Eight billionaires own same as poorest half of the world

[MusterX]

The original TS was talking about wiping out hunger.

You seem to be throwing in a lot of BS. No one is talking like these people are dogs, thats just you blowing shit out of proportion. To try to get an emotional response instead of a logical rational one. Again first issue to get people out of poverty is to get them where they have regular food. How can we do that?

You seem upset that rich people haven't created a way for a system that has never been done before?


You rich sons of bitches, why haven't you come up with a way that No one else in the history of man kind has.......

Talking about giving money away or investing it in... sounds good, until you have to tell someone how to do it or what is the process? Do we go through governments? what if they don't like how the money is being spent or they think they can spend it better? How do we make sure they people that are actually getting it, get it?

If you don't want to feed them, what the fuck do you want to do with them. The first and foremost issue facing them is hunger.

why is it worse that 1% has... and others have ...

is there a limited amount and the 1% are taking money away from the ...?

Is the 1% making.... taking money away from teh other people?

Why would you expect people living in mud huts in mountains or bad terrain areas to have all sorts of wealth?


You basically just seem to be spewing emotional bullshit and then blaming people for not coming up with a system that has never been done before. If a system like that could be done, don't you think it would at least be getting worked on. You think Gates and all these other people who have donated billions just want to see their money pissed away?

Since it is so easy, why don't you create the system, win a nobel prize and show all those rich greedy assholes how simple it is.

That post is incredibly incoherent. Yes there is a limited amount you troglodyte. The more you get, the less someone else can get. For example in the U.S. we keep around 1 to 1.5 trillion in circulation. So when the top 1% have as much as the other 99% combined I think its an obvious problem you refuse to look at.

 

[MusterX]

what is stopping MusterX from developing a sustainable farming initiative, technique, and or methodology that would end up producing food sources for people in areas in most need?

I dont get people who seem to address a problem but offer no solution that they themselves lead

Always comes down to why doesnt someone else do this.

Because I don't have the resources for such an undertaking would be the biggest reason. Look, if you guys don't see a problem with 1% of people have more than the other 99% then I don't know what to say.

I mean fuck man, if we went into a meeting of the last 100 people on earth and said we are starting the world over, we have $200 of wealth to start off. Joe-Bob in the front row, you get half of it, $100, the other 99 of you get the other half, about $1 each. Do you know what would happen? The 99 in that room would kill Joe-Bob before he got out of the room bud.

That is the situation we live in on Earth now, where 1% has the same as the other 99% combined.

 

[Hagelslag2]

Great, now get those loafs of bread to billions of people across multiple continents everyday. And of course you have to make sure that when you drop them off they actually get to the people not just the governement hording it or some warlord taking it. You know people are paying for the transport for those flowers. So now to feed billions of people you not only have to buy the food but you would need 100s if not thousands of planes everyday, fuel, parts, upkeep, pilots. Then once it gets there you have to have some sort of distribution center set up, people to work the distribution cenetrs, transportation to rural areas to take the food, etc. Now you can get some help from the country on the distribution aspect, as long as they are trust worthy and not selling the food to other cities or to the gov itself. The amount of money needed everyday would be astronomical. While this is going on are you doing anything to help the local economy out? are you helping these people get jobs, etc. If you just feed them and they continue to have kids, then the cost just continues to go up. You gonna pay for security so that the transport trucks don't get hijacked?

Like I already pointed out, I merely pointed out that the problem isn't transporting the food. I never said it was a good idea or that we should do it.

 

[Codger]

That post is incredibly incoherent. Yes there is a limited amount you troglodyte. The more you get, the less someone else can get..

I'm not economist but I'm pretty sure there is wide agreement that money is not a zero-sum game.

 

[CableandThanos]

That post is incredibly incoherent. Yes there is a limited amount you troglodyte. The more you get, the less someone else can get. For example in the U.S. we keep around 1 to 1.5 trillion in circulation. So when the top 1% have as much as the other 99% combined I think its an obvious problem you refuse to look at.

So Bill Gates is keeping abdul mohammed in pakistan for making extra money?

We have poor here in the US correct, yet there are jobs available all day long. Where is that money coming from and why hasn't the mean old rich people taken it? Bill gates making another $100,000 is not keeping you from making your money or going out and gettign another job and making even more money.

 

[CableandThanos]

I'm not economist but I'm pretty sure there is wide agreement that money is not a zero-sum game.

NO NO NO he said it is. I wonder why the greedy rich people haven't taken all the money that is still available by evrryone offering jobs? We have poor people in the US correct? yet there are millions of jobs available? Where is that money coming from and how come Bill gates hasn't gotten it yet? Bill Gates is not stopping anyone from going out and getting money or getting a second job and making more money.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Because I don't have the resources for such an undertaking would be the biggest reason. Look, if you guys don't see a problem with 1% of people have more than the other 99% then I don't know what to say.

I mean fuck man, if we went into a meeting of the last 100 people on earth and said we are starting the world over, we have $200 of wealth to start off. Joe-Bob in the front row, you get half of it, $100, the other 99 of you get the other half, about $1 each. Do you know what would happen? The 99 in that room would kill Joe-Bob before he got out of the room bud.

That is the situation we live in on Earth now, where 1% has the same as the other 99% combined.

But you're odd example, that money was distributed arbitrarily. Bezo's, Gates, Zuks, Paige and Buffet all built their wealth -- so, i have no problem with their wealth vastly exceeding mine -- i did nothing to earn their money and in fact, i wanted the products they offered to actually gave them money.

And thats cool if you want to play a sad tune for all those people -- but you are litterally doing nothing to alleviate the situation. You're just sitting there talking about a problem when you have no intention of remedying it. Those guys didnt have the resources to develop change when they first started, they built that up -- so if you're truly wanting to see change, why not stop telling others what to do with their wealth and establish your own.

 

[MusterX]

Then we agree by the sound of it. Sure help in a famine but if a country can't feed itself then it needs either to develop the land and technology so it can, or stop living in those areas completely. Population control would be a great start in some places. If the West can help with the technology, planning and development then great.

Yea, that isn't going to work, this is why we send so much food to Africa. You can't relocate half the continent of Africa that live n areas that are unable to sustain crops. The argument has actually been made that by feeding these people we allow the situation to get worse because they breed and then there are more to feed. The argument being that if we allowed them to starve then the problem would get less and less.

Just as an example you have shit like this to think about.

Drought-stricken Ethiopia is pleading for food aid again to stave off starvation, but some critics are complaining that the policies of the country's most generous donor, the United States, is exacerbating the cycle of starvation.

A hungry Ethiopia gets 70 percent of its aid from the U.S., but according to a new report by the aid organization Oxfam International, that help comes at a cost.

U.S. law requires that food aid money be spent on food grown in the U.S., at least half of it must be packed in the U.S. and most of it must be transported in U.S. ships. The Oxfam report, "Band Aids and Beyond," claims that is far more expensive and time consuming than buying food in the region.

"For roughly $1 spent on aid, the U.S. taxpayer is paying $2 to get it here," said Carolyn Gluck, an Oxfam spokeswoman.
American aid policies also undermine long-term development strategies that could break the cycle of drought and starvation in Ethiopia.

"It's like having a health service that's running on emergency ambulances to deal with the sick all the time," said Gluck. "You can't just deal with the problem. You need to treat the underlying causes, otherwise you'll be locked into this endless cycle of foreign food donors."
http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Health/us-food-aid-contributing-africas-hunger/story?id=8939151

 

[CableandThanos]

Like I already pointed out, I merely pointed out that the problem isn't transporting the food. I never said it was a good idea or that we should do it.

I know but people like muster X are getting upset at rich people for not coming up with a system that has never been done before. Entire nations and the UN and economist from all different countires have not come up with a proper sytem, yet these people get mad that billionaires have not come up with a system.

It sounds silly.

Damn greedy rich people, why can;'t the 8 of you come up with a system that millions of economist and the entire UN and world governements haven't been able to come up with......

 

[Literally Bricked]

Well Zuckerberg is also pretty charitable and has huge global influence in developing tech start up capabilities in 3rd world nations (paying and training coders and developers in Nigeria) and spending 200 million to grant parts of Africa with satellite data connections (well, the satellite blew up in Sept, but the rebuild is happening)

Bezo I think was the 3rd American on that list and yeah, he's not as charitable - but still has a decent foundation.

Buffett would have to be on that list and hes donated over 20 billion.

Kaiser, bloomberg and Allen have all also donated over a billion dollars each.

I think most people LOVE to armchair quarterback on how others should spend their money -- the difference being, people who judge how others spend their wealth are generally not very good at acquiring themselves.

So what you are saying is it is Zuckerberg's fault I get an e-mail from a Nigerian prince daily?

 

[MusterX]

NO NO NO he said it is. I wonder why the greedy rich people haven't taken all the money that is still available by evrryone offering jobs? We have poor people in the US correct? yet there are millions of jobs available? Where is that money coming from and how come Bill gates hasn't gotten it yet? Bill Gates is not stopping anyone from going out and getting money or getting a second job and making more money.

LMAO at comparing Bill Gates to someone struggling to live month to month while getting a 2nd job and working 80 hours a week making $9.Fitty an hour. Work harder plebs!

 

[MusterX]

I know but people like muster X are getting upset at rich people for not coming up with a system that has never been done before. Entire nations and the UN and economist from all different countires have not come up with a proper sytem, yet these people get mad that billionaires have not come up with a system.

It sounds silly.

Damn greedy rich people, why can;'t the 8 of you come up with a system that millions of economist and the entire UN and world governements haven't been able to come up with......

You have no idea wtf you are talking about. We have all the systems in place but government bureaucracy hobbles much of it. Where the fuck do you think famine stricken areas of Africa get all their food? They get it mostly from the U.S. Getting food to people is not difficult, its that there is no real effort in most cases to do so and hunger is not even the real problem. The real problem is figuring out how to make things right in a world where a few people have all the money.

The problem is not food, the problem is when you use a finite amount of money and resources and you allow 1,000 people to have as much as Billions of people combined. That is the problem.

 

[Codger]

Yea, that isn't going to work, this is why we send so much food to Africa. You can't relocate half the continent of Africa that live n areas that are unable to sustain crops. The argument has actually been made that by feeding these people we allow the situation to get worse because they breed and then there are more to feed. The argument being that if we allowed them to starve then the problem would get less and less.

Just as an example you have shit like this to think about.

Drought-stricken Ethiopia is pleading for food aid again to stave off starvation, but some critics are complaining that the policies of the country's most generous donor, the United States, is exacerbating the cycle of starvation.

A hungry Ethiopia gets 70 percent of its aid from the U.S., but according to a new report by the aid organization Oxfam International, that help comes at a cost.

U.S. law requires that food aid money be spent on food grown in the U.S., at least half of it must be packed in the U.S. and most of it must be transported in U.S. ships. The Oxfam report, "Band Aids and Beyond," claims that is far more expensive and time consuming than buying food in the region.

"For roughly $1 spent on aid, the U.S. taxpayer is paying $2 to get it here," said Carolyn Gluck, an Oxfam spokeswoman.
American aid policies also undermine long-term development strategies that could break the cycle of drought and starvation in Ethiopia.

"It's like having a health service that's running on emergency ambulances to deal with the sick all the time," said Gluck. "You can't just deal with the problem. You need to treat the underlying causes, otherwise you'll be locked into this endless cycle of foreign food donors."
http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Health/us-food-aid-contributing-africas-hunger/story?id=8939151

That just proves that food charity isn't a long term solution.

 

[MusterX]

But you're odd example, that money was distributed arbitrarily. Bezo's, Gates, Zuks, Paige and Buffet all built their wealth -- so, i have no problem with their wealth vastly exceeding mine -- i did nothing to earn their money and in fact, i wanted the products they offered to actually gave them money.

And thats cool if you want to play a sad tune for all those people -- but you are litterally doing nothing to alleviate the situation. You're just sitting there talking about a problem when you have no intention of remedying it. Those guys didnt have the resources to develop change when they first started, they built that up -- so if you're truly wanting to see change, why not stop telling others what to do with their wealth and establish your own.

There is not an infinite amount of money and resources, you get that right? You understand that if you have 6 trillion dollars and you give 3 trillion of it to 500 guys and then give the other 3 trillion to 5 billion people that there is going to be a lot of untold misery in the world? I mean look, if you don't see a problem with it then carry on man.

 

[CableandThanos]

There is not an infinite amount of money and resources, you get that right? You understand that if you have 6 trillion dollars and you give 3 trillion of it to 500 guys and then give the other 3 trillion to 5 billion people that there is going to be a lot of untold misery in the world? I mean look, if you don't see a problem with it then carry on man.

There is no pie where if bill gates gets more money, that means I get less?

How many jobs are out there right now waiting for people to get money? Gates making $100,000 does not stop me you or anyone else from making money or getting a second job and getting more money?
http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2007/04/wealth_creation.html

There is not a finite amount of money and if there was, we are no wher near that level...... thus all those jobs waiting for people to come take the money..

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

There is not an infinite amount of money and resources, you get that right? You understand that if you have 6 trillion dollars and you give 3 trillion of it to 500 guys and then give the other 3 trillion to 5 billion people that there is going to be a lot of untold misery in the world? I mean look, if you don't see a problem with it then carry on man.

New wealth sources are created all the time -- if you developed an IP / patent that produced an ROI, you would also receive a boot in income; possibly in the billions -- so your finite statement makes no sense. You litterally could build your own wealth and use it to help -- you are choosing not to.

US Money supply in the US goes up every year almost -- hell, every month practically

there was nearly 200 new billionaires in 2015-- that money didnt come from taking it from depleting others -- that was developed through new business sources. The .Com boom created new wealth, 2015 was a benchmark year in VC created wealth.

I know there is wealth inequality, all i am saying is you just bitch about it with no real plan for yourself to address it. You are just bellowing about what others should do.

Whats your network -- i bet if you liquidated it and donated -- you could feed 30 people in the world. Do those 30 people not outweigh the needs of yourself?

 

[CableandThanos]

New wealth sources are created all the time -- if you developed an IP / patent that produced an ROI, you would also receive a boot in income; possibly in the billions -- so your finite statement makes no sense. You litterally could build your own wealth and use it to help -- you are choosing not to.

there was nearly 200 new billionaires last year -- that money didnt come from taking it from depleting others -- that was developed through new business sources. The .Com boom created new wealth, 2015 was a benchmark year in VC created wealth.

I know there is wealth inequality, all i am saying is you just bitch about it with no real plan for yourself to address it. You are just bellowing about what others should do.

Whats your network -- i bet if you liquidated it and donated -- you could feed 30 people in the world. Do those 30 people not outweigh the needs of yourself?

Even if there ws a finite amount of money in the US, we are no where near that level. There are millions of jobs just waiting for people to come take them and get more....what...money...

Bill gates making $100,000 does not mean that it cost me money or that I have no way of going and getting more.

I don't know why he can't see that.

 

[Codger]

There is not an infinite amount of money and resources, you get that right? You understand that if you have 6 trillion dollars and you give 3 trillion of it to 500 guys and then give the other 3 trillion to 5 billion people that there is going to be a lot of untold misery in the world? I mean look, if you don't see a problem with it then carry on man.

But that's not what happened. Nobody gave that money to anyone. Everyone earned it with goods sold or services rendered. All that matters is whether people have the opportunity to earn the wealth they require for a secure life. There is nothing inherent in the financial system that guarantees that. Only other man-made systems like government can do that and in reality even they will struggle.

Let's say I invent a product that saves anyone who owns it 10% of their fuel bills. I make it for $1 and sell it for a reasonable $2. it's such a great product that I sell a 5 billion of them netting me $5 billion profit for myself. I am now a dreaded billionaire. After a few years maybe I'm the richest man on the planet. How has that harmed anyone? Why is me being so rich making others poor? I'm not forcing them to buy my product. I'm not gouging them for profit. I'm not taking the food off their plate or the sweat from their brow. I'm actually saving them money. Why would that make me a bad person or make what I do detrimental to mankind? And that's not even taking into account the fact that I'd be hiring 1000's of people spending money on all sorts of services just to run my firm which enables poorer people work. I'm paying taxes the government can spend and I guess I'm blowing wads of cash on boats and houses and god knows what. Again - who is being harmed?

It seems to me that shows that just gathering and concentrating wealth through business is not inherently bad in itself. What is bad is if my product does harm in some way or if my business practices stop others making money. If my product was based on an essential resource and I was using it all up or if it polluted the planet or whatever then that's bad. If it's addictive and people find they are forced to buy it to the detriment of their own finances, that's bad. If abuse my power to put the competition out of action etc. but just being rich from selling stuff - that's not bad.

So to convince me that wealth being concentrated like you describe is bad per se then I need to see evidence that it's being done in a bad way. I'm not saying it's not. I'm saying there merely being a billionaire doesn't mean others go hungry.

 

[foxnoob]

We humans are a competitive species, that's all this is. These billionaires are some of the most ferocious, ultra competitive people on the planet and they measure their success by their net worth. It's human nature, but allowing it to continue unabated to the point it destroys the macro economy is not a good idea.

So since I'm just not that competitive over money I've gone with this for most of my life. You can't buy height!

 

[sub_thug]

For anyone who is interested, Gates, Zuckerburg, Musk, and others made their fortunes on software and internet-based companies that weren't capital-intensive. Literally anyone in the US could do their ideas with enough talent and work.

Warren Buffet made most of his money after the age of 50. Therefore, it's not too late for most of you.

If you want to change the world, go out there and do it. These guys did. Don't be mad that these self-made men aren't doing things how you think they should do them.