, 2014

Wealth inequality continues to grow: the world’s 85 richest individuals now own as much, as the poorest half of the global population, according to a report released by Oxfam. The report calls on governments to target international tax dodgers and invest in public institutions like healthcare, and to implement progressive taxes and eradicate opaque political structures that encourage corruption. According to the report, 210 people have become billionaires within the past year, joining a select group of 1,426 individuals who have a combined net worth upwards of $5.4 trillion. The combined wealth of the richest one percent of people in the world now amounts to over $110 trillion.

...

Yeah, it's busted and we need to fix it.

So what about person 86? Free pass? or person 1427? I wonder how much I own in comparison to the poor half, I'm frugal with money but worked hard and saved enough that I'm probably better off than most of the folk (other than drug dealers) in my neighbourhood. At what point do we stop "fixing the problem." How do we "Fix" it?

And how much does the head of Oxfam get paid, part of the problem or the solution? How much do they spend on advertising?

Also the old adage about teaching a man to fish is one thing, but if said man lives with 25,000 others and they all fish the same spot, do we then have to teach them to share or dump more fishing rods on them? Its a complex problem which sounds good to talk about solving, but I don't see any solutions forthcoming from anyone.

[FBM]

Step one is getting enough people to be aware of the problem. Then it's up to brains bigger than mine to find the most effective solution.

[Audley Strange]

Step one is getting enough people to admit that there is a problem. Then it's up to brains bigger than mine to find the most effective solution.

I think generally we can see across the political spectrum that people do recognise there is a problem, I think many on both sides consistently point to the source too before they get stuck in ideology and start blaming the part of the population they don't like. Their common complaint that Trans-National corporations have far too much influence in the legal and political shape of the globe as well as wielding almost all the economic power. The flaw in our system is that we have made them abide by rules that make them inimical to both taxation and free trade.

To me that is because after a certain size a corporation must work on a plutocratic model to sustain itself. That's my "why".

So the problem is how do we keep them in check, now we've let them loose? Especially since it seems dismantling them could cause chaos.

Anyway was just wondering if you had any ideas. As I say, a complex problem.

Also, is not taking jobs from rich westerners and giving them to poor 2nd and third world economies a more effective redistribution of wealth than any such schemes from governments of a communist or socialist bent?

Again, just wondering.

[FBM]

I think generally we can see across the political spectrum that people do recognise there is a problem, I think many on both sides consistently point to the source too before they get stuck in ideology and start blaming the part of the population they don't like. Their common complaint that Trans-National corporations have far too much influence in the legal and political shape of the globe as well as wielding almost all the economic power. The flaw in our system is that we have made them abide by rules that make them inimical to both taxation and free trade.

However, the middle and lower classes see a different problem, generally speaking, from the upper class. And the left identifies a different problem from the right, the libertarians yet another, etc. There's still a great deal of latent Social Darwinist - and Calvinist - thinking out there, particularly among the haves. Show them picture of poor, even starving people and their response (whether spoken or inward) is likely to be something along the lines of, "Of course!"

To me that is because after a certain size a corporation must work on a plutocratic model to sustain itself. That's my "why".

So the problem is how do we keep them in check, now we've let them loose? Especially since it seems dismantling them could cause chaos.

Anyway was just wondering if you had any ideas. As I say, a complex problem.

I wouldn't propose anything so drastic as dismantling them. Restructuring the tax burden would be a good start. Some of those billionaires have recognized and vocally supported the idea that they should pay a proportionately higher percentage of taxes. I also don't see any ideological problem with putting a cap on CEO salaries, as long as it's a generous one. These people are extraordinarily greedy and extraordinarily powerful, so a compromise would just be an acceptance of the way things are, rather than as we would have them be.

Also, is not taking jobs from rich westerners and giving them to poor 2nd and third world economies a more effective redistribution of wealth than any such schemes from governments of a communist or socialist bent?

Again, just wondering.

I'd be quite happy to see that happen, assuming that those jobs weren't in substandard sweatshops that employed school-age children. I don't have any bias towards or against capitalist, communist or socialist ideologies. I'm far too pragmatic for that. Whatever solves the problem, regardless of label, is fine by me.

[Audley Strange]

Ah well be careful, because one of the easiest solutions which never seems to be off the table is exterminate the poor, the middle classes, or the rich, depending on which loons are making the demands.

I'm not sure taxing 85 people to oblivion is much of a solution, I think even at 95% taxation it wouldn't be that much. Personally I think shareowners should be liable for losses as well as profits and that there should be V.A.T. on all shares as luxury items. This might make them a bit more cautious with their portfolios.

[pErvinalia]

Capitalism won't ever be reformed (in a civilised manner) as governments and corporations have ideologically become the same thing.

[FBM]

Ah well be careful, because one of the easiest solutions which never seems to be off the table is exterminate the poor, the middle classes, or the rich, depending on which loons are making the demands.

I'm not sure taxing 85 people to oblivion is much of a solution, I think even at 95% taxation it wouldn't be that much. Personally I think shareowners should be liable for losses as well as profits and that there should be V.A.T. on all shares as luxury items. This might make them a bit more cautious with their portfolios.

All I can suggest is that you do the math. Put all that the middle and lower classes have together and no matter how much you tax them, you still can't get 10% of what a small increase in the taxes of those 85 would produce. They've got almost all of everything. A small change in what they contribute would far outweigh a large change in what everyone else HAS, much less what they might be able to contribute.