| Author |
|
Philippe Negrin
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 01 August 2007
Location: France
Posts: 2644
|
| Posted: 17 April 2019 at 10:40am | IP Logged | 1
|
post reply
|
|
I realize it's a thoroughly unAmerican point of view but how can we accept to live in a system that allows a tiny fraction become so rich that they can give away 200 million dollars in a minute when the majority of the planet's population barely has $2 to survuve each day ?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Eric Sofer
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 31 January 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 4789
|
| Posted: 17 April 2019 at 11:49am | IP Logged | 2
|
post reply
|
|
David S., please be sure I intended no insult. I am an ignorant American, and was not aware of Notre Dame's status of being a public building (among many other things of which I'm ignorant... :)
I wouldn't think President Macron would say any such thing, then. Unlike certain OTHER presidents I know of, he seems fairly decent...
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 15811
|
| Posted: 17 April 2019 at 12:00pm | IP Logged | 3
|
post reply
|
|
[In response to Phillipe's question about how can we live in a society that allows...]
The general thinking for hundreds of years has been that such a system actually encourages prosperity for the general whole in way that beats every other system.
"It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest."
I'm not a fan of unfettered capitalism (and dislike the idea of generational wealth in particular), but when you look at social experiments like Venezuela or the old Soviet Bloc you realise that the capitalism does actually work better than the alternatives.
When we talk about advances in medicine: how many advances in medicine do you think we'd have if all the biopharma companies didn't spend all that money on R&D in the hopes of discovering profitable patents?
Edited by Peter Martin on 17 April 2019 at 12:02pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 15811
|
| Posted: 17 April 2019 at 12:19pm | IP Logged | 4
|
post reply
|
|
The question comes then, why DON'T we spend more money on hungry people? Or on better health care so that people don't go bankrupt from a critical disease? ------------------------------------------------------------ - Not sure who 'we' is supposed to be, but given you are from the US, did you know that for every dollar the US government spends, about 60 cents goes to a combination of Social Security, Unemployment & Labor and Medicare & Health.
Here is some of the breakdown of the money that doesn't go to socialsecurity/health:
3 cents goes on education. 2 cents on transportation. 2 cents on housing. 1 cent on the environment. 6 cents on paying down US debts. 4 cents to veterans. 4 cents on food and agriculture. 16 cents on military.
I do think US military spending is unnecessarily large, but I was surprised by how big the chunk of govt spending is on medicare and social security.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 15811
|
| Posted: 17 April 2019 at 12:21pm | IP Logged | 5
|
post reply
|
|
I say paying down debt, but that is not accurate. Servicing debt is a more accurate term.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
David Miller
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Posts: 3009
|
| Posted: 17 April 2019 at 12:38pm | IP Logged | 6
|
post reply
|
|
Capitalism and Socialism aren't binary opposites. Almost every functioning Western democracy has found it necessary to balance the two. Unfettered capitalism practically requires a social welfare state, because the self-interest and disparate power inherent in capitalist employment relationships leaves many worker needs unfilled. See Walmart for a metastasized example.
Typically, the same American capitalists who insist social welfare should be provided by private charity and not through compulsory taxes, also despise private charity. Mississippi, for example, which is run by about as righteous and right-wing people as any state in America, is thoroughly hostile to nonprofit organizations operating withing its borders, with exorbitant fees and excessive reporting requirements. But at least they all feel good paypalling fives and ones to the Vatican treasury. |
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
| |
David Schmidt
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 11 July 2017
Location: France
Posts: 441
|
| Posted: 17 April 2019 at 1:09pm | IP Logged | 7
|
post reply
|
|
Eric, I never thought you insulted me. I think I'm not fluent enough in english to write with the proper temper... And I never implied I thought Americans were ignorant. In fact when I read topics on this forum I understand how different we are on many subjects for cultural reasons and how I'm ignorant of your way of living (I do my best but I don't understand how your electoral college system works...).
About President Macron... I can't say I'm a big fan but... well... I agree with you on this one.
Edited by David Schmidt on 17 April 2019 at 1:11pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Michael Roberts
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 20 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 14816
|
| Posted: 17 April 2019 at 1:17pm | IP Logged | 8
|
post reply
|
|
I'm not a fan of unfettered capitalism (and dislike the idea of generational wealth in particular), but when you look at social experiments like Venezuela or the old Soviet Bloc you realise that the capitalism does actually work better than the alternatives.
———
Social experiments? They were authoritarian regimes. Authoritarian governments suck under both Capitalism and Socialism.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 15811
|
| Posted: 17 April 2019 at 1:33pm | IP Logged | 9
|
post reply
|
|
Chavez was elected democratically a number of times in free and open elections and I would argue his economic policies amounted to a social experiment. His economic polices were very socialist in nature and were repeatedly embraced by the electorate. And they screwed the country economically.
Edited to add: this is starting to get into major thread drift. I would add that I think in theory some of Chavez' policies were nice ideas, or at least certainly well-intentioned, but ultimately the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and Venezuela has ended up with terrible inflation, power outages and massive product shortages.
Edited by Peter Martin on 17 April 2019 at 1:47pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Philippe Negrin
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 01 August 2007
Location: France
Posts: 2644
|
| Posted: 17 April 2019 at 2:53pm | IP Logged | 10
|
post reply
|
|
I think we could have capitalism and at the same time prevent a system in which 2,000 people own 90% of the total global wealth...
Edited by Philippe Negrin on 17 April 2019 at 2:54pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 15811
|
| Posted: 17 April 2019 at 3:44pm | IP Logged | 11
|
post reply
|
|
I'd be happy with a system (in theory) whereby you can earn as much for yourself in your own lifetime, but you give it all back to be redistributed when you die. So everyone starts at birth on a level playing field with everyone else. Or 95% goes back to be redistributed.
From my own anecdotal evidence from conversations I've had, people really, really don't like that idea though.
In practice, it would be hard to enforce, as people would find a way to squirrel the money away and get it to their descendants. But as I said before, I personally find the idea of generational/dynastic wealth as especially troubling. That families can silo off these vast fortunes from society, using the wealth to build ever more for their own from generation to generation.
Money that is sequestered away for the benefit of the few is, I agree, not good.
Bringing it back to Notre Dam, I would point out that this money is not disappearing into a hole. People will be employed with this money for years and years. The economy will be stimulated. Taxes will go to the government from the wages paid and the corporate profits made. A good portion of that tax revenue will be redistributed to those less well off.
All better than if the cash had sat in the bank accounts of those donating.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Koroush Ghazi
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 25 October 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 1652
|
| Posted: 17 April 2019 at 8:33pm | IP Logged | 12
|
post reply
|
|
Peter Martin wrote:
| Not sure who 'we' is supposed to be, but given you are from the US, did you know that for every dollar the US government spends, about 60 cents goes to a combination of Social Security, Unemployment & Labor and Medicare & Health. |
|
|
Here's a pie chart showing the rough breakdown of Total US Government expenditure in 2105:
Major components:
15.9% - Military
27.4% - Medicare & Health
33.3% - Social Security, Unemployment & Labor
Of course, under Trump the much-needed and highly productive Military component is much higher now...
As for Notre Dame, this article summarizes the real reason why so much money and attention is being diverted towards it:
Christians 'under siege', says Sydney archbishop following Notre-Dame Cathedral fire
QUOTE:
But Archbishop Anthony Fisher said after hearing of a recent "catalogue of fires" at churches in France, "it really struck me that we are, in some ways, under siege".
"Particularly at this time, we know there are those in the world who are opposed to all religion or opposed to our religion and it looks like some of them are determined to make that clear by burning down our buildings," he told 2GB radio on Thursday.
"I hope that's not what was behind what happened at Notre-Dame Cathedral. I think the determination of the French people to rebuild it is a very Christian response. |
|
|
Humanity, doubling down on stupidity in the face of logic.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
