The Decade The Rich Won.

[cuttsie]

3 minutes ago, cgksheff said:

or .... human nature.

Same thing it seems .

[crookesey]

3 minutes ago, cgksheff said:

or .... human nature.

Always remember that when someone tells you that you are equal to them that they are lying.

[trastrick]

11 hours ago, Longcol said:

Only if you totally ignore the Eastern Front where 60-80% of the Nazi's were fighting against the USSR.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Front_(World_War_II)

Lol

 

Only if you totally ignore the:

 

https://ru.usembassy.gov/world-war-ii-allies-u-s-lend-lease-to-the-soviet-union-1941-1945/#:~:text=Totaling %2411.3 billion%2C or %24180,common enemy — bloodthirsty Hitlerism.”

 

"Even before the United States entered World War II in December 1941, America sent arms and equipment to the Soviet Union to help it defeat the Nazi invasion. Totaling $11.3 billion, or $180 billion in today’s currency, the Lend-Lease Act of the United States supplied needed goods to the Soviet Union from 1941 to 1945 in support of what Stalin described to Roosevelt as the “enormous and difficult fight against the common enemy — bloodthirsty Hitlerism.”

[trastrick]

20 hours ago, Anna B said:

OK so they're not all bad, but they have a habit of thinking they're always right.

 

The USA have waged war on nearly every continent in the last few years. Often 'Peace keeping' is just a euphemism for bombing the s*** out of innocent people and wrecking countries. They want to spread capitalism to every corner of the earth whether they want it or not. And they are known for misjudging the cultural situation. As for the second world war, it involved troops from many countries, I'm not sure America can take all the credit. And don't forget we had to pay for their support, a monetary debt I believe we didn't finish paying off until the 1990's. 

 

The USA has terrible levels of poverty which they take care we don't hear much about. Also one of the biggest gaps between rich and poor. Many people cannot afford health insurance so have to suffer from easily dealt with conditions in silence. They also have some of the worst housing and education standards, especially in poor areas. 'The American Dream' is simply not possible for everyone no matter how hard they try, yet they are effectively punished for failing.

 

I'd rather we looked to the Scandinavian countries more for examples of good practice, they frequently top the charts for the highest standards and good outcomes, but we hear very little about them.

 

 

To have a society that would have a decent safety net, for the poor, sick, or even the terminally unemployable, you need a prosperous economy.

 

A prosperous economy, is a nation that values a "work ethic" like Germany, and/or has natural resources aplenty, to sell to the World, like Scandinavia, Canada, and even Saudi Arabia.

 

Other countries that finance their minimum income/education/subsidized housing and other largess, like the U.K., Greece, Italy, Spain, France, must borrow from generations unborn, and like the U.K. run up unsustainable spiraling deficits.

 

It has never made sense to make, what once were "safety net" subsidies, UNIVERSAL to all citizens of a country regardless of their income. Trump, Boris and Sir Mick, Sir Elton et al, don't need free health care, education, child care, family allowances and the rest.

 

Those dependencies, and the additional burden imposed by third World immigrants and refugees leads to civilian entitlements that eventually can overwhelm the system, then all hell breaks loose, and you get a move to the right in elections in civilized countries, or even street rioting, when there's not enough money to maintain to entitlements. You see it in some parts of Europe and places like Venezuela 

 

Left wing governments are expert at sharing the wealth, but you need a sufficient number of wealth creators to make that possible.

 

That's why the Thatchers, Bushes, Trumps, and Boris's are elected from to to time.

 

If Socialism really worked, there would never be the need for another conservative party elected anywhere in the World 

 

You can have the bread sharers, but when that runs out, you need to get the bakers back in.

 

Too many sharers, and not enough bakers  is unsustainable.

 

Its a zero sum game. Means Testing is the only sensible way to distribute limited (borrowed) resources to those most in need!

 

See;

 

"Scandinavian Countries Tighten Requirements For New Citizens"

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidnikel/2021/04/26/scandinavian-countries-tighten-requirements-for-new-citizens/?sh=5c599aa51fa7

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 28, 2022 by trastrick

[El Cid]

2 hours ago, Anna B said:

I agree, basic foodstuffs should always be on the list, while some of the things that are, are laughable.

It seems to me like moving the goalposts all the time. Not an accurate measure at all.

CPI inflation does not include housing, that would be CPIH!

[crazyhorse]

It is all academic...who is richer than whom...

 

The fundamental problem is that all financial/economic systems (capitalism, socialism etc) rely on endless material growth on a planet with finite resources...and now the environmental chickens are coming home to roost.

 

I don't think people will be that bothered with getting a new car, holidaying in the Med or whatever...when their city becomes un-livable due to heat, flood or pollution and their borders are swamped with desperate environmental refugees.

It is already happening, but still we re-fight the ideological battles of the early 20th Century.

 

People think they can go on digging up more metal, burning more oil, squandering more water, eating more food and laying more concrete for ever.

They can't.

Human ingenuity and technology will mitigate some of the effects...but it will only get worse and worse...as 7 billion humans fight for their fair share.

The current system we have cannot be changed to work with this new reality...as only money is valued...not the things that keep us alive.

 

We really are a stupid species.

We can't see beyond our greed.

[trastrick]

21 minutes ago, crazyhorse said:

It is all academic...who is richer than whom...

 

The fundamental problem is that all financial/economic systems (capitalism, socialism etc) rely on endless material growth on a planet with finite resources...and now the environmental chickens are coming home to roost.

 

I don't think people will be that bothered with getting a new car, holidaying in the Med or whatever...when their city becomes un-livable due to heat, flood or pollution and their borders are swamped with desperate environmental refugees.

It is already happening, but still we re-fight the ideological battles of the early 20th Century.

 

People think they can go on digging up more metal, burning more oil, squandering more water, eating more food and laying more concrete for ever.

They can't.

Human ingenuity and technology will mitigate some of the effects...but it will only get worse and worse...as 7 billion humans fight for their fair share.

The current system we have cannot be changed to work with this new reality...as only money is valued...not the things that keep us alive.

 

We really are a stupid species.

We can't see beyond our greed.

Maybe you live in a cave, with no piped in water, gas, electricity, telephone, furniture, computer, schools, hospitals, supermarkets, appliances and means of transportation.

 

If not, you are the part of the problem! 

Edited January 28, 2022 by trastrick

[crazyhorse]

2 minutes ago, trastrick said:

Maybe you live in a cave, with no piped in water, gas, electricity, telephone, furniture, computer, schools, hospitals, supermarkets, appliances and means of transportation.

 

If not, you are the part of the problem! 

I am well aware I am part of the problem...and I do not advocate returning to the Paleolithic.

 

Obviously an "economy" of some description is needed to provide those basic needs.

Those basic needs will either be met by the resources on this planet (which may be one of very few that is capable of supporting advanced life)...or not met.

 

Trouble is people crave much more beyond their basic needs.

I include myself...and I have spent the better part of 40 years living by that philosophy.

 

Currently however after the arrival of two kids, I begin to wonder what all that frantic work was for?

I have come to the realisation that the "system" is not really working in my best interests or the best interests of our planet.

So now, I am trying to reduce my "discretionary spend" with the aim of escaping my financial overlords as soon as possible and retiring to do more interesting stuff, that doesn't simply involve working for money, buying stuff, then working for more money to buy more stuff.

 

I think this is what scares my financial masters...

If I take my discretionary spend out of the economy...what happens to all those companies satisfying it...and the workers they employ?

What other system is there?

I don't think anyone in power knows the answer to that.

 

Maybe we should all do this and have a year of buying nothing more than essentials...as a lesson to our masters, who is really in charge?

A howling mob of unemployed workers, a collapsed stock market and burst housing bubble may win some concessions!

 

Unfortunately that would also probably reduce the value of my pension...so like the vast majority of my fellow citizens...I am trapped!

 

 

[cuttsie]

A lot of people in this Country cannot even buy essentials already .in fact millions 

[El Cid]

3 hours ago, cuttsie said:

A lot of people in this Country cannot even buy essentials already .in fact millions 

I guess you are older like me, richer than some?