As explained by a german satirical newspaper:
These 26 people are so hardworking that they perform around 148 million times as much as a person on the lazier part of the world population" says a spokesman of the organisation. "That is a really impressive performance for which these 26 people are being rewarded greatly completely justified. A normal person could not imagine what it would mean to work that hard."
New data is suggesting that the gap between lazy and hardworking is more and more increasing. "Whether it's because the hardworking are becoming more and more hardworking or if the billions lazy are becoming more and more lazy is not completely clear yet." says the spokesperson.Though it would not harm anyone from the lower income half to finally just work harder.
Comments
(Old Spike)
(Old Spike)
whats your solution? i dont have one but just asking... because it looks like we are effectively going back to a state of kings and peasants under the guise of capitalism..maybe the market will sort it out..
(Old Spike)
I've been thinking about this a lot. On one side, many of these billionaires aren't personally spending billions of dollar to live they are reinvesting it. I see some good re-investments into tech. Why would we tax that more? Arguably faster investment in technology will help the world even more vs a slower investment and a longer time to help the world, which could actually mean more people suffer. Phones in Africa have brought people together and have driven significant economic prosperity and education. The ability for wireless communications where there exists no land line infrastructure is an example of of technology making the world better. We also have all the old billionaries giving away most of their fortunes to programs to help the world like the Giving Pledge. Is taxation better? If the government spends it on the people maybe.
On the other side, I sometimes wonder if there is the unwritten rule that we know the world does not have enough land to feed everyone properly so let's quietly let them die off till were back down to 3-4 Billion and then we can look at equalizing quality of life.
(Site Moderator)
You are absolutely correct in saying that more investment in technology will make us all better off. But look at the core technologies we are using now: computers, automation, the internet and countless others came out of the state sector because no private company would be crazy enough to invest for decades without seeing any profit. But that is simply required in order to establish the basic science we need for transformative technologies. It is only relatively late in the game that private companies take over.
Also bear in mind that most of the ultra rich are not self-made billionaire tech gurus despite some of those in tech being more prominent. And you're got plenty of assholes like Rupert Murdoch or the Koch brothers who actively use their fortunes to screw over civil society.
(Old Spike)
So you are saying if governments taxed companies more and used it to fund disruptive tech it could help better. Of course, it's a bit of both, there is a lot of innovation coming out of companies with deep pockets but of course even new areas that have big tech gaps, where a clear path to profibility is unclear could use some government funding.
I does seem that a lot of the big billionaires in tech have altruistic goals, especially when compared to others who seem to care about wealth soley as a primary goal.
Makes me think about GE where they invest so heavily in innovation they get to write those costs off and end up paying little to no tax. Wealth motives? Maybe... Altruistic? Probably not, but not necessarily from a neglectful motive.
So how can there be a solution? It's almost like the solution is to ask all wealthy people to have altruistic goals. And help themselves but also help society. Government can definitly play a role in bringing up the bottom of society here to reduce poverty, through education and other programs. Though, even they get this bungled up.
Maybe the reason it is such a tough problem to solve is because we are at a time where there is such a wealth differential and that those billionaires can make a difference.
(Old Spike)
What's my solution? Well I take issue with your premise that there is a problem to begin with. Unless you can show me evidence that the wealth in question was unlawfully taken from other people, there is no problem. I've never had some wealthy guy fraudulently withdraw money from my bank account or steal my property. The fact that certain people have far more than other people and you think that is somehow wrong says more about you and your envy than it does about those people.
Wealth is not a zero sum game. In other words, it isn't like there is a economic constant called "wealth" that is fixed and these few people are hoarding it all. Wealth is something you can create. This is not a problem with capitalism, this a problem with your ass focusing on ways and reasons to TAKE wealth from other people instead of on ways to better yourself or create your own wealth.
If we are ever going to go back to the state of kings and peasants it won't be because of capitalism or wealth, it will be because people surrender their liberty to a Technocracy run by a hand full of companies that control the new public square and decide what may or may not be stated openly.
The market is doing just fine. If there is a critique to be made it's that we have apathetically allowed our Government representatives to get in bed with large companies; whereby the pass laws that favor those companies in exchange for campaign donations. That's not the fault of capitalism, that's fault of the public not keeping it's eye on the Government is doing and being apathetic. None of what I just described can be solved by turning to Marxist/Socialist polices either, despite what Bernie and AOC's dumb asses say.
(Old Spike)
first of all this is just silly and doesnt have anything to do with what i asked..
'The fact that certain people have far more than other people and you think that is somehow wrong says more about you and your envy than it does about those people'
like i said i dont have a solution and was just asking what you thought should be done..no malice..just information seeking..you are always very offensive with your comments here..
anyway..you started the premise with the communist thing..i only asked what your solution is..you are american no? its easy to say you dont see 'a problem to begin with' when you live in the current world empire state..put youself in the shoes of an indian or african who has to trawl through waste to make living then see if there is a problem in the world with a wealth gap..
'Wealth is not a zero sum game. In other words, it isn't like there is a economic constant called "wealth" that is fixed and these few people are hoarding it all'
you are right in a way but the top one percent does control over half of all the wealth in in world now..if thats not hoarding i dont know what is..
'If we are ever going to go back to the state of kings and peasants it won't be because of capitalism or wealth, it will be because people surrender their liberty to a Technocracy run by a hand full of companies that control the new public square and decide what may or may not be stated openly.'
dont know about that so cant comment but capitalism was not a nice thing for people in general until it was mixed with socialism..like a lot of european countries have done..
'That's not the fault of capitalism, that's fault of the public not keeping it's eye on the Government is doing and being apathetic' agree 100 percent with that ..thanks for the answer
(Old Spike)
its easy to say you dont see 'a problem to begin with' when you live in the current world empire state..put youself in the shoes of an indian or african who has to trawl through waste to make living then see if there is a problem in the world with a wealth gap..
You really didn't even bother reading my post, did you. I mean, if you had you wouldn't have bothered asking such completely irrelevant question. Let's pretend you had your way and we just air dropped billions of dollars on those people after it was taking it by force from those who had it. What do you imagine in that silly little head of yours would happen? Do you think those societies and cultures living in waste would magically turn into a modern western nation?
Of course they wouldn't because that's not shit works in the real world. They'd still be living in waste, just more expensive waste, at least until the money thay were showered with ran out, at which point they'd be right back to where they were.
You don't solve poverty by throwing other people's money at poor people. That merely creates dependency and leads to more suffering. Want an example? Look no further than the Native Americans.
There is no magic way of bringing entire nations of people out of poverty. There has to be a large enough movement within the society to want to better themselves. A nation fractured by tribalism and religious infighting for example will never advance.
(Old Spike)
'You really didn't even bother reading my post, did you. I mean, if you had you wouldn't have bothered asking such completely irrelevant question'
straight away on the offensive again..that wasnt a question i asked now was it? no it wasnt.. i said
'put youself in the shoes of an indian or african who has to trawl through waste to make living then see if there is a problem in the world with a wealth gap'
maybe if you took time to actually read it properly, as you accused me of, you wouldve noticed that..
'Let's pretend you had your way and we just air dropped billions of dollars on those people after it was taking it by force from those who had it. What do you imagine in that silly little head of yours would happen? Do you think those societies and cultures living in waste would magically turn into a modern western nation?'
i also never said that wealth should be redistributed you just assumed i thought that way in your silly little mind that thinks its always right and fills in whatever gaps it wants to fill its own goals
the rest of your post is just you masturbating all over the screen while probably telling yourself that youre the man or something.. well done buddy hope you enjoyed it..
(Old Spike)
Wealth is derived from finite resources.
(Old Spike)
That depends on what resource you are talking about, but we haven't even come close to tapping the natural resources of our planet. And that's even if we pretend recycling isn't, ya know, a thing that exists.
And exactly what finite resource is Apple and Google hoarding? Brains? Give me a break.
(Old Spike)
what finite resource is Apple and Google hoarding
That's kind of a strawman, I don't think anyone's arguing against companies building assets or banking profits.
A finite resource for companies is the spendable income of the market, patents they own, staff they hire etc. These things aren't commonly considered 'wealth', more like 'assets'.
Arguments about wealth distribution regarding companies is usually about tax avoidance & income of execs compared to average workers, tax rates, things like that.