It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Superclass and Is global governance necessary

page: 1
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 10:02 AM
link   
Corporations have more power than most countries in the World. Super wealthy people have so much power democracy is meaningless. Many people believe all government is bad. Many people believe government is always a failure. But how can wealth inequality be addressed if there is no global power to opposed corporate power. Is someone a "communist" just for claiming wealth inequality is a big problem? It seems government will be the only force powerful enough to address wealth inequality.

This video does better job than me framing the discussion:



Does government have any role at all? I've heard many people saying the United States participating in a global government with sovereignty is a big mistake. The video referenced above makes a pretty good argument in favor of government having a role and the idea of some global governance to keep multinational corporations power over national governments in check.




posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 10:06 AM
link   
Well i would point to the EU and NATO and the UN as a reason not to involve governme t
All 3 are corrupt and feed the superclass you mentioned. The only way to reverse that trend is a popular revolt. a reply to: dfnj2015



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: lakenheath24

It's hard to advocate violence. I think the solutions presented in the video are more appealing.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 10:16 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Why is income inequality bad? Imagine income equalility. I would make the same as my less ambitious friend who plays video games all day.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 10:27 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

As long as you at the top it's great. For the people on the bottom it sucks.



If your neighbor making ends meet determines the value of your own property then maybe it is important. Who want's to live in Detroit?



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 10:31 AM
link   
It does suck for people at the bottom. But extreme poverty is decreasing exponentially, to the point where extreme poverty might be eradicated in our lifetime.

Is it not comforting that human beings can become billionaires?



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 10:47 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Of course common people have power. But as the video says institutions have rules. The corporation's rules are to serve the owner. The owners of the institutions are the shareholders. What do they want? Profit and growth. So they are driven not because they are evil or venal but because they are legally obligated to be driven. To seek out cheap labor. To seek out better tax environments. To seek out high growth environments. They are not planning to be evil. But they are driven by what they are legally obligated to do.

The problem is the interest of the corporations are completely not aligned with the interests of people. The problem with the leave it to the markets approach is even if the CEO of every company on Earth were an angel from Heaven, it's not their job to make the World a better place.

Other people have to have the job of advancing justice, equity, and quality of life in the interest of the people at large. We need a balance between those things. And since on the global stage we don't have global governance mechanisms the balance has shifted in a way that it hasn't shifted in the past. And that needs to be redressed in the same way it's been redressed in society since cave people.

So my question to you, is the the answer to this question for you anything more than just, "Let them eat cake" ?


edit on 4-6-2018 by dfnj2015 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 10:51 AM
link   
I can empathise certainly. My family comes from eastern ky. Both my parents came from dirt poor families. However, dads family have done extremely well wwhile my moms family are still poor.

I put it down to ambition and attitude and or the lack of it. And lets put it in perspective....compare them to north koreans or chinese workers. Those peeps aint got a car, cable, or a cell. Just sayin.

a reply to: dfnj2015



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

The world is getting more and more wealthy.

I think you might be looking at it the wrong way. JK Rowling, for instance, is a billionaire. She’s a billionaire because people want to buy her product, which they enjoy because it fills their lives with joy, not because she’s abusing any class of people. She makes the world a better place, not a worse place. I don’t think it is on her to provide justice, equity, and balance, when she’s doing good enough providing good books.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 10:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

As long as you at the top it's great. For the people on the bottom it sucks.



If your neighbor making ends meet determines the value of your own property then maybe it is important. Who want's to live in Detroit?


American poor are considered middle class in most countries. The bottom 5% of Americans live better than the top 5% in India.

There has never been more wealth equality in history. We have a ton of class mobility as well. Very few people in the lowest quintile income wise stay there...


edit on 4-6-2018 by Edumakated because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 11:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: dfnj2015
I think you might be looking at it the wrong way. JK Rowling, for instance, is a billionaire. She’s a billionaire because people want to buy her product, which they enjoy because it fills their lives with joy, not because she’s abusing any class of people. She makes the world a better place, not a worse place. I don’t think it is on her to provide justice, equity, and balance, when she’s doing good enough providing good books.


I never said it was up to her. You are moving off topic. The original video makes a great point about corporations legal responsibilities and global governance. If you can't stick to the topic then don't respond.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 11:06 AM
link   
I come from a lower middle class family. My dad busted his a$s until he retired...now he is even busier...mom was stay at home.

I am now middle middle class. I am busting my a$s with 1 full time and 2 part time jobs. My wife is stay at home by choice..although she does a few theatre shows a year.

We can improve if she works ft. But how we approach if, i am in school working on a masters. We constantly try to improve our kids life.

Don NOT take from my hard work to give to some one who does not even do enough on their own to survive.

My neighbor has 6 kids from 5 dads, a new caddy, iPone, 60" 4k tv, etc...and has never worked aday in 42 years.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 11:07 AM
link   
It's a good thing that communist and socialist countries don't have wealth inequality.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 11:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: dfnj2015
I think you might be looking at it the wrong way. JK Rowling, for instance, is a billionaire. She’s a billionaire because people want to buy her product, which they enjoy because it fills their lives with joy, not because she’s abusing any class of people. She makes the world a better place, not a worse place. I don’t think it is on her to provide justice, equity, and balance, when she’s doing good enough providing good books.


I never said it was up to her. You are moving off topic. The original video makes a great point about corporations legal responsibilities and global governance. If you can't stick to the topic then don't respond.


Sorry, no, I can do what I wish. I was speaking about your assumption that “wealth inequality needs to be addressed”. I’m saying it doesn’t. If you can’t defend your most basic principles, don’t bother.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 11:18 AM
link   
Without government, the super wealthy simply couldn't exist. They depend too heavily on the government to get away with fleecing the population.

Without government, bankers would be hung up in city squares a long time ago.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Wealth inequality is the worst reason for a global gov't. The cretins running the show now, gov't and Corporate, is the best reason for a global gov't/super class.

The trouble is our super class have screwed it up just as badly as the lower cretins have. The best the planet seems to have done, briefly, was let each do their own thing with a lone super-power making sure no one got too far out of hand.

The American people, via lack of oversight, screwed that one up.

Simple answer? None of the above.


edit on 4-6-2018 by nwtrucker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 12:03 PM
link   
Power controls society. Governments are shells for people who control the money. But not all the rich are bad and neither are all corporations. Some are just supplying our needs and employing people so they can support themselves.

There are corrupt people in governments but there are good people in government too. Remember, good and evil are beliefs. What is good for some is bad for others. It is not a clear line between good and bad. If I drop a fifty dollar bill and someone finds it, it is good for them and bad for me. If I see someone drop money I will give it back to them, if I find money in the aisle in a store, I pay attention more, if someone acts like they are looking for money, I will ask them what they are looking for and if they say they lost their money, I will give it to them. I am not going to go ask people if they lost a ten dollar bill though, that would be crazy.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 12:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: lordcomac
Without government, the super wealthy simply couldn't exist. They depend too heavily on the government to get away with fleecing the population.

Without government, bankers would be hung up in city squares a long time ago.


You are werong, the people who have wealth and money would be worse, they can hire their own army. Laws do protect the people a lot, having the right kind of government protects us.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 12:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: lakenheath24

It's hard to advocate violence. I think the solutions presented in the video are more appealing.


I am 55 minutes into this speech and haven't heard any solutions yet beyond the rich are so rich and corporations are more powerful than countries. Therefore you must submit to globalization and embrace climate change.

This is from 2013. We've moved beyond some of this thinking.

I will give one example. Trump introduces tariffs. Suddenly nationalism becomes relevant again.

A corporation is not a country. There are ways to influence international corporations.

It is not true that it is impossible to bust up international corporations. They haven't done it lately because they don't want to.

I could continue but maybe I missed something. What exactly are these solutions that you find appealing? It sounds to me like this guy is trying to get a job from Exxon.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 12:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated


The bottom 5% of Americans live better than the top 5% in India.

I am sorry. You can show me any book, article, or statistic you want. I will never believe that.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join