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.

 

IF the worlds Wealth was divided FAIRly

page: 6
11
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by TheGhostViking
 


YOU unite the races, personally. each person does that.
any ideology that teaches the opposite, is missing the mark,
from what i can tell (i mean, just observing what transpires around
the world)

I try to ! see im glad i asked your views on a better world i was suprised to see they were similar to mine .
The earth is a wonderful place but for too many their time on it is a painful struggle .
While others such as some I know were born with a silver spoon , jobs money life is not hard for them and they never spare a thought for those struggling .




posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 03:10 PM
link   
reply to post by TheGhostViking
 


we were donating to alot of charities before hubby retired. he was out of work for a year before he could find another job, and in that time, all our bills skyrocketed with additional fees and interest rates. the charities we'd been donating to, called for more donations, and we couldn't help them because we weren't making enough to pay our own bills. long story short, ya first have to make sure you have the money (remember our discussion about south africa?) before you help others with it. if you give your stuff to someone else, when they need your help again, you'll both be broke.



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by TheGhostViking
 


that's why i said, develop it for everyone to take advantage of (if they are personally interested or capable physically. i know that i'm not well enough to go to space, unless it's via some ET high tech thingy (in which case, i'd be asking if they could fix my physical problems, while wer'e out there, flying around lol)



we should have have hoverboards now and no diseases liviing til were 170 in cities that float !
but no were too busy seeing if swans like sudoku .



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 03:21 PM
link   
double post
edit on 4-2-2011 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheGhostViking
we should have have hoverboards now and no diseases liviing til were 170 in cities that float !
but no were too busy seeing if swans like sudoku .


:
it's ideologies, clashing. it's like a mexican stand off.



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by 547000
1) How is the system "fair" if the ones who produce have no choice but to give what they produce to the ones who only consume?


This is the relationship between 3rd world countries (producers) and 1st world countries (consumers.) Almost everything in your home is the result of exploitation of the producers in the 3rd world. Your computer, television, game systems. The ring on your wife's finger, the clothes on your child's back. The frame of your home, the oil that runs your car and generates your electricity. Even the land it's all built on was gained through exploitation.

You're describing capitalism; the poor pay the rich, the starving feed the obese.


2) Wouldn't severe population control be needed to ensure no one would go hungry?


There is more than enough food in the world to go around. It's just being hoarded, and wasted. Seriously, think about it for a moment. How many fast food joints and supermarkets are there in your town? I bet there's quite a few, right? What fills their dumpsters? Food. Tons and tons and tons of food wasted. How many hungry people are in your town, now? Sure, a bruised tomato isn't top-shelf, but it IS food. But your local store throws it away.

The same applies around the world. In Brazil, people are going hungry, while massive tracts of land are cleared to grow tons of corn... which all goes to cattle who take up even more land than the corn... which mostly gets exported to our fat, colon cancer-having asses here in the US. Think about how wasteful that is. Think of how much wheat and barley is blown on making Budweiser, and compare it to the people in Mali who are desperate for a bread crust. Hunger is rampant in India, even among the communities that grow a lot of food, because our "charity" carries a debt with interest that the farmers must pay by selling all their crops - and which leads to widespread suicides when they can't make the debt, and see their children going hungry while shipping out tons of produce.

All that's needed is proper management of resources and a real effort to reduce waste, both in terms of food, and the land used to produce the food.



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by TheGhostViking
 


These are the continued voyages of the starship enterprise, its ongoing mission....yadayadayada...if everyone had the same amount of money you would still have thugs taking from others, others blowing their equal portion on things they due not need and the world would grind to a halt....just my opinion...

where is the incentive to be creative and invent if we all were equal, the world would suffer and those that worked the jobs most of us dont want to do would not do them and we would be one big disaster as a world.



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by TheGhostViking
 


we were donating to alot of charities before hubby retired. he was out of work for a year before he could find another job, and in that time, all our bills skyrocketed with additional fees and interest rates. the charities we'd been donating to, called for more donations, and we couldn't help them because we weren't making enough to pay our own bills. long story short, ya first have to make sure you have the money (remember our discussion about south africa?) before you help others with it. if you give your stuff to someone else, when they need your help again, you'll both be broke.



I said something like this before , good people like you and your hubby feel like you have to do something , every little helps right ? , well us guys dont have mansions , pa' s private planes , etc etc .
These millionaire's including tptb could stop world debt (they could be heroes) but no not interested !
as a kid people always told me that the rich become rich by being selfish and puttin pursuit of the dollar over everything else , I tend to agree !



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 03:54 PM
link   
I learned a long time ago life is not fair, you take what you are given and make the best with it.

Interesting question though, problem is equality is not a stable state, numerous and expensive redistribution schemes would crash the whole system not to mention the lack of incentive to produce. Another poster said it first but worth repeating, been tried, the pure communist experiment failed.



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


When I say I see people on ats I consider leaders who can unite races I mean people like fox . Read his post , you can't deny it its true he and others are not brainwashed , people like fox are better leaders than any #kn politican in power right now .
But the sad thing is some wouldn't vote for him because he values a fair just life over the dollar .
Not like these politicans who earn millions in their spare time out of weapons and "medicine " instead of concerning themselves with running the country properly



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by marinesniper0351
 


"where is the incentive to be creative and invent if we all were equal, the world would suffer"

I value a humans right to NOT die of starvation over creativity , the world IS suffering because we are not equal !



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 04:01 PM
link   
reply to post by TheGhostViking
 


"We could all live a prosperous life"

Depends on how you define prosperous. Because without a doubt there would be people who would buy things until their funds are completely gone and then they'll cry and beg for more.

And people with financial sense/skills will quickly begin to amass more wealth.

I don't think it's possible to "spread the wealth" evenly with the current monetary system, or the current humanity for that matter.



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 04:05 PM
link   
Where are all the positive people ? humans invented robots , heat seeking missiles , wireless communication , THE AIRPLANE !
yes we can "invent" a way to feed everyone , just that it means people being less selfish , which im gathering is going to be the real task !



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 04:06 PM
link   
It could mean freedom for a few decades, but we would have to get rid of the scarcity economic structure. All human needs wouldn't have a dollar value, they would be free. Everyone would work their talents to contribute to the growth and health of Earth and every living thing on her. A Global Christ conscience would hold it all together quite nicely. We could PARTY!!! SING and DANCE!!!



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by enigma91
 


Your correct friend on pg 2 we found that food was a more appropriate issue to discuss ,
We produce too MUCH food , look up food mountains ,
I grew in the 80s when the pop stars sang "feeed the world "
30 years later we still havent



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFoxThere is more than enough food in the world to go around. It's just being hoarded, and wasted.


So is oxygen - its being used up by people who continue to procreate without the means to support their offspring. If a company or person trades something of value for the food it is theirs to do with as they see fit; to eat it, give it away or to watch it slowly rot on the shelves. It is not for you, me or anyone to make them give it for free to anyone else.

If you lack something of value to trade be it in the form of money, goods or services in exchange for food and lack the ability to procure it legally for yourself - I guess you are just going to be hungry. Life is not fair.


Originally posted by TheWalkingFoxThe same applies around the world. In Brazil, people are going hungry, while massive tracts of land are cleared to grow tons of corn... which all goes to cattle who take up even more land than the corn... which mostly gets exported to our fat, colon cancer-having asses here in the US. Think about how wasteful that is.


Guess it sucks to not have money or a skill to earn any to get food. The land belongs to the land owner who can do with it anything he/she desires. I have cattle I could raise grain instead I guess and give it away but then what would I exchange for goods and services? That would be suicide.



Originally posted by TheWalkingFoxThink of how much wheat and barley is blown on making Budweiser, and compare it to the people in Mali who are desperate for a bread crust.


Sucks to be born in Mali then I guess - I bet if they were willing to pay more for the grain than Budweiser the farmers would gladly send it there. It’s a concept called capitalism and it runs under the theory of competition.


Originally posted by TheWalkingFoxHunger is rampant in India, even among the communities that grow a lot of food, because our "charity" carries a debt with interest that the farmers must pay by selling all their crops - and which leads to widespread suicides when they can't make the debt, and see their children going hungry while shipping out tons of produce.


Then they should not accept the "charity" and grow their own food then. Entirely their choice as I see it.


Originally posted by TheWalkingFoxAll that's needed is proper management of resources and a real effort to reduce waste, both in terms of food, and the land used to produce the food.


I think by management you mean confiscation of private property for "managed" redistribution to the poor - that's is a failed concept since people have no incentive to produce if they cannot enjoy the fruits of their labor. Communism as it is commonly known is a failed experiment.

It is a nice sentiment to care for those in need but to forcibly take from one person regardless of their relative wealth (be that force of law or point of a gun) and give it to someone else despite their relative “need” is called theft and is pretty much frowned upon in any society.

edit on 4/2/2011 by Golf66 because: (no reason given)

edit on 4/2/2011 by Golf66 because: (no reason given)

edit on 4/2/2011 by Golf66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Visitor2012
It could mean freedom for a few decades, but we would have to get rid of the scarcity economic structure. All human needs wouldn't have a dollar value, they would be free. Everyone would work their talents to contribute to the growth and health of Earth and every living thing on her. A Global Christ conscience would hold it all together quite nicely. We could PARTY!!! SING and DANCE!!!



Where do I sign up ?

Seriously though thats sounds #n QUALITY !
edit on 4-2-2011 by TheGhostViking because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheGhostViking
reply to post by marinesniper0351
 


"where is the incentive to be creative and invent if we all were equal, the world would suffer"

I value a humans right to NOT die of starvation over creativity , the world IS suffering because we are not equal !


I have to respectfully disagree,... the world is suffering because of greed and selfishness. If we all could learn that your suffering is my suffering and your joy is my joy then the world truly be a better place,.. equality seems like it would be the answer but it is not. We are all born with different abilities and talents, different levels of intelligence, it is the responsibility of those who are greater endowed to share and help with those who are lesser endowed. None of us know when we may fall from a height and need assistance ourselves.



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Golf66

Originally posted by TheWalkingFoxThere is more than enough food in the world to go around. It's just being hoarded, and wasted.


So is oxygen - its being used up by people who continue to procreate without the means to support their offspring. If a company or person trades something of value for the food it is theirs to do with as they see fit; to eat it, give it away or to watch it slowly rot on the shelves. It is not for you, me or anyone to make them give it for free to anyone else.

If you lack something of value to trade be it in the form of money, goods or services in exchange for food and lack the ability to procure it legally for yourself - I guess you are just going to be hungry. Life is not fair.


Originally posted by TheWalkingFoxThe same applies around the world. In Brazil, people are going hungry, while massive tracts of land are cleared to grow tons of corn... which all goes to cattle who take up even more land than the corn... which mostly gets exported to our fat, colon cancer-having asses here in the US. Think about how wasteful that is.


Guess it sucks to not have money or a skill to earn any to get food. The land belongs to the land owner who can do with it anything he/she desires. I have cattle I could raise grain instead I guess and give it away but then what would I exchange for goods and services? That would be suicide.



Originally posted by TheWalkingFoxThink of how much wheat and barley is blown on making Budweiser, and compare it to the people in Mali who are desperate for a bread crust.


Sucks to be born in Mali then I guess - I bet if they were willing to pay more for the grain than Budweiser the farmers would gladly send it there. It’s a concept called capitalism and it runs under the theory of competition.


Originally posted by TheWalkingFoxHunger is rampant in India, even among the communities that grow a lot of food, because our "charity" carries a debt with interest that the farmers must pay by selling all their crops - and which leads to widespread suicides when they can't make the debt, and see their children going hungry while shipping out tons of produce.


Then they should not accept the "charity" and grow their own food then. Entirely their choice as I see it.


Originally posted by TheWalkingFoxAll that's needed is proper management of resources and a real effort to reduce waste, both in terms of food, and the land used to produce the food.


I think by management you mean confiscation of private property for "managed" redistribution to the poor - that's is a failed concept since people have no incentive to produce if they cannot enjoy the fruits of their labor. Communism as it is commonly known is a failed experiment.

It is a nice sentiment to care for those in need but to forcibly take from one person regardless of their relative wealth (be that force of law or point of a gun) and give it to someone else despite their relative “need” is called theft and is pretty much frowned upon in any society.

edit on 4/2/2011 by Golf66 because: (no reason given)

edit on 4/2/2011 by Golf66 because: (no reason given)

edit on 4/2/2011 by Golf66 because: (no reason given)




you sound like Cecil Rhodes and no thats not a compliment . Views like yours are shared by those who justify raping and pillaging foreign countries in order to expand Empires and are the reason people are dying of starvation while the fat cats make profit out of misery and legalised slavery .



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheGhostVikingyou sound like Cecil Rhodes and no thats not a compliment . Views like yours are shared by those who justify raping and pillaging foreign countries in order to expand Empires and are the reason people are dying of starvation while the fat cats make profit out of misery and legalised slavery .


I guess one has a choice to fight for what they want literally or metaphorically; however, remember it is not advised to bring a knife to a gunfight or to bet on the one legged man in the ass kicking contest.

Don't want to be hungry in the third world may I suggest either becoming a local warlord or at least working for one – ironically, I would wager that once "the poor and starving" have a taste of success; I very much doubt they would be willing to share either. It is not in human nature.







 
11
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join