Stop blaming the richest 1%

[rpm]

Stop blaming the richest 1% and move with the times

Technology has exacerbated inequality, but instead of being stuck laying blame, we should prepare ourselves for an increasingly tech-driven world.

 

[RanzB]

Are MyBB just regurgitating M&G articles or is there something I don't know?

 

[KaMoS]

Gray article. Nice read.

 

[RyanPCMR]

A pity I could not type in my response but only a screenshot:

---

---

For saying: **** article. Most people would not bother about the rich if they did not spend all of their profits generated in their poorer country of citizenship on overseas products. What is the poorer country to do but tax these rich people proportionally on their overseas investments in order to not digress further?

 

[Chevron]

Are MyBB just regurgitating M&G articles or is there something I don't know?

You haven't heard of syndication?

 

[supersunbird]

Yes, no reason to blame them.

Make your tax system efficient and work on closing exploitable loopholes when they are discovered, tax them at 40% and be happy.

SA must focus on education and crime (and obviously get a better government). Fix those and you can focus on areas like tourism, people cant experience the wild properly from the internet and Kenya and wherever is dangerous, and productive farming for exporting (so stop messing with land rights) since tech people need to eat right? There are many other industries where one can focus on where we might have an advantage. And one taxes them so the profit can be used for whatever.

 

[chicken247]

Make your tax system efficient and work on closing exploitable loopholes...

Sounds about right when 85 people have more money than 3,5 billion people. Yeah lets vote to continue the system that made that possible and try to improve it. The current system implies a certain political disorder or lawlessness within and at the top of the global community, a skewness where some are more equal. Or maybe we should burns these fsckers down.

 

[supersunbird]

Sounds about right when 85 people have more money than 3,5 billion people. Yeah lets vote to continue the system that made that possible and try to improve it. The current system implies a certain political disorder or lawlessness within and at the top of the global community, a skewness where some are more equal. Or maybe we should burns these fsckers down.

Do you use FB and Google products and do you have a cellphone?

 

[Vrotappel]

Sounds about right when 85 people have more money than 3,5 billion people. Yeah lets vote to continue the system that made that possible and try to improve it. The current system implies a certain political disorder or lawlessness within and at the top of the global community, a skewness where some are more equal. Or maybe we should burns these fsckers down.

Those 3.5 billion helps make them rich. There's lots in life you'll have to give up if you don't want to support them.

 

[Freaksta]

Sounds about right when 85 people have more money than 3,5 billion people. Yeah lets vote to continue the system that made that possible and try to improve it. The current system implies a certain political disorder or lawlessness within and at the top of the global community, a skewness where some are more equal. Or maybe we should burns these fsckers down.

Each person has the potential to be wealthy. If you generate an idea that 1 Billion people use and like great i recon you deserve to get rich for it.

It is very easy to point fingers, but create you own wealth and you will be the person who gets fingers pointed at.

 

[Creag]

Are MyBB just regurgitating M&G articles or is there something I don't know?

Why not? If it is a good article and their is a business agreement, then I say it's great for the readers.

 

[chicken247]

Each person has the potential to be wealthy. If you generate an idea that 1 Billion people use and like great i recon you deserve to get rich for it.

It is very easy to point fingers, but create you own wealth and you will be the person who gets fingers pointed at.

Yes. I agree. I also agree with that new idea/system DJ proposed. Normal people are not happier after earning 1$ more than the first 1 billion $. What I am saying is there should be a ceiling where you dont get the same warm fuzzie's / utility for earning that last $ as for the first 1. When you cross that line you go to the dark side. Shouldnt there be a point where you say "f@k dit" and move on to the next thing that gives you warm fuzzie's / utility?

I am not talking about the 1 oke in 200 that has more money that 78 of the 200. I am talking about people who are addicted to that last $ and then the next 1.

 

[chicken247]

Do you use FB and Google products and do you have a cellphone?

Industry leaders (companies) are not people they are systems in their own right. Most of them have been weaponized to such an extent that they are part of the problem and not the solution.

 

[supersunbird]

Industry leaders (companies) are not people they are systems in their own right. Most of them have been weaponized to such an extent that they are part of the problem and not the solution.

But the ****ers that should be burned down are Mark Zuckerburg and Larry Page and Sergey Brin who started those two companies or not?

 

[chris_meier]

What Eric Schmidt said at Davos recently was not given enough coverage, and is worth revisiting:

Google Chairman Eric Schmidt just gave a “fireside chat” in Davos.

In the context of talking about global inequality, which Schmidt thinks is partly the result of technology and is going to get worse before it gets better, Schmidt revealed a critical truth about the economy that few other successful investors and executives appear to understand (or at least admit):

The stagnation in middle-class wages is not just a middle-class problem. It’s an economic problem. And it’s one of the main reasons that global economic growth is so lousy.

Why do stagnant middle-class wages hurt the economy?

Because the middle-class folks whose wages are stagnant are the global economy’s biggest spenders.

And when they don’t have money to spend, their lack of spending hurts not just them but all the companies that depend on them for revenue.

Including, Schmidt pointed out, Google.

Put differently, one company’s expenses (wages) is another company’s revenue. So, collectively, when companies are cutting wages, they’re also cutting their own future revenue growth.

Right now, companies are so focused on cutting wages — by paying their employees as little as possible and replacing them with technology whenever possible — that wages as a per cent of the economy are now near an all-time low (see chart below). And this weakness in wages is the big reason demand in the economy is so weak.

Source

The difference between a standard wage today and what it was in the 60s and 70s is also part of the problem. I can't find the story now, but will update when I do. A young man, fresh out of school in the 60s could support himself and buy a car working a very basic, entry level job. The problem is not just that people are being replaced by technology, but that those who aren't are almost certainly not earning a decent wage.

 

[supersunbird]

What Eric Schmidt said at Davos recently was not given enough coverage, and is worth revisiting:



Source

The difference between a standard wage today and what it was in the 60s and 70s is also part of the problem. I can't find the story now, but will update when I do. A young man, fresh out of school in the 60s could support himself and buy a car working a very basic, entry level job. The problem is not just that people are being replaced by technology, but that those who aren't are almost certainly not earning a decent wage.

I concur with Eric Schmidt .

 

[jax_maxit]

Good article. Quite informative.

 

[Alan]

Sounds about right when 85 people have more money than 3,5 billion people. Yeah lets vote to continue the system that made that possible and try to improve it. The current system implies a certain political disorder or lawlessness within and at the top of the global community, a skewness where some are more equal. Or maybe we should burns these fsckers down.

and your alternative is too elect bureaucrats who'll take money by compulsion and 'distribute it' fairly, efficiently and without siphoning off most it for themselves?

Tell me do you think the top 1% stuff their cash in giant mattresses never to be seen again?

 

[RanzB]

You haven't heard of syndication?

Why not? If it is a good article and their is a business agreement, then I say it's great for the readers.

So do either of you know of such a deal? If so, as I said before, it's news to me.

 

[chicken247]

and your alternative is too elect bureaucrats who'll take money by compulsion and 'distribute it' fairly, efficiently and without siphoning off most it for themselves?

Tell me do you think the top 1% stuff their cash in giant mattresses never to be seen again?

Elections are flawed and rigged ( Bush/Gore). China have engineers (trained people), just feels more equitable.
I have no alternative, yet I am thinking about it and i am encouraging others to do the same. This system will eat itself so we have to find something better. Look at the resentment/greed some of this tech has already fostered among our own people - especially the really poor. Also look at what you are giving up in return when you just open a "free" website today, i am not talking about bandwith costs. Did i mention that tech is weaponized?

The top 1 % are more equal in that they have access. Information is the newest soft commodity and if you have that you have a virtual mattres that multiplies your money. I wonder sometimes if access is not already segregated acccording to a new social formula that benefits the piramid scheme and its atendants. When you benefit from the system you seldom look for flaws in it.

I do like the idea of one currency worldwide. I am sure it will bring its own pitfalls but the euro and its problems can be used as a template to improve upon.