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: 2
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 01:39 PM
link   


God, er uhm, The Market will provide.




posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 01:42 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015


First off, all ownership comes from the government period.. you don’t own your land. The government allows you to own your land.

If the government vanishes tomorrow. You don’t own your stuff. The local warlord does. Maybe some think they would be that warlord, and some inherently are right.

See that is kinda the major problem and imho where I think all the “all government is bad government” motif comes from.. It’s propaganda from the corporations that don’t want to pay taxes, labor or spend money on environmental protections.


People don’t realize we only have 2 choices..


Trust the government to regulate big buisness..

Or

Trust big buisness to regulate itself...




Because by not trusting the government to regulate big buisness we are inherently trusting big buisness to regulate itself.

And big buisness is not even lip service pretending to operate for the good of the people..


Big buisness is motivated purely by profit.. and quite often bad things for the people are most profitable industries.



If “government is the problem” then there is no one to check and balance bad actors..



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 01:43 PM
link   
a reply to: toms54

You can't prove someones opinion or subjective judgment is wrong but that one is a doosy!



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 01:44 PM
link   
Here Alex Jones makes a pretty good argument against David Rothkopf:




posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 01:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
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.


Because - on a purely pragmatic level, it causes chaos and instability - read history. If Money is the only value you subscribe to then you want a stable economic and social environment to continue accumulating your wealth.

On a Moral level - it goes without saying, or not, that me are morally bound to alleviate the suffering of others. Other people's suffering makes one suffer as well. This why we take so much effort not to notice and we DEHUMANIZE OTHERS we don't like, or agree with so that we can not care.

I can quote various scripture or philosophy to back this up.

If, however, you do not suffer when others do or feel empathy for others then....



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 01:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
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?


This is a falsehood.

ourworldindata.org...

www.nytimes.com...

www.childrensdefense.org...



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 01:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: toms54
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.


America's Poor Still Lives Better than Most of Humanity

Read the article. It explains why.




In fact, America’s bottom ventile is still richer than most of the world: That is, the typical person in the bottom 5 percent of the American income distribution is still richer than 68 percent of the world’s inhabitants.


Think about it. In America, if you live in the "hood" you still have a solidly constructed home. Shoes. Clothing. Cell Phones. Air conditioning. Cars. Food. Education. Xboxes. Ipads.

The reality is that there are a ton of significantly poorer people globally. The standard of living in America is extremely high, even for the poor. All of whom live better than the upper class did probably 30 years ago.

Anyone who has traveled globally and see "real poverty" will tell you how the poor in America don't really know how good they have it. This is not to say there can't be improvement, but no poor person in America lives in conditions like a favela in South America.

I recall going to a sugar cane plantation in the Dominican Republic. There were literally kids running around buck azz naked living in tin huts. My dog lived in better conditions.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 01:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: LesMisanthrope


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.


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



And the role of government was to balance those two segments. The system has become so corrupted as to be unrecognizable.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 02:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: lakenheath24
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



What you are effectively saying is that people outside the confines of the USA don't count in this International equation. And when you are lively in poverty - and recall that 49% of US households are just one paycheck aways from homelessness but that's not considered poverty - it isn't about attitude or ambition - it's about the next meal, shower it's about opportunity and people in poverty don't have the PRIVLEDGE expressing their ambitions or dreams.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 02:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
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.


That is one person out of how many BILLION.

As an aside:


mis·an·thrope

noun a person who dislikes humankind and avoids human society. synonyms: hater of mankind, hater, cynic; More

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



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 02:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

Oh come on. You said "The bottom 5% of Americans live better than the top 5% in India."

Now it's "'The standard of living in America is extremely high, even for the poor. All of whom live better than the upper class did probably 30 years ago." So the poor guy lives better than Trump did in 1980? Got to call you on that one too.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 02:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: toms54
a reply to: Edumakated

Oh come on. You said "The bottom 5% of Americans live better than the top 5% in India."

Now it's "'The standard of living in America is extremely high, even for the poor. All of whom live better than the upper class did probably 30 years ago." So the poor guy lives better than Trump did in 1980? Got to call you on that one too.


Did you bother to read the article?

Poor in America is not the same thing as poor in India, Africa, etc. Of course, the poor in American don't live better than an Indian billionaire. However, the average person in the bottom 5% in American live better than the average person in the top 5% in India.



Now check out the line for India. India’s poorest ventile corresponds with the 4th poorest percentile worldwide. And its richest? The 68th percentile. Yes, that’s right: America’s poorest are, as a group, about as rich as India’s richest. All of which should be something of a reality check for those who insist that America's poor are being forgotten, left behind and all the rest. Even if you're stuck in the bottom 5% of the US income distribution your standard of living is about equal to that of the top 5% of Indians. Even if you're in the bottom 10% your standard of living is about the same as that of the bottom 10% in other rich countries (which, so we are told, care so much more and do so much more) like Sweden and Finland. And when we sweep everything together into some sort of quality of life measure the American poor are better off than the French or German poor.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: FyreByrd

Uhhmmm, No I did not say that. I said, in my personal observation of family members, that it appears that the difference between the two different groups, is attitude and ambition. I THEN, in a separate sentence equated the poor in 3rd world countries to those of my poor relatives.

So you are effectively saying that you know the circumstances of 49% of the population? You know 150 million peoples stories? LMAO. There are probably 150 million reasons as to why they are 1 paycheck away...some genuine, and some not so genuine.
And that last sentence is pure gibberish, you saying poor people cant dream? That is insulting to every parent out there working to better themselves.



Anyway, on topic,

I watched a series called the Men Who Built America, and it details how the Rockefellers, Vanderbilts, etc became uber-wealthy, to the point that anti-trust laws were brought in. I think it was JP Morgan who had more money than the Fed at one point. But to your point, this is a good example of when the government is supposed to step in and correct things. Lately, that is not happening, because the government has no idea how to deal with the internet of things.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 03:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
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.


Why do you assume anyone talking about income inequality are advocating Communism? Limiting the amount of wealth in the hands of the 1% is not communism. It's regulated capitalism. It was regulated capitalism, not a completely free market, that lead to greatest amount of wealth ever generated by a nation.

If a man needs society in order to generate wealth I believe the society has a right and obligation to put limits on that wealth. With the understanding that no one man can be worth more to society than a certain level of wealth above the rest of society.

Extreme wealth and income inequality leads to corruption amongst those who would vie for power. Plato was an advocate of limiting the wealth of the upper class to control this thirst for power that can not be quenched.

If a man needs employees to produce goods in order to generate wealth, those who help generate that wealth have a right and obligation to put limits on the percentage of wealth that should be distributed across the entire supply chain. Which was the initial reason for unions which have since become corrupt themselves.

Historically speaking higher rates of inequality equates to more corruption and crime. With the knowledge that extreme wealth which surpasses quality of life leads to corruption, the only civilized answer is to control some of that wealth.

For anyone who thinks the wealthy create jobs I suggest you have been swindled by a fine sounding argument. The only thing that creates jobs is demand. Historically the wealthy don't invent or bring new technology to the table. They simply buy companies, merge them and automate as much as possible while eliminating middle-class jobs.

Those of you who are not part of the 1% should all be concerned. Many of you will fight against controlling the wealth of the 1% because you just can't imagine that it's only an amount of time before you will also be put out of business and become slaves.

Extreme wealth is a stain on society. If it is not controlled eventually all men will become slaves to a very small percentage of men who have only their own best interests in mind.



edit on 4-6-2018 by Isurrender73 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 03:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

So this is what I'm hearing.

Poor people in America are doing better than the poor in other nations so screw them and tell them to work harder if they don't want to be poor.

Did I miss something?



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 04:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: toms54
a reply to: Edumakated

Oh come on. You said "The bottom 5% of Americans live better than the top 5% in India."

Now it's "'The standard of living in America is extremely high, even for the poor. All of whom live better than the upper class did probably 30 years ago." So the poor guy lives better than Trump did in 1980? Got to call you on that one too.


Did you bother to read the article?

Poor in America is not the same thing as poor in India, Africa, etc. Of course, the poor in American don't live better than an Indian billionaire. However, the average person in the bottom 5% in American live better than the average person in the top 5% in India.



Now check out the line for India. India’s poorest ventile corresponds with the 4th poorest percentile worldwide. And its richest? The 68th percentile. Yes, that’s right: America’s poorest are, as a group, about as rich as India’s richest. All of which should be something of a reality check for those who insist that America's poor are being forgotten, left behind and all the rest. Even if you're stuck in the bottom 5% of the US income distribution your standard of living is about equal to that of the top 5% of Indians. Even if you're in the bottom 10% your standard of living is about the same as that of the bottom 10% in other rich countries (which, so we are told, care so much more and do so much more) like Sweden and Finland. And when we sweep everything together into some sort of quality of life measure the American poor are better off than the French or German poor.


I don't wish to be rude. The idea an Indian manufacturing company owner is poorer than someone on welfare in the US is just laughable. There are many wealthy in India. The average Indian doctor is probably far wealthier than the bottom 5% in America. Seriously.
edit on 4-6-2018 by toms54 because: Add last sentence



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 08:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: toms54
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.


Perhaps you should travel then.

Dharavi Slum Mumbai.
Bhalswa Slum Delhi.
Nochikuppam Slum Chennai.
Basanti Slum Kolkata.
Rajendra Nagar Slum Bangalore.
Indiramma Nagar Hyderabad.
Saroj Nagar Slum Nagpur.
Mehbullahpur Slum Lucknow.

There is a good list to start.

Then get back to us, as opposed to typing away on a computer and not believing reality.




posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 09:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: toms54

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: toms54
a reply to: Edumakated

Oh come on. You said "The bottom 5% of Americans live better than the top 5% in India."

Now it's "'The standard of living in America is extremely high, even for the poor. All of whom live better than the upper class did probably 30 years ago." So the poor guy lives better than Trump did in 1980? Got to call you on that one too.


Did you bother to read the article?

Poor in America is not the same thing as poor in India, Africa, etc. Of course, the poor in American don't live better than an Indian billionaire. However, the average person in the bottom 5% in American live better than the average person in the top 5% in India.



Now check out the line for India. India’s poorest ventile corresponds with the 4th poorest percentile worldwide. And its richest? The 68th percentile. Yes, that’s right: America’s poorest are, as a group, about as rich as India’s richest. All of which should be something of a reality check for those who insist that America's poor are being forgotten, left behind and all the rest. Even if you're stuck in the bottom 5% of the US income distribution your standard of living is about equal to that of the top 5% of Indians. Even if you're in the bottom 10% your standard of living is about the same as that of the bottom 10% in other rich countries (which, so we are told, care so much more and do so much more) like Sweden and Finland. And when we sweep everything together into some sort of quality of life measure the American poor are better off than the French or German poor.


I don't wish to be rude. The idea an Indian manufacturing company owner is poorer than someone on welfare in the US is just laughable. There are many wealthy in India. The average Indian doctor is probably far wealthier than the bottom 5% in America. Seriously.


I don't wish to be rude, but you don't seem to have a grasp of basic statistics.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 11:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: toms54
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.


Perhaps you should travel then.

Dharavi Slum Mumbai.
Bhalswa Slum Delhi.
Nochikuppam Slum Chennai.
Basanti Slum Kolkata.
Rajendra Nagar Slum Bangalore.
Indiramma Nagar Hyderabad.
Saroj Nagar Slum Nagpur.
Mehbullahpur Slum Lucknow.

There is a good list to start.

Then get back to us, as opposed to typing away on a computer and not believing reality.



So all the India millionaires live in the slums? OK
edit on 4-6-2018 by toms54 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2018 @ 02:48 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

The guy worked for Kissinger and Clinton and he says he is a "free market guy and centrist" and globalist.

Some of his statements ...

"Set aside the paranoia there are good elites, there are shadow elite like Osama Bin Laden" hmm Funny how he doesn't name the other baddies but falls back on a terrorist as an example of a "venal elite"

"Markets create wealth and then it could work its way down society" Trickle down economics yeah right.

He seem also suggest when asked that more education in the US is needed when the question asked was that foreign educated workers are undercutting wages in the US.

Perhaps you could point out to what actual solutions you think he has supplied.

Government usually is beholden to big business, they provide donations and threaten Govts with withdrawing factories overseas if they dont get their way. The repeal of the Mundt act and the Dodd Frank Act shows that Governments are not for the people.

I wasted an hour of my time listening to a "soft" globalist apologist.




top topics



 
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join