Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Snake Vargas "Proliferation of democracy" doesn't mean "equal distribution of wealth". There are good acts here and there, but IMO humanity is generally selfish, and you can figure the rest out yourself.
In my vision of a distopian future, the only thing that will bring people back to their senses is social collapse - when a large sector gets so poor that they have nothing left to lose and cause widespread and massive social upheaval. Then the rest of society can either work to right things for all or simply quash the peasant uprising  |
I see your point SV, but a social collapse will only yield another cycle of typical human selfishness.
The way the world is today is a collective group of individuals. If we analyze the individual, for the most part, we can all conclude that he/she is self-interested. This is something that plays a huge role in society. However, that is just one variable that has to be taken into consideration.
Take for instance my generation. We have been told constantly that if you can dream about it you can get it. Unfortunately the dreamers are still dreaming and reality is still being reality. Peopple ultimate have to realize that they will not make it. Once this reality sets in--of course this is factoring out the lucky draws such as the lottery or anything related to that that may happen to someone in their life--people begin to adjust to what they have and, psychologically, conform themselves to this. I am in some way or form REFLECTING on what Just me pointed on in one of his first posts. I am in no way questioning him, or anyone like him.
Society itself will always bee a seperation of classes and that is the way it will be no matter what. If everyone were rich, then there would be no balance and therefore, everyone that is rich would be the same analogy of, "the glass is half full", or "the glass is half empty". Taking that analogy and applying the princicple to such an example (everyone being rich), you would be right if you said, "everyone is rich" and/or "everyone is poor". In that case the situation would be relative. This of course is being mentioned only in passing since some that live in a etopian world tend to mention that the world should be rich, and that would bring happiness, which is absurdly wrong.
In the US the rich are not getting that much richer, in my opinion. The era of the Rockefellers and families alike, has pretty much ended. So, in reality, looking at the rich sector in American society one can see that the rich, as a whole, have balanced out. The rich as a whole are equal in some aspects. Moving to the poor, well, there is an influx of immigration would is mutating the face of American culture, and in doing this, is creating a poorer class. However, directly and indirectly this is creating a middle class, which is growing more rapidly than the rich or poor. In China, the change from a full fledged Communist practicing state, to a semi-capitalisitc state, has morphed the make-up of China. The middle classs is growing so fast, that China has restriced so many people from the urbanized areas in which much of this middle class resides.
Ultimately, the argument that the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer is relative based on social, political, and economical factors that shape cities, regions, states and the world itself. I personally think the the US is a prime example of anyone being able to make their life what they want it to be with ceratin restrictions.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rob
Seriously, most people don't know what real poverty really is ....I'm talking about people who are so poor, they actually live in a hole in the ground ...I saw a man on TV a while ago who grew up as a peasant in a very poor part of the Soviet Union, his family literally lived in a hole which was covered with a roof. I also read about three sisters who lived in a small village in China, they were so desperately poor, that they only had one dress between them ....and so only one sister left the house at a time. That is the kind of poverty that I find abhorrent ....not some welfare dependent solo mother who spends her money on cigarettes and lottery tickets.
|
Rob I cannot stress how true this is.
For one taking a look at 3rd world countries, one can see that people are in a devasted situation. Poor is not a term, because to me poor would imply a very low low income, or income that in some way or form contributes to your well being or living. In some of these countries income does not exist, therefore, poverty is used in place of that. Of course I have twisted the definitions here to comply with my belief, however, it is not to far from the truth. The fact remains that many 3rd world counties are suffering, and not moving up the ladder because of many different reasons. However, that is not the point.
Poor in the US is rich! in 3rd world countries.