| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 15:07 - Jan 16 with 1630 views | lowhouseblue |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 11:36 - Jan 16 by caught-in-limbo |
I think it's excellent that the 7th richest man has been given 600b$ by the CIA for access to its Amazon cloud. It's also really cool and very "free press" that that same man has recently bought one of the US's most respected newspapers, The Washington Post.
That's really excellent. The WP being the first to claim Russian hacking of the US elections with no evidence whatsoever wouldn't be linked to such conflict of interests at all. |
house!! cil bingo is so easy. [Post edited 16 Jan 2017 15:07]
|  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
|  |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 15:12 - Jan 16 with 1621 views | baxterbasics |
Agree the focus on inequality is a distraction which is increasingly politicising humanitarian efforts. If the poorest person on the planet had a shelter, clothes, food and access to education and health, it really wouldn't matter if there is someone else 1000000 times richer.
They would rather the poor be poorer..... as a certain lady once said. |  |
| |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 15:19 - Jan 16 with 1601 views | bluelagos |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 13:48 - Jan 16 by GlasgowBlue |
The methodology that Oxfam has used is very misleading.
https://iea.org.uk/blog/oxfams-global-inequality-statistics-dont-believe-the-ant
Oxfam recently seem to have got their priorities mixed up. The focus should be on defeating poverty, not inequality.
There's has been a huge fall in poverty around the world in recent years. Take India. There has been a huge fall in poverty but at the same time there has been a massive increase in inequality. Certain people have become very wealthy at the same time and poverty has fallen.
Are Oxfam saying they would prefer India to be a more equal country where more people went hungry due to poverty?
Unfortunately this charity has become very politicised recently and their statements are timed to coincided with the statements made by the leader of the Labour party. |
That Oxfam have highlighted some examples of the huge disparity of wealth (Presumably as a means of fund raising) in our World seems to be then interpreted as (your question)
"Are Oxfam saying they would prefer India to be a more equal country where more people went hungry due to poverty? "
This seems quite bizarre, and I speak as someone who has seen first hand examples of some of their projects in the field. The prime way the development industry move people out of poverty is by and large through economic activities (am sure we agree on this being the best way too) so wealth creators are to be encouraged.
The issue evolves though as to how that wealth is shared. If it all ends up in hands of very few people, then many people more remain trapped in poverty than might otherwise be the case.
Course it would be easy (for some, not me) to suggest we just attack the super rich, but the issue is way more complex and I think anyone suggesting that is the goal of Oxfam is some way off the mark. (If that is what you are indeed suggesting) [Post edited 16 Jan 2017 15:23]
|  |
| |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 15:22 - Jan 16 with 1593 views | chicoazul |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 10:13 - Jan 16 by StokieBlue |
Very saddening but I don't think it's the fault of the 8 though. For instance, Bloomberg started with nothing and built up a massive data company which he still owns and never floated on the markets to take quick profits like Zuckerberg.
Gates and buffet have already committed to giving away more than 99% of their wealth when they die and run a charity together. Buffet started with little and still lives in the little house he has for about the just 50 years with his wife.
What would be the solution? I agree nobody needs that much money but not sure it's right to just redistribute it against their will either.
SB |
Rumour has it Bloomberg is going to run for President against Trump in 2020. |  |
| |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 15:24 - Jan 16 with 1580 views | bluelagos |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 15:22 - Jan 16 by chicoazul |
Rumour has it Bloomberg is going to run for President against Trump in 2020. |
He'd have been a very strong candidate this time round, and maybe spared us all from the prospect of President Trump. | |
| |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 15:25 - Jan 16 with 1580 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 15:22 - Jan 16 by chicoazul |
Rumour has it Bloomberg is going to run for President against Trump in 2020. |
I was hoping Bloomberg had stood as an independent against Clinton and Trump.
Maybe he concluded that there wasn't anything going to stop the Trump bandwagon. |  |
| |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 15:28 - Jan 16 with 1575 views | chicoazul |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 15:25 - Jan 16 by GlasgowBlue |
I was hoping Bloomberg had stood as an independent against Clinton and Trump.
Maybe he concluded that there wasn't anything going to stop the Trump bandwagon. |
I cant see it happening as he will be 77 by then, but he would probably beat Trump. Trump is going to be a one-term President anyway so the Dems are going to win next time regardless. | |
| |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 16:42 - Jan 16 with 1546 views | eireblue |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 15:19 - Jan 16 by bluelagos |
That Oxfam have highlighted some examples of the huge disparity of wealth (Presumably as a means of fund raising) in our World seems to be then interpreted as (your question)
"Are Oxfam saying they would prefer India to be a more equal country where more people went hungry due to poverty? "
This seems quite bizarre, and I speak as someone who has seen first hand examples of some of their projects in the field. The prime way the development industry move people out of poverty is by and large through economic activities (am sure we agree on this being the best way too) so wealth creators are to be encouraged.
The issue evolves though as to how that wealth is shared. If it all ends up in hands of very few people, then many people more remain trapped in poverty than might otherwise be the case.
Course it would be easy (for some, not me) to suggest we just attack the super rich, but the issue is way more complex and I think anyone suggesting that is the goal of Oxfam is some way off the mark. (If that is what you are indeed suggesting) [Post edited 16 Jan 2017 15:23]
|
I can't remember the guys name, but the question a philosophical type posed was, if I could guarantee you I can save a live for £250, and you have a spare £250, would you
a. Save a live
b. buy a better DVD player (which somewhat dates the question, hence memory failure)
Is doing b, a bad thing, when you know you could have done a?
I think it is an interesting point that as more resource is acquired by less people, then governments have less control over helping others. May or may not be a bad thing.
But those top individuals can choose to spend their money on another yacht, or save/improve a few hundred thousand lives.
And the public/democratically elected officials have no control over that.
Not saying that is good/bad, but it is something that should give people pause for thought.
In the same way one person can choose how to spend £250, as a society should we have more control over helping less fortunate. Or do we just assume it is best to leave it to capitalism and philanthropy
I know the figures don't reflect disposable income, but I have a hunch that Bill and Larry would have done the same things they have done anyway and ended up with 10-20% less disposable income.
I believe that Warren thinks it unfair that super rich can end up paying less tax in terms of percentages than poorer people. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 17:06 - Jan 16 with 1517 views | bluelagos |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 16:42 - Jan 16 by eireblue |
I can't remember the guys name, but the question a philosophical type posed was, if I could guarantee you I can save a live for £250, and you have a spare £250, would you
a. Save a live
b. buy a better DVD player (which somewhat dates the question, hence memory failure)
Is doing b, a bad thing, when you know you could have done a?
I think it is an interesting point that as more resource is acquired by less people, then governments have less control over helping others. May or may not be a bad thing.
But those top individuals can choose to spend their money on another yacht, or save/improve a few hundred thousand lives.
And the public/democratically elected officials have no control over that.
Not saying that is good/bad, but it is something that should give people pause for thought.
In the same way one person can choose how to spend £250, as a society should we have more control over helping less fortunate. Or do we just assume it is best to leave it to capitalism and philanthropy
I know the figures don't reflect disposable income, but I have a hunch that Bill and Larry would have done the same things they have done anyway and ended up with 10-20% less disposable income.
I believe that Warren thinks it unfair that super rich can end up paying less tax in terms of percentages than poorer people. |
Every time you hear someone say "we should help our own first" I don't for a minute doubt how they would answer that question. Almost certainly of course whilst not helping their own first either.
We even dehumanize those trying to escape the poverty of the developing world, whilst simultaneously doing sfa for those trying to escape poverty and staying put. And then we fail miserably to recognise the fact that much of the poverty is as a direct result to our exploitation of these countries and the legacy of our rule.
You raise some interesting points and I do wonder how many yachts anyone needs. But, ultimately my gripe is more with those who choose to make ignorant I'll informed judgement on those doing all they can to escape to escape poverty, rather than the super rich per se. | |
| |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 17:18 - Jan 16 with 1497 views | connorscontract |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 11:20 - Jan 16 by bluelagos |
They try all over Africa too. Wonder how many millions of people have died of HIV because of their attitude and approach to the use of contraception?
Literally millions. |
You do know that the Salvation Army and the Roman Catholic Church are two completely different organisations, don't you?
The SA don't prohibit use of contraception. |  | | |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 17:22 - Jan 16 with 1488 views | bluelagos |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 17:18 - Jan 16 by connorscontract |
You do know that the Salvation Army and the Roman Catholic Church are two completely different organisations, don't you?
The SA don't prohibit use of contraception. |
Yeah, did say somewhere else I have no beef with the Sally army. Don't know much about them in practice, am sure they are doing a wonderful job, especially helping the homeless. | |
| |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 17:25 - Jan 16 with 1485 views | connorscontract |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 17:22 - Jan 16 by bluelagos |
Yeah, did say somewhere else I have no beef with the Sally army. Don't know much about them in practice, am sure they are doing a wonderful job, especially helping the homeless. |
Yes, they really do (am not a member). Consistently doing good stuff here and elsewhere.
And their biggest contribution to contraception are those hideous nylon A Line skirts the women wear... | | | |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 17:57 - Jan 16 with 1466 views | caught-in-limbo |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 13:50 - Jan 16 by eireblue |
Be interested to learn how the 7th richest man on that list can give access to the Amazon cloud. |
He's the owner of Amazon.
* EDIT, apologies, the 5th richest man. [Post edited 16 Jan 2017 17:59]
|  |
| |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 18:29 - Jan 16 with 1439 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 13:48 - Jan 16 by GlasgowBlue |
The methodology that Oxfam has used is very misleading.
https://iea.org.uk/blog/oxfams-global-inequality-statistics-dont-believe-the-ant
Oxfam recently seem to have got their priorities mixed up. The focus should be on defeating poverty, not inequality.
There's has been a huge fall in poverty around the world in recent years. Take India. There has been a huge fall in poverty but at the same time there has been a massive increase in inequality. Certain people have become very wealthy at the same time and poverty has fallen.
Are Oxfam saying they would prefer India to be a more equal country where more people went hungry due to poverty?
Unfortunately this charity has become very politicised recently and their statements are timed to coincided with the statements made by the leader of the Labour party. |
The iea are effectively lobbyists for corporate elites .... Mark Littlewood is a kn#b (in my considered opinion! ) |  |
| |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 18:30 - Jan 16 with 1438 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 18:29 - Jan 16 by BanksterDebtSlave |
The iea are effectively lobbyists for corporate elites .... Mark Littlewood is a kn#b (in my considered opinion! ) |
Instead of making an ad hominem argument; what do you disagree with in the article? | |
| |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 18:36 - Jan 16 with 1428 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 13:48 - Jan 16 by GlasgowBlue |
The methodology that Oxfam has used is very misleading.
https://iea.org.uk/blog/oxfams-global-inequality-statistics-dont-believe-the-ant
Oxfam recently seem to have got their priorities mixed up. The focus should be on defeating poverty, not inequality.
There's has been a huge fall in poverty around the world in recent years. Take India. There has been a huge fall in poverty but at the same time there has been a massive increase in inequality. Certain people have become very wealthy at the same time and poverty has fallen.
Are Oxfam saying they would prefer India to be a more equal country where more people went hungry due to poverty?
Unfortunately this charity has become very politicised recently and their statements are timed to coincided with the statements made by the leader of the Labour party. |
Re India ..... go tell all the small scale Indian farmers committing suicide due to debts how much better off ...... don't even get me started on how much better off we are all going to be when the sh@t storm that is perpetual growth on a finite planet, supported by debt based wealth hits the proverbial fan ! Trickle down ..... ha ! ha ! | |
| |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 18:47 - Jan 16 with 1397 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 18:36 - Jan 16 by BanksterDebtSlave |
Re India ..... go tell all the small scale Indian farmers committing suicide due to debts how much better off ...... don't even get me started on how much better off we are all going to be when the sh@t storm that is perpetual growth on a finite planet, supported by debt based wealth hits the proverbial fan ! Trickle down ..... ha ! ha ! |
Where did I mention trickle down. Trickle down is a myth used by the left and falsely put in the mouths of the right.
You haven't told me what you dispute in the article. Regardless of the tragic picture you paint regarding Indian farmers and the majority of those tragic suicides took place in 2004 and 05, are you disputing that in just three years poverty in India has reduced from 30% to 22% whilst Indian GDP has increased and is expected to reach 8-9% by 2020.
Oxfam's issue is with wealth inequality whilst their focus should be on poverty. That's the basis of the article. | |
| |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 19:04 - Jan 16 with 1384 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 18:47 - Jan 16 by GlasgowBlue |
Where did I mention trickle down. Trickle down is a myth used by the left and falsely put in the mouths of the right.
You haven't told me what you dispute in the article. Regardless of the tragic picture you paint regarding Indian farmers and the majority of those tragic suicides took place in 2004 and 05, are you disputing that in just three years poverty in India has reduced from 30% to 22% whilst Indian GDP has increased and is expected to reach 8-9% by 2020.
Oxfam's issue is with wealth inequality whilst their focus should be on poverty. That's the basis of the article. |
Any figures produced by the iea will be produced to support their favoured narrative (lies damn lies etc)...for you to quote GDP seems to suggest you've missed my point on 'growth' and that it makes us 'wealthier' . As far as I remember trickle down was how globalism and free market Capitalism was sold to us plebs by the venerable Margaret and Ronald ! | |
| |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 19:16 - Jan 16 with 1369 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 19:04 - Jan 16 by BanksterDebtSlave |
Any figures produced by the iea will be produced to support their favoured narrative (lies damn lies etc)...for you to quote GDP seems to suggest you've missed my point on 'growth' and that it makes us 'wealthier' . As far as I remember trickle down was how globalism and free market Capitalism was sold to us plebs by the venerable Margaret and Ronald ! |
I'll ask you again, for a third time. What do you dispute in the article?
You keep returning to Trickle down. No one used it. Trickle down was first coined by FDR in the late 1920's. I don't know anybody who argues that society would become wealthier because the rich were spending more.
In fact quite the opposite. It's more of a trickle up. You are probably typing now on software made by Bill Gates. Technology has enabled poorer people to get richer. At the same time it's enriched Bill Gates.
The article advocates that a strong economy will take more people out of poverty. The article doesn't make the case that making rich people richer will trickle down to the poor.
Would you accept that under the isolationist communist regime the majority of people in China lived in poverty? Would you say that there was less wealth inequality when the majority were equally poor?
In fact 84% of China’s population used to live in extreme poverty. Since China entered the global capitalism market hat number has been reduced to 10%. There is higher wealth inequality in China but a hell of a lot less poverty overall. That's down to a strong economy. Nothing to do with the so called trickle down.
[Post edited 16 Jan 2017 19:24]
| |
| |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 19:24 - Jan 16 with 1370 views | bluelagos |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 19:04 - Jan 16 by BanksterDebtSlave |
Any figures produced by the iea will be produced to support their favoured narrative (lies damn lies etc)...for you to quote GDP seems to suggest you've missed my point on 'growth' and that it makes us 'wealthier' . As far as I remember trickle down was how globalism and free market Capitalism was sold to us plebs by the venerable Margaret and Ronald ! |
Posted in wrong place: Supposed to be for Glassers:
--------------
May I?
Point 5: Oxfam — a development charity — is now obsessed with the rich rather than the poor
This is utter bollx. They deliver projects all over the world focused very clearly on assisting the poor.
Point 6) At home and abroad, Oxfam is now like a one-club golfer: more government is always the answer.
More utter bollox. [Post edited 16 Jan 2017 19:26]
| |
| |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 19:51 - Jan 16 with 1338 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 19:16 - Jan 16 by GlasgowBlue |
I'll ask you again, for a third time. What do you dispute in the article?
You keep returning to Trickle down. No one used it. Trickle down was first coined by FDR in the late 1920's. I don't know anybody who argues that society would become wealthier because the rich were spending more.
In fact quite the opposite. It's more of a trickle up. You are probably typing now on software made by Bill Gates. Technology has enabled poorer people to get richer. At the same time it's enriched Bill Gates.
The article advocates that a strong economy will take more people out of poverty. The article doesn't make the case that making rich people richer will trickle down to the poor.
Would you accept that under the isolationist communist regime the majority of people in China lived in poverty? Would you say that there was less wealth inequality when the majority were equally poor?
In fact 84% of China’s population used to live in extreme poverty. Since China entered the global capitalism market hat number has been reduced to 10%. There is higher wealth inequality in China but a hell of a lot less poverty overall. That's down to a strong economy. Nothing to do with the so called trickle down.
[Post edited 16 Jan 2017 19:24]
|
Maybe you live in a left/right paradigm vacuum....my point would be that a global, growth based economy mostly based on making/advertising stuff that is largely unnecessary and made to not last and dependent on increasingly fragile/complex systems will in the long run make us all significantly worse off when said sh#t hits said fan ! The Emperor has no clothes! (It's all based on unserviceable debt as well ! ) | |
| |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 20:13 - Jan 16 with 1316 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 19:24 - Jan 16 by bluelagos |
Posted in wrong place: Supposed to be for Glassers:
--------------
May I?
Point 5: Oxfam — a development charity — is now obsessed with the rich rather than the poor
This is utter bollx. They deliver projects all over the world focused very clearly on assisting the poor.
Point 6) At home and abroad, Oxfam is now like a one-club golfer: more government is always the answer.
More utter bollox. [Post edited 16 Jan 2017 19:26]
|
See banksterdebtslave that's how you do it.
Lagos I'm just getting in the car. I'll come back to these points tonight or tomorrow mate. | |
| |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 20:18 - Jan 16 with 1308 views | bluelagos |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 20:13 - Jan 16 by GlasgowBlue |
See banksterdebtslave that's how you do it.
Lagos I'm just getting in the car. I'll come back to these points tonight or tomorrow mate. |
Save it for another time Glassers - enjoy your night out. | |
| |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 20:26 - Jan 16 with 1300 views | BorisOrTrevor |
| Blimey - this says a lot about our society... on 11:36 - Jan 16 by caught-in-limbo |
I think it's excellent that the 7th richest man has been given 600b$ by the CIA for access to its Amazon cloud. It's also really cool and very "free press" that that same man has recently bought one of the US's most respected newspapers, The Washington Post.
That's really excellent. The WP being the first to claim Russian hacking of the US elections with no evidence whatsoever wouldn't be linked to such conflict of interests at all. |
Also, the whole giving money away to charity is all BS. It is about buying influence and power beyond published wealth once you get to that level. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
