4 ms·

Really puts in perspective how bad it has gotten.

barry-cotter 8y ago
Indeed, we all long for the days, before 1800 or so, the overwhelming majority of human history, when the people living on more than $2 a day were a vanishingly small minority. The expansion of health, wealth, education and prosperity since WW2 has been particularly revolting. Education and lifespan have increased on every continent and wealth per person has increased on every continent bar Africa. This is not the wretched poverty, suffering and disease, the death in childbirth, the children dying in their droves in infancy that we deserve.
- cyborgx7 8y ago
  Are you denying that the income and wealth disparity between the poor and the rich is currently widening?
  - beaconstudios 8y ago
    You're just sat in the 1%, looking up at the .01% and decrying the immorality of their success. Worldwide, the number of people living in extreme poverty has IIRC halved since the 90s. Fatal diseases in third world countries are being prevented. Things are getting better for the most vulnerable people but everyone is focused on how unjust it is that Warren Buffett or Jeff Bezos makes more than them. Why care?
    - cyborgx7 8y ago
      I'm not in the 1%. The reason I care is because the primary reason for still so many people living in poverty, is the people hoarding money and doing what they can against anything that could change that.
      - IncRnd 8y ago
        The people in the article aren't hoarding money. They are paying the salaries of many people with their gaming.
        cyborgx7 8y ago
        And afterwards they will still have thousands of times what regular people have.
        beaconstudios 8y ago
        so what? Should we all have the same, or similar? I would've thought the focus would be on lifting up the poorest, not bringing down the richest. If you bankrupted every billionaire in the world you could give everyone on the planet about $1000, and that's presuming that a) net worth estimates are accurate and b) liquidating a billionaire's net worth would actually result in that amount of cash (it wouldn't). Ultra-rich individuals hoarding money aren't exactly emptying out the economy.
        cyborgx7 8y ago
        I disagree with the premise that some unelected individuals should control such a disproportionate amount of ressources, and therefore power, yes.
        beaconstudios 8y ago
        OK, but the primary reason billionaires are so rich is from running or founding companies that produce much more value than the billionaires extract. Take away the idea that a successful founder can keep maybe 1% (at most, probably a vast overestimate) of the value they generate, and you'll have vastly fewer founders unless you find another way to motivate them. In terms of power, ideally there would be a clean separation between money and political power. Some countries are better at this than others. Extremely wealthy people can wield a lot of power internationally, and that's bad. But them having more resources is not a bad thing in my mind unless they can use those resources to hurt people. As far as I'm aware, most don't.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - tormeh 8y ago
      >Why care? Because humans (apes also do this) don't look at absolutes. They look at the relative. And they ask if it's fair. Human-like primates obsess about fairness.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

Indeed, we all long for the days, before 1800 or so, the overwhelming majority of human history, when the people living on more than $2 a day were a vanishingly small minority. The expansion of health, wealth, education and prosperity since WW2 has been particularly revolting. Education and lifespan have increased on every continent and wealth per person has increased on every continent bar Africa. This is not the wretched poverty, suffering and disease, the death in childbirth, the children dying in their droves in infancy that we deserve.

cyborgx7 8y ago
Are you denying that the income and wealth disparity between the poor and the rich is currently widening?
- beaconstudios 8y ago
  You're just sat in the 1%, looking up at the .01% and decrying the immorality of their success. Worldwide, the number of people living in extreme poverty has IIRC halved since the 90s. Fatal diseases in third world countries are being prevented. Things are getting better for the most vulnerable people but everyone is focused on how unjust it is that Warren Buffett or Jeff Bezos makes more than them. Why care?
  - cyborgx7 8y ago
    I'm not in the 1%. The reason I care is because the primary reason for still so many people living in poverty, is the people hoarding money and doing what they can against anything that could change that.
    - IncRnd 8y ago
      The people in the article aren't hoarding money. They are paying the salaries of many people with their gaming.
      - cyborgx7 8y ago
        And afterwards they will still have thousands of times what regular people have.
        beaconstudios 8y ago
        so what? Should we all have the same, or similar? I would've thought the focus would be on lifting up the poorest, not bringing down the richest. If you bankrupted every billionaire in the world you could give everyone on the planet about $1000, and that's presuming that a) net worth estimates are accurate and b) liquidating a billionaire's net worth would actually result in that amount of cash (it wouldn't). Ultra-rich individuals hoarding money aren't exactly emptying out the economy.
        cyborgx7 8y ago
        I disagree with the premise that some unelected individuals should control such a disproportionate amount of ressources, and therefore power, yes.
        beaconstudios 8y ago
        OK, but the primary reason billionaires are so rich is from running or founding companies that produce much more value than the billionaires extract. Take away the idea that a successful founder can keep maybe 1% (at most, probably a vast overestimate) of the value they generate, and you'll have vastly fewer founders unless you find another way to motivate them. In terms of power, ideally there would be a clean separation between money and political power. Some countries are better at this than others. Extremely wealthy people can wield a lot of power internationally, and that's bad. But them having more resources is not a bad thing in my mind unless they can use those resources to hurt people. As far as I'm aware, most don't.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - tormeh 8y ago
    >Why care? Because humans (apes also do this) don't look at absolutes. They look at the relative. And they ask if it's fair. Human-like primates obsess about fairness.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]