01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 |
61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 | 120 |
121 | 122 | 123 | 124 | 125 | 126 | 127 | 128 | 129 | 130 | 131 | 132 | 133 | 134 | 135 | 136 | 137 | 138 | 139 | 140 | 141 | 142 | 143 | 144 | 145 | 146 | 147 | 148 | 149 | 150 | 151 | 152 | 153 | 154 | 155 | 156 | 157 | 158 | 159 | 160 | 161 | 162 | 163 | 164 | 165 | 166 | 167 | 168 | 169 | 170 | 171 | 172 | 173 | 174 | 175 | 176 | 177 | 178 | 179 | 180 |
<= [851][852][853][854][855][856][857][858][859][860] => |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4166 |
SEATO, similarly stands as a formidable bastion in Asia, and it is no longer only a veritable US institution, but a mult layered association of intricate political web. **
Klausowitz .... **
4167 |
Economics can be explained by referring back to human nature, and what is it that explores human nature?
Sounds like a typical reversal of hierarchy, looking at nature from the perspective of human social norms, instead of observing nature and how social norms emerge within it. **
4168 |
Speaking of videos; I just made this simulation of a single sub-atomic particle which looks surprisingly like the emulation (if one could actually see ultra-minuscule EMR pulses) and could be included in a video. A black-hole would be merely a much, much larger version of that same thing.
But I really need to convey the following pic in an animated way:
That one isn't so easy to simulate. **
4169 |
4170 |
Arminius wrote:
»You do not need to simulate all your pics.« ** **
4171 |
4172 |
4173 |
By 2025, »sexbots will be commonplace« which is just fine, as well all be unemployed and bored thanks to robots stealing our jobs. **
4174 |
The problem lies where psychiatry fabricates mental illnesses .... **
4175 |
Was Sartre right about what lies at the core of human nature? **
4176 |
The closest thing probably is understanding how it was before you were born, that state of nothingness. So, yes, you can, based on the logical example of what death is, ceasing to exist. **
4177 |
Arminius wrote:
»So again: You are the one who did not understand what almost all others wrote in this thread.« ** **
Glad I'm not the only one having this experience. The discussion should have been over before it began - he hasn't made a solid non-semantic point yet, and the only thing keeping his »argument« going is a convenient series of misunderstandings and omissions whenever somebody points out the mistake he's making, **
4178 |
Arminius wrote:
»World War III .... With what enemies?« ** **
United States and its allies versus Russia along with China and their allies. **
4179 |
Arminius wrote:
»I don't know all your pics.« ** **
Picture Bank 1
Picture Bank 2 **
4180 |
Arminius wrote:
»Yes.« ** **
Hey, I don't know if you were following, but remember the part where I accused his arbitrary reformulation as just being a cheap attempt to bash religion by importing the New Atheist usage of »belief« into philosophy? **
Well, there it is in his new update- doing exactly as I predicted for the reasons I predicted.
It sucks that the only rebuttal is to just say again all the things he ignored when they were said before. I mean holy shit:
»3. Religion, faith, Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Greek Mythology, Jainism, Taosim, are beliefs, not knowledge.«
How are you supposed to deal with something like that in any sort of rigorous way? **
4181 |
Arminius wrote:
»Good question. .... Hmmm .... Should one just ignore him? .... Probably .... However: It sucks very much.« ** **
Well, epistemology is one of my favorite subjects and it doesn't come up often. So yeah, it sucks a lot. One thing I noticed is when you said »knowledge is a type of information« you were using it in a slightly different way. There 'knowledge' which means something like »facts«. and then there's knowledge that means something like »being aware of (certain of?) a fact.«. Maybe a slightly more precise way to have worded the OP would be »Is knowing also a belief?«. **
4182 |
Yes, mental illnesses are fabricated every year. It's all a very lucrative financial business .... **
Psychiatry as an arm of the state is very important in curving down and controlling the masses or population also. **
4183 |
It's used to reaffirm authority in people's everyday life or existence. It's not enough to control people physically as authority must ensure mental obedience as well. **
4184 |
I'm currently at the bar trying to get drunk. On my first drink now. **
4185 |
Second shot of Vodka. Still not drunk yet. **
4186 |
No, just zoning out wishing I was on another planet. Cheers. **
4187 |
There's music I'm just not paying attention to it. I am in my own little world .... **
|
4188 |
4189 |
4190 |
4191 |
4192 |
4193 |
The Most Destructive Paradigm: Owning Earth ....
Humans should be free to settle wherever they want to. **
When humans are contained, restricted, they also are more controllable. **
An open border policy has thus little to do protectionism but the ability to move freely. **
Protectionism is no more less than a prison without bars. **
4194 |
4195 |
4196 |
4197 |
Territoriality can be found in all species. Human territoriality is just taken to the extremes.
Naturally since human beings are the apex predator at the top of the food chain it makes sense as to why human beings have achieved an existence of global territorial domination.
What separates human beings however from all other species is economics in a purely monetary and currency sense. No other species has this kind of organization or systemization on living and existing. **
4198 |
4199 |
Air pollution is killing about 4,400 people in China every single day, according to a new study (**). **
4200 |
Arminius wrote:
»Most humans want to change the world.
Only few humans want to protect the world.It is wrong to change the world to the extent as it is done currently. It is logically false, it is ethically false, it is aesthetically false. So it is philosophical false.« ** **
Humans are part of the world, so if you want to protect the world you have to change the humans. It's that simple. **
4201 |
4202 |
Nursing a hangover. **
Other than that, I'm fine. **
4203 |
4204 |
A key to philosophy is language. **
4205 |
4206 |
Why would you bother to only respond to the subject? I mean obviously that doesn't say much at all and is a duh.. but the content in the body isn't necessarily a »duh«. **
4207 |
I lost count after eighteen. **
4208 |
After last night suffice it to say I will not be drinking again anytime soon. **
4209 |
We'll keep this thread open just in case I start drinking again. **
|
4210 |
4211 |
Meanwhile crossing the border of Greece into Macedonia .... Onwards north. **
4212 |
Oh, I am sure it is. The borders might be closed but they're still finding ways in.
I specifically got that photo from a news agency and that was what it stated.. **
1) This is one route (the route you were talking about): |
2) This is another route (from Libya that has no state anymore): |
3) This is a currently less used route (Marocco has still a state): |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
4213 |
4214 |
Wonder if there is any routes through eastern Europe via Turkey. **
4215 |
Looks like they're headed to Italy or Greece. **
4216 |
Absolutely, Libya is currently destabilized and is experiencing tremendous civil war. **
|
4217 |
4218 |
Hahaha wrote:
»Psychiatry as an arm of the state is very important in curving down and controlling the masses or population also.« **
I would say rather that the state is an arm of the corporations. If the corporations can create a market somewhere then they get the state to privatize something or market the corporate solution or validate the corporate solution as the only solution. The DSM5 privitizes pathology. Your mind is now a market for products. **
4219 |
2op. You think america is bad, our new budget plan takes from the disabled and gives to the rich, pays the rich more in dividends and takes some more of them out of the highest tax bracket. When I was a young punk I thought all this bs, homelessness etc, would be gone by the time I got to my age, but its just got worse ~ silly me. **
4220 |
4221 |
We dont know much about our own death. This means that it is an incredibly fearful thing to most humans, and we mostly spend our time trying to avoid it. The fact that we know of this impending doom however, means that we can in turn really enjoy life. In this video, I discuss why knowledge of our own death is actually a good thing for us. Let me know your view with a comment!
Martin Heidegger's Being & Time. **
4222 |
Arminius wrote:
»This webforum lacks philosophy, although and because its name is I Love Philosophy.« ** **
The problem here is in defining philosophy. Personally, I don't find existentialism to be very philosophical. I don't find most religion to be particularly philosophical. Many would consider both subjects squarely in the philosophical purview. On the other hand, I think physics and math have quite a lot to do with philosophy. I think rhetoric and policy and economics are philosophical endeavors. Many would disagree.
We try to accept all comers. That means essentially everyone will see something on here to which they'll think, »that's not philosophy«. **
4223 |
4224 |
More precisely, it is obfuscation and extortion leading to a Comply or Die world. There actually is a way to avoid it. But you do have to be able to clearly see it first. .... Hence »philosophy«. **
4225 |
Say, for the sake of simplicity, that there are 100 people in a society. Of all these 100 people, everybody does their role in maintaing the society - some are police/military, and they defend it from other humans and animals that would attack it (protectors). Others are providers and make clothes, food, etc. etc. However, one person decides that they don't want to work. They would rather get handouts. They decide to exploit the system that gives a certain amount of money for a child, and have 9 kids (all of whom, like their parent, refuse to actually work), and so they live better than an average person who has to work. That individual has, indeed, successfully escaped the natural consequences of their own behavior. However, the society still has to deal with it one way or another. A society has to give almost a tenth of its food, clothes, etc. to individuals who don't contribute to its maintenance. **
THIS is why it is an important question to ask: »What would happen in nature?«. Because the more things a society allows that are anti-nature (like people refusing to work for a living and being given shit for free instead, when in nature the opposite would happen and they would die off), the more the society allows things which contribute to its own collapse as more resources are drained than given back. Basically - an individual can escape dealing with nature, but the system is still faced with it and forced to find ways to maintain the high degree of artifices (what we call a living standard). The cost for weakness and degeneracy is always paid, either by the individual, or the system. The cost can be transfered and so escaped by one entity, but ultimately it can not be made to disappear and so somebody, somewhere ... will pay. **
4226 |
4227 |
4228 |
Minus the above admitted mistakes above, the argument stands on geopolitical grounds. The scenario has changed totally. The disintegration of the Brit Empire, and the foundation of former colonial nations, on supposedly democratic principles, let loose billions of 'emancipated' populations, who had changed the map of political shift toward new horizons. **
The past prior to the great wars showed the political economic centers in London, New York , Berlin. This no longer holds true. Other centers are competing, ; Shanghai, Hong Kong, Tokyo, among the most formidable.
With the rise of a new economic order, the significance of the older ones have relatively diminished. Europe and the US , rather then gaining from dissolving treaties and alliances, would loose, in terms of having the muscle of enforcing them, and overcoming pressure from the new markets. ASEAN replaced SEATO, and it is mostly a regional organization, filling the vacuum. **
The opening of hostilities due to economic pressures is nothing new, ww2 is an example, where choking the production of military equipment by the pressure on Japan in it's steel production resulted in open hostilities.
In a capitalistic world, arms guarantee of the flow of manufacture and trade. These are other reasons why, these institutions should not be discontinued.
This is an opposite point of view argument, credible, not necessarily that with which I would be absolutely in agreement with, however, as economy is the main driver in a world dominated by trade, rather then ideology, it would seem, that the new 'democratic'
nations cause the difference in this shift.Arminius, thanks to pointing to mistakes in the argument, they are helpful, but inessential to the argument as a whole. **
|
4229 |
What's the best method for identifying and banning those trolls? **
And how effective do you assume banning to be for preventing someone from posting on ILP? **
4230 |
4231 |
Freedom in a commons brings ruin to all.
4232 |
Arminius wrote:
»You could just as well say it the other way around (but you just do not want to):
We easily say that it might be 10th street when we actually mean I believe it is 10th street.
People throw around the word might too loosely.« ** **
I don't think that's the case. Saying »I believe it is 10th street« to someone usually means »I don't know it's 10th street, I think its 10th street though«, does it not? Otherwise, someone who knows it's 10th street would say »It's 10th street«. Very confidently. **
You could just as well say it the other way around (but you just do not want to):
We easily say that »t might be 10th street« when we actually mean »I believe it is 10th street«.
People throw around the word »might« too loosely. ** **
The good thing about this example is, there is usually no cognitive biases wrapped up around this issue of finding something, usually. So its pretty simple. I don't think people throw the word »might« around too loosely. **
Seems you're just being contrarian to engage in sophistry. **
4233 |
4234 |
4235 |
4236 |
4237 |
Arminius wrote:
»Ich glaube in German means I believe in English, and Ich denke in German means I think in English. Since the late 1960s, certain German people have been fighting a word battle; the reason for it is the goal that Ich denke shall be used instead of Ich glaube which shall die out; the people shall believe that they think and shall not notice that they believe and not think; in this way new believers shall be bred, namely those who do not think / know that they believe but nevertheless believe that they think / know.« ** **
Do you have any references for this? **
|
4238 |
4239 |
4240 |
4241 |
4242 |
4243 |
4244 |
4245 |
Arminius wrote:
»It is not good when people do not know that they believe but nevertheless believe that they know.« ** **
Yes, I know.
.... Emmmm..
I mean I believe it to be true.
Well, I fear it to be true.
Or at least I suspect it.
I doubt that it isn't true.Oh hell, what do I know. **
4246 |
I agree with Ucc. If I were mod I'd be a bit ruthless. No ad hom, people have been getting away with personal attacking instead of attacking the position in a debate. **
4247 |
4248 |
4249 |
4250 |
4251 |
4252 |
4253 |
4254 |
4255 |
4256 |
4257 |
So to identify the trolls, you seem to recommend an I-know-it-when-I-see-it approach, is that right? And then you recommend banning early and often. First insult a permaban? First off-topic post? Or just when a user continues to rub the moderator the wrong way for a long time? **
4258 |
Mostly you, but the question is for the room (and bakes in some of Artimas' ideas that you seemed to agree with).
I appreciate Uccisore's moderation style, it's very different from my own and in many cases better. He can clarify if I misstate his approach, but as I see it, Uccisore is better at enforcing obvious standards of quality, where I tend to emphasize articulable standards. I generally err on the side of permissiveness, where I think Uccisore would err in the other direction (to a lesser extent, of course, and we would likely disagree about what it means to err in the case of moderator intervention).
I think both approaches are useful, both have their time and place, and both have in turn won us praise and cost us users.
More generally (and this I don't intend as in contrast with Uccisore), I'm pretty easy going, and I don't find trolls that annoying, nor am I offended by offensive ideas. And I value noise; there can absolutely be too much, but there can also be too little noise.
Most importantly, I distrust humans when it comes to moderation, myself included; trolls that disagree with me are more annoying than trolls that don't. That's why I favor articulable standards, it keeps me honest and removes human lapses from enforcement. I think that's important on a philosophy forum, because it's easy to find ideas that someone considers appalling amid discussions such as these.
So I tend to under-enforce, because I expect that to be less harmful. But I could be wrong. **
4259 |
I like to typically use a black mark system, first time usually always being a warning, maybe even a second warning, then a suspension from posting but threads still viewable perhaps, then if they come back and keep on going then a ban is probably good. Or just simply put a 1-5 mark system 5 marks is perm ban. Maybe more marks depending. **
|
4260 |
4261 |
Enjoying life is important. That is why the DNA machine has to be made, to improve the quality of life. And if you want to be immortal, you need the consciousness transporter (duh.) The brain serum has to be made so scientists will have the energy and knowhow on how to build it. And from there, you need to do the death research, in case someone dies by accident, so you will know where their consciousness goes, in order to improve their quality of life. **
4262 |
It seems most forget that energy does not cease, it changes. **
Death does not stop energy, it would just change it. **
4263 |
Hahaha wrote:
»I enjoy many things of culture. Don't misinterpret me on that part, it's just that I don't think any of it is necessary for our survival.« **
I agree. It seems you think that the only way to survive is to not have much culture, ever, in any form. **
4264 |
4265 |
4266 |
How do you imagine things getting to the better with or without collapse? What does it look like? **
4267 |
ILP revolt. **
4268 |
|
4269 |
Arminius wrote:
»Artimas wrote:
I like to typically use a black mark system, first time usually always being a warning, maybe even a second warning, then a suspension from posting but threads still viewable perhaps, then if they come back and keep on going then a ban is probably good. Or just simply put a 1-5 mark system 5 marks is perm ban. Maybe more marks depending **
I can agree with that.« ** **
So is the problem is that we have two too many marks? **
»If a member's behavior is disruptive to discussions, staff will intervene to prevent further disruption. Ideally, a private message or a post in a given thread will be enough, but if it not, additional actions may be taken based on the number of similar actions a user has incurred in the past 6 months:
1st warning: board warning, no further action;
2nd: the user will be barred from posting for 24 hours;
3rd: barred from posting for 4 days;
4th: 1 week:
5th: 1 month;
6th: 3 months;
7th: 3 months, but seriously, 7 warnings in 6 months when you can't post for 4.5 of them? Why do you come back?.«Or, if it's that there's no permanent ban at the end, the reality is that there's no such thing as a permanent ban on the internet. We could say 'permanent', but that just means that the user name is dead, not that the poster is banished in practice. **
4270 |
Convincing argument! ** **
Yet, the very chaos , according to the view which prevail, in EU and USA is, that the forces at work to manage the chaos need the combined resources of both economies. The fact remains that the US is the biggest spender in the world for military spending, and the her deterrent absence would encourage the Immediate destabilization of world peace. For that reason alone, a NATO as a military alliance cannot be suddenly disengaged from being a sort of policeman of the world. **
Where did I hear that term before? **
The joint power of NATO imposes constraints upon the forces which would do Europe harm. **
In addition, there are still very staunch and formidable enemies, very reactionary in their holding against such fairly recent, and surprising developments as the unification of East and West Germany. **
The geopolitical map of Europe, is a fairly recent development, and East and West conflict did not totally erase from the consciousness of former belligerents, not even 2 generations old. **
4271 |
4272 |
4273 |
4274 |
4275 |
4276 |
Arminius:
»Economics is not the number one. Economicis is subordinated but also superordinated. It depends on to what and whom.« ** **
I can agree with that. **
Economics is the prime mover of society where psychology and sociology merely explains the behavioral implications of its effects. **
4277 |
I see many problems with Keynesian Economics, but I'll point out that even the Keynesians don't go along with everything he said any more . .... »We are none of us Keynesian any more.« - Milton Friedman.
Inflation is one of the easiest ways to raise taxes without having to ask for permission .... And that is just the tip .... **
4278 |
4279 |
|
4280 |
Arminius, I agree with you.
What I wanted to say in my OP but perhaps I failed to express myself clearly enough, is that politics have begun leaning so radically leftist that even the present right have bought into the leftist bullshit of -isms and -phobias, hence why conservatives are actually cuckservatives and rightists are pretty much socially left, perhaps only economically right.
To be a 'moderate' conservative (cuckservative) is to buy into -isms and -phobias.
Why is this bad?
First of all, it is WRONG. It is a survival instinct we are programmed with to prefer your own group and to have an aversion to other groups, or things like homosexuality, pedophilia, etc. It is not a diabolic, evil conspiracy idea conjured from purely satanic intentions of bringing somebody/something else down purely for the sake of evil or something, as the left would have you believe.
Second of all, because once you buy into it you pretty much leave yourself open to further cuckification and being infected by liberalism, as you have already accepted the basic premises of their cultural marxism.This is why Alternative Right/Nationalism is needed and has pretty much replaced the conservatives (cucks) and the modern right, who are unworthy of their name. **
4281 |
Planet broken beyond repair .... Stable financial system? **
4282 |
Holy fuck. This level of stupidity. I just don't have the mental fortitude to deal with it anymore. Yes, Rome was a multicultural utopia which was all-inclusive and permissive and open-minded and tolerant and they waved rainbow flags around. They were not conquerors who slaughtered all who opposed them and imposed their own rule over the conquered peoples.
Rome was a multicultural utopia paradise and the reason they lost against the barbarians is that they stopped being inclusive and liberal so they were justly replaced with far more inclusive and liberal Germanic tribes who went on to liberally pillage and tolerantly rape and inclusively destroy everything in its path.
Ummm ... yes, that's what happened.
Sheeesh, some of you people are just hopelessly brain-dead. **
4283 |
4284 |
Good Friday, the symbol of injustice and oppression not just from military states, but also through the denunciations of institutions which serve such powers. The questions we have to ask ourselves is not whether we are intrumentalised for oppression .... **
What are we preventing by behaving as we do? Where do we intervene and ruin, rather that build up? Where are we part of the social entropy that breaks down cultures and development? In the end we have to ask ourselves where we think it will lead us! Where are we going in the course of a lifetime? What kind of a world will we leave behind us? Will it be goodbye or good riddance? What will our children lack, when we have gone, that we enjoyed in abundance? **
4285 |
|
4286 |
4287 |
4288 |
Arminius wrote:
»What is your shortest answer?« ** **
That's always been the same too: We don't know.
Which then begs the question, »Can we know?«
Well, we don't know that either.
Aside of course from all those here who insist that in fact they already do know: in their head.
And not just the solipsists. **
What is your shortest answer? ** **
4289 |
4291 |
4291 |
Iambiguous wrote:
»It's always this one: Why does anything exist at all?« **
Nothing ever exists, at all. We just think it does.
And this disproves existence before essence. **
Because I feel that Shakespeare was right. All the worldly is a stage. Now, if you believe that, then the next line, is not too far of a stretch, ----to be or not to be, ------ our existence is neither in the comprehension of choice, we are thrown into this world, (an existential mantra); we are determined to act out our prescribed roles.
If so, then our preception so, and our knowledge based on them are perfectly determined by our roles.
We are determined to play the prescribed roles, and our so called existence make perfect sense:To purvey our necessary link between those who came before us, and those, who will come after us.
Our existence is merely a link, a very minute one at that, to enable the chain of being to proceed. **
How minute? Think of what Helena Blavatsky said of the first tangent of life of three hundred trillion and forty billion years, then, you will begin to feel the minute es of individual existence.
Now, if it is existence in itself you are talking about, then the permutations become innumerable even within one life time.
Therefore, it is difficult to think or talk of existence. It simply doesen't exist. **
WW III Angry wrote:
»So you think things exist, but not as they are thought to exist, right?« **
Yes and no. They exist as they are thought to exist, therefore, they don't exist. Cogito ergo non sum. **
4292 |
Faust wrote:
»I'm with you, Mr R. No one wants to dine at a table with people who don't even know how to wipe their mouths. No matter how good the food is. people who don't bother to learn how to string together a sentence, punctuate, spell, etc just need to grow up.« **
Okay, but what about the argument regarding those here who are superb spellers and grammarians, but who don't seem all that particularly interested in philosophy?
In particular, philosophy that actually relates to the lives that we live from day to day in our social, political and economic interactions.
Isn't that far more pressing a problem here?
And isn't it the invasion of one or another rendition of the Kids that have more or less driven away folks that might otherwise still be here?
Rather than the shitty spellers? **
4294 |
I'm just gonna say it. Every day, I see all kinds of spelling errors, and people using the wrong words, and all sorts of things that just irritate .... **
4295 |
4295 |
Without solipsism, there could not be a self realization .... **
4296 |
Arminius wrote:
»I guess you know the story of the Roman soldier that died at Pompeii, whose bones were found at his post, because someone forgot to relieve him.
Our duty is to hold on to the lost position, without hope, without rescue, like that Roman soldier whose bones were found in front of a door in Pompeii, who, during the eruption of Vesuvius, died at his post because they forgot to relieve him. - Oswald Spengler, Man and Technics: A Contribution to a Philosophy of Life ** (original title: Der Mensch und die Technik - Beitrag zu einer Philosophie des Lebens, 1931, S. 89 **). ** « ** **
I don't see that the Roman soldier died because someone forgot to relieve him, but that there was no-one left to relieve him, because the Town he was guarding had been destroyed. **
Greatness is to die at the gate whilst the whole town is burning? **
Hmm, a bit pointless, like the point rider who escapes the attack on the group that came from behind and rides back to be killed as well.
Solidarity in hardship could be a little more productive. **
4297 |
It isn't the defining feature of the West, is it, considering that wealth is usually inherited and that is the defining story of the West and a legacy of capitalism. **
4298 |
I'm not so sure about wealth usually is redistributed. **
Yes capitalism and socialism are guilty of that injustice. But the West being successful economically - due to capitalism - is now showing us the dangers of this wealth staying and growing in a very disproportionate way. **
Do you know the term »Brazilianization of the World« (»Brasilianisierung der Welt« - Ulrich Beck; cp. also Franz Josef Radermacher)?
This means that all nations of the world tend to have the same distribution of wealth that Brazil has.
Here are some real examples from 2006:
The richest Finnish 20% have 35% of the Finnish income (GNP).
The poorest Finnish 80% have 65% of the Finnish income (GNP).
The richest German 20% have 40% of the German income (GNP).
The poorest German 80% have 60% of the German income (GNP).
The richest US 20% have 47% of the US income (GNP).
The poorest US 80% have 53% of the US income (GNP).
The richest Brazilian 20% have 65% of the Brazilian income (GNP).
The poorest Brazilian 80% have 35% of the Brazilian income (GNP).Maybe that the richest Brazilian 20% have already 80% of the Brazilian income (GNP). So at last we will possibly see the following scenario in the world: 20% of all humans have 80% of the global income. So 80% of all humans have merely 20% of the global income. (Cp. Pareto distribution.)
But the study by the central bank found on Monday, laying bare a wide gap between the richest and the poorest in Europe's biggest economy (**) says that »the top 10 percent of Germans have almost 60 percent of the wealth« (**), and that is not true. ** **
==>
|