Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => The Coffee Corner => Topic started by: Justan on June 09, 2010, 01:00:16 pm
-
These rubes are all but threatening the UN if they dare discuss the sinking of a S Korea war ship.
Link (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2012064511_apasskoreashipsinks.html)
I guess they are testing how much uh, "influence" having some nukes gives them. As if the UN will ascent to their demands!
-
These rubes are all but threatening the UN if they dare discuss the sinking of a S Korea war ship.
Link (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2012064511_apasskoreashipsinks.html)
I guess they are testing how much uh, "influence" having some nukes gives them. As if the UN will ascent to their demands!
Ummm.....
I like photography. I like beautiful landscape photographs.
You may want to post this at a more politically oriented site.
-
Ummmmmm..............
Sorry if the topic is beneath your reading standards.
-
a little off topic: Went to a talk last year and I think it was Edward Burtynsky's talk and one of the topics was how DMZ had become this great natural perserve
-
how DMZ had become this great natural perserve
you want a preserve ? nuke it - like 30-km zone around Chernobyl
-
you want a preserve ? nuke it - like 30-km zone around Chernobyl
I watched a tv show last week on Chernobyl and was surprised to learn that wildlife (and vegetation) is doing very well…
-
I watched a tv show last week on Chernobyl and was surprised to learn that wildlife (and vegetation) is doing very well…
Read "Wolves eat Dogs" by Martin Cruz Smith (author of Gorky Park). It's a novel, not a textbook, but it's interesting and in large part set in the exclusion zone around Chernobyl.
Jeremy
-
I watched a tv show last week on Chernobyl and was surprised to learn that wildlife (and vegetation) is doing very well…
Yes, I believe with three-legged lizards, blue roses and wild dogs that meow... a brave new world, then.
Rob C
-
I watched a tv show last week on Chernobyl and was surprised to learn that wildlife (and vegetation) is doing very well…
Undoubtedly, we are the worse threat to wildlife in this planet; I guess the fact that people left the zone out-weighted the effects of radiation.
-
These rubes are all but threatening the UN if they dare discuss the sinking of a S Korea war ship.
Link (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2012064511_apasskoreashipsinks.html)
I guess they are testing how much uh, "influence" having some nukes gives them. As if the UN will ascent to their demands!
The regime is completely loony, but one can only pity the population. Such misery!
-
If the financial crisis in the western world gets any worse then the North Korean regime may appear to be an advanced one that millions will wish for?
-
If the financial crisis in the western world gets any worse then the North Korean regime may appear to be an advanced one that millions will wish for?
Stamper, I was there, flying fighter-bombers, during the war. I saw a lot of the south and some of the north. This is what part of Taegu -- in the south -- looked like in those days. From what I've read, the north is in even worse shape than this. The western world is going to have to collapse a long, long way before we look out of our caves and envy the North Koreans.
[attachment=22552:river_dwellings_1.jpg]
-
If the financial crisis in the western world gets any worse then the North Korean regime may appear to be an advanced one that millions will wish for?
Not in a million years. I suspect that you don't have a clue as to what's going on there.
-
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/201...ref=videosearch (http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2010/02/09/pkg.vbs.korea.vbstv?iref=videosearch)
there are a ton more on vbs...
http://www.vbs.tv/newsroom (http://www.vbs.tv/newsroom)
I presumed this topic was about the extra striker North Korea tried to sneak into the world cup as a goalie.
-
According to my daily newspaper the public sector in Japan is on the verge of collapse. If it does so it will reverberate around the world? The last time the economy collapsed in Japan the rest of the world was doing "fine", thus there wasn't much effect. Now all the major countries with the exception of China and maybe Brazil are in dire straights. Don't believe all the propaganda that is spouted against N Korea. RSL bombing the place wouldn't have helped it's infrastructure or economy? The thirty thousand American troops camped on it's border won't help the situation much either?
-
Stamper, without the thirty thousand American troops camped on its border there wouldn't be a North Korea. There'd just be a Korea -- with Kim as its dictator. That would have an even more dolorous effect on the world economy than what's happening now.
-
Well, I tried all the news channels that are available to me on the SKY satellite this morning (the free ones, of course, you think I'd pay for that shit?) and every hot darn one was full of bloody football!
Surely to God, SKY and the rest have so many pay-for sports special ones; why pollute the free ones too?
Rob C
-
Well, I tried all the news channels that are available to me on the SKY satellite this morning (the free ones, of course, you think I'd pay for that shit?) and every hot darn one was full of bloody football!
Surely to God, SKY and the rest have so many pay-for sports special ones; why pollute the free ones too?
Rob C
I'm sick of football too. I like rugby anyway. (France always beat Scotland )
-
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/201...ref=videosearch (http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2010/02/09/pkg.vbs.korea.vbstv?iref=videosearch)
there are a ton more on vbs...
http://www.vbs.tv/newsroom (http://www.vbs.tv/newsroom)
Thanks for the links. I had the time to look through one. It illustrates why so many are mystified by motivations of the politics of N Korea. They are so openly bellicose and arrogant. This latest statement is all but backing themselves into a corner over what appears another hostile act.
Meanwhile, most reports indicate that the nation is starving itself and seems willing to go to nearly any extent to continue this trend.
The largely self-created problems of NK gives one great pause
-
Thanks for the links. I had the time to look through one. It illustrates why so many are mystified by motivations of the politics of N Korea. They are so openly bellicose and arrogant. This latest statement is all but backing themselves into a corner over what appears another hostile act.
Meanwhile, most reports indicate that the nation is starving itself and seems willing to go to nearly any extent to continue this trend.
The largely self-created problems of NK gives one great pause
Hopefully for the N Koreans things won't get as bad as the scenes from the American heartlands during the depression of the thirties.
-
Hopefully for the N Koreans things won't get as bad as the scenes from the American heartlands during the depression of the thirties.
I agree.
And that is an interesting comparison. The last great depression in the US was a transition point for the world. A big part of the reason is that many had a valid option between returning to an agricultural life or ascending to what is a considered today as merchant or corporate economy. Millions sought to turn to the past and turn expressly away from modern tools so to speak, even to irrational ends.
In the current depression, we don’t have any place to go back to. Of course the biggest problem is that capitalism is inherently unstable, but it’s the only game we have.
Even given this, NK doesn’t seek to insulate itself from the global economy so much as it is said to want to insure it’s homogeneity. But it is a case where their government peruses a self-destructive path with growing aggression in this name. Truly a case of eating one’s young in the name of protecting the clan.
Another popular conspiracy theory is, of course, that someone not from NK bought NK manufactured torpedoes and used them in calculated ploy to start a war. Now who would have an interest in starting a war that would escalate to ultimately being between the US and China as the chief protagonists? Hmmm . . . Could be anyone with an interest in profiting from warfare.
Of course if this were the case, then NK would logically be more conciliatory rather than to essentially threaten the UN to not even debate the topic. That decision by NK gives little credibility to the conspiracy theory.
So why does NK want to punish itself in the name of protecting homogeneity?
-
Hopefully for the N Koreans things won't get as bad as the scenes from the American heartlands during the depression of the thirties.
Stamper, How old are you? Most North Koreans already are far, far worse-off than people in the American heartlands were during the depression. That's why North Koreans are dying trying to cross into China, where things aren't a whole lot better. A large part of the country literally is starving. There's been a lot of propaganda about the American depression, but I can tell you from personal experience that it wasn't as bad as the propaganda makes it sound. Besides that, the U.S. didn't have a military with its boot on the neck of the people. That's a huge, huge difference.
As far as Justan's comment on the stability of capitalism is concerned, to paraphrase Churchill: capitalism is the worst of economic systems, except for all the rest. Capitalism illustrates the fact that nothing in life is perfect -- not even the good things.
-
Stamper, without the thirty thousand American troops camped on its border there wouldn't be a North Korea. There'd just be a Korea -- with Kim as its dictator. That would have an even more dolorous effect on the world economy than what's happening now.
Americas failure to overcome Vietnam didn't have an effect on the world economy. The bringing down of the Soviet regime didn't help the world economy either. Since then we have had a lot more crisis. The one we are about to go into - the recession hasn't ended only started - will last 15 to 20 years and a lot of innocent people will suffer, far more than in N Korea. Ironically the most successful economy is Chinas. They lend billions to prop up the America economy as well as supply a lot of their consumer products. The actions of the American bankers are causing world wide problems. Time for a new economic system?
-
Stamper, From your opinions I can see what sort of thing you're reading. I suspect you don't have access to anything else. But you're right, the recession has just started and the governments of most Western countries are doing their best to make sure it continues and deepens -- just as Roosevelt and his "brain trust" did in the late thirties and early forties here in the U.S. The thing that ended the depression in the U.S. was the beginning of WW II, which made it impossible for the government to continue to press its socialist programs. If you'd like references to support that statement, I'll be happy to supply them -- or at least to point you in the direction of some genuine economic data about the era. But evidently you've been led to believe that people in the U.S. were starving during the depression. Very few were. Which is not to say that people didn't have a very hard time. They did. But the government wasn't grinding them the way the government of North Vietnam is grinding their people. We had churches, charities, and neighbors helping neighbors. Interestingly enough, crime levels were quite low, which sort of blows up the idea that poverty causes crime.
I don't know where you're getting your ideas about living conditions in North Korea. They're certainly divorced from what's reported regularly by those watching the situation. The "leaders" and the military brass in North Korea are living high. The peasants literally are starving.
As far as recent wars and the demise of the Soviet Union not having an effect on the world economy is concerned, you might want to try backing up that statement with some references. They certainly had an effect, but I suspect no one really understands what the effect was. Again, before you get too stretched out with a statement about "a lot more crises," I'd suggest you first define what you mean by crisis and then dig up some data to support your statement. I've been around long enough to see an awful lot of crises, and I have a hard time believing that the number has increased. From my own point of view, the "cold war" went continually from crisis to crisis.
China's making huge economic headway by bringing in a modicum of Capitalism. In the long run, how that's going to work out alongside their dictatorship has yet to be determined. Personally, I'm not optimistic. People who rise through their own efforts in a Capitalistic system usually seem to become a bit impatient with their dictators.
As far as American bankers are concerned, they certainly seem to as greedy as bankers in most societies, but you have to understand that the real disaster was brought on by the government requiring those bankers to make loans to people who couldn't pay them back. The housing crisis arose directly out of Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac -- the two quasi-government agencies who were required to back bad loans at taxpayer expense. The other problem was that though banks probably are the most regulated outfits in the U.S. economy, the regulators weren't regulating.
As far as a "new economic system" is concerned, what would you suggest? Socialism? We already have that.
-
... the real disaster was brought on by the government requiring those bankers to make loans to people who couldn't pay them back...
Ah, yes... the Joe Schmoes of the world... they always been nothing but trouble. The poorest in any society are always guilty of all the troubles: world wars, religious wars, economic crises, currency collapses, investment bubbles, you name it. They just can't sit still and let the fat cats create wealth... no, sir, the poor just have to ruin everything for everybody.
Or perhaps it was bundling of those bad loans into derivatives, then re-bundling of those derivatives onto the nth degree that caused the house of cards collapse (a.k.a. the world's financial collapse)? And every time a new bundle is made and sold to the next sucker, Wall Street and bankers world-wide made another billion in bonuses. And then that billion had to be priced into the next derivative bundle and sold to the next sucker at an even higher price. And it was all Joe Schmoe's fault.
-
Slobodan, I didn't say or suggest anything of the sort. In many, many cases the people offering the loans screwed the people accepting the loans. But before I say anything more about that, I have to ask you: do you have any idea what Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac are? Can you describe what they do? If not, better do a bit of research into their part in this fiasco, and also into the members of congress who insisted that Fanny and Freddie back subprime loans. Yes, the derivatives were a big part of the problem, not because there's anything inherently wrong with derivatives, but because the feds who were supposed to regulate derivatives -- in other words, the cops -- didn't do their job. Yes, some of the people putting together the derivatives were, well, less than scrupulous about what they were doing. Some probably ought to be in jail. There's a lot of blame to go around.
-
... I have to ask you: do you have any idea what Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac are? Can you describe what they do? If not, better do a bit of research...
Hmmm... am I only imagining, or there is a patronizing tone in the above? Nah, knowing it comes from you, I will take it as a rhetorical tool.
Btw, my professional credentials are just a few clicks and a google search-box away.
-
Quote RSL
I don't know where you're getting your ideas about living conditions in North Korea. They're certainly divorced from what's reported regularly by those watching the situation. The "leaders" and the military brass in North Korea are living high. The peasants literally are starving.
Unquote
I am not a supporter of N Korea or its Stalinist approach to economics. It comes across as a dictatorship. My beef is the hypocritical sniping of the west to countries like N Korea, Cuba and Iran. They don't want N Korea and Iran to have nuclear weapons but America has and used them. America's stated aim since WW2 is to dominate the world. I do read both sides of the argument and have a lot of literature at hand. The three countries that I have stated, their problems won't get better by bullying them. The Iraq war was for oil and as to Afghanistan, who knows why the west is there? This is a complicated subject. You gloss over the American banker's incompetence and greed which has triggered problems in the weakness of other countries economic systems. They can't be patched up only reformed?
-
Quote RSL
I don't know where you're getting your ideas about living conditions in North Korea. They're certainly divorced from what's reported regularly by those watching the situation. The "leaders" and the military brass in North Korea are living high. The peasants literally are starving.
Unquote
I am not a supporter of N Korea or its Stalinist approach to economics. It comes across as a dictatorship. My beef is the hypocritical sniping of the west to countries like N Korea, Cuba and Iran. They don't want N Korea and Iran to have nuclear weapons but America has and used them. America's stated aim since WW2 is to dominate the world. I do read both sides of the argument and have a lot of literature at hand. The three countries that I have stated, their problems won't get better by bullying them. The Iraq war was for oil and as to Afghanistan, who knows why the west is there? This is a complicated subject. You gloss over the American banker's incompetence and greed which has triggered problems in the weakness of other countries economic systems. They can't be patched up only reformed?
Stamper, I'm not interested in exchanging rants, so I'm going to wrap up my participation in this thread right now. The kind of literature you have "at hand" is quite clear from your list of assertions.
-
Hmmm... am I only imagining, or there is a patronizing tone in the above? Nah, knowing it comes from you, I will take it as a rhetorical tool.
Btw, my professional credentials are just a few clicks and a google search-box away.
Slobodan, If my reply sounded patronizing it's because it looked as if you weren't a very careful reader when you replied to what I said. I certainly wasn't blaming "joe schmoe." Joe's almost always the mark in that kind of operation, not the initiator. And I certainly didn't excuse the greedy and immoral financiers who were at the heart of the fiasco. But with your background you certainly ought to be aware that none of this could have happened if the governments of the western world had done their jobs. Our congress flatly required subprime loans backed by the taxpayers because it was politically advantageous for them to do so. Then, when the bundling took place and those bundlers were making their billions, the governments were like cops standing in the street, watching the banks being robbed while they munched their doughnuts and coffee. Our government keeps talking about more regulations, but as you well know, the regulations are already there. What we need is better regulators.
I'm now going to leave this thread and get back to photography, which is what LuLa is all about. Yours, by the way, is very, very good.
-
Stamper, I was there, flying fighter-bombers, during the war. I saw a lot of the south and some of the north. This is what part of Taegu -- in the south -- looked like in those days. From what I've read, the north is in even worse shape than this. The western world is going to have to collapse a long, long way before we look out of our caves and envy the North Koreans.
[attachment=22552:river_dwellings_1.jpg]
Russ
A great photograph in many ways.
It aroused my memory into a little déjà vu moment: HC-B, Nanterre - 1968; Doisneau, Ivry - 1946, Villejuif - 1946 and Saint-Denis, 1971.
Those conditions are not that foreign to western experience at some times and in some places; I have seen pics of my old Glasgow that would make you think you were on another, post-apocalyptic planet, and that goes no further back than the 40s/50s. Some of Don McCulin's shots of east London...
Oh, how about the railway and water mains in olde Bombay if you want romantic? I know Frank sang about a bar there, but I bet he never visited!
Rob C
EDIT: Russ, were you landing or taking off?
-
Stamper, I'm not interested in exchanging rants, so I'm going to wrap up my participation in this thread right now. The kind of literature you have "at hand" is quite clear from your list of assertions.
One of the problems about having left wing views is that you tend to get spoken down to from time to time. The above illustrates this? Russ you have obviously got your views and I have mine. A more tolerant attitude towards the "lesser" nations in the world would be beneficial to world peace.
-
Russ
A great photograph in many ways.
It aroused my memory into a little déjà vu moment: HC-B, Nanterre - 1968; Doisneau, Ivry - 1946, Villejuif - 1946 and Saint-Denis, 1971.
Those conditions are not that foreign to western experience at some times and in some places; I have seen pics of my old Glasgow that would make you think you were on another, post-apocalyptic planet, and that goes no further back than the 40s/50s. Some of Don McCulin's shots of east London...
Oh, how about the railway and water mains in olde Bombay if you want romantic? I know Frank sang about a bar there, but I bet he never visited!
Rob C
EDIT: Russ, were you landing or taking off?
Rob, Yes, I'm familiar with the HC-B and Doisneau pictures you mention. There certainly are similarities. I was standing on the bridge that crosses the river -- don't remember its name -- near the center of town. I have a series of pictures from that vantage point. Those people were refugees -- most of them from the north. It was a human catastrophe, as war always is. I shot these when the weather was reasonably good. In the winter the situation was worse.
-
UN hears testimony regarding sinking of South Korean War Ship Cheonan.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/asia_pacific/10315219.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/asia_pacific/10315219.stm)
-
UN hears testimony regarding sinking of South Korean War Ship Cheonan.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/asia_pacific/10315219.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/asia_pacific/10315219.stm)
And what do you think will happen if they are found guilty? The start of world war three or more sanctions on a beleaguered population. They will suffer but the leaders will become more paranoid. Change can only come from within?
-
And what do you think will happen if they are found guilty? The start of world war three or more sanctions on a beleaguered population. They will suffer but the leaders will become more paranoid. Change can only come from within?
Yes, you have a point, stamper, but democracy seems the only system that permits change from within, short of revolution and more bloodshed. They've been trying it for generations in Burma, but to what avail? All these totalitarian systems are not shy of spilling blood - it is their guarantee. Iran? It, along with Lebanon, was one of the more sophisticated countries outwith western Europe. I knew people who worked out there as engineering contractors building hydro-electricity schemes (in the time of the Shah) - they were people we knew from India where they did the same and they loved the place and the people. Today? Today, the people would love to leave - even just to go to India, I bet!
What will actually happen with NK? I think, in a word, nothing. If I am mistaken though, and anything gets done, it will be by China, driven by its own commercial needs with the external markets.
As relief from the ubiquitous bloody football, I sometimes catch reports on the Gulf oil disaster. All I see is more political posturing. Obama makes a fourth visit - or is it now more - to the area and does what? What the hell can he do other than sound fierce and posture? Bush was pilloried for missing out on Kate's arrival - not an early enough visit - his replacement is just trying to avoid the possibility of the same accusation; but what can he do? Does he or anybody else with a brain really, really imagine BP isn't the single, most concerned entity in the whole damn disaster? But, as with the politicos, what can it do either? Fix it? Yes, so they are not trying - they enjoy losing all that oil and running up the debt of repair and inevitable lawsuits? Boy, in the true spirit of the ill wind, will those lawyers be happy!
The moment the press/TV/web latches onto something, reality flies out the window. What was that quotation? Truth is the first casualty of war?
Rob C
-
One of the problems about having left wing views...
Declaring your views left-wing, you are not doing the Left a favor.
-
Declaring your views left-wing, you are not doing the Left a favor.
Would you care to elaborate on that? It is a broad church, too broad in my opinion?
-
Yes, you have a point, stamper, but democracy seems the only system that permits change from within, short of revolution and more bloodshed. They've been trying it for generations in Burma, but to what avail? All these totalitarian systems are not shy of spilling blood - it is their guarantee. Iran? It, along with Lebanon, was one of the more sophisticated countries outwith western Europe. I knew people who worked out there as engineering contractors building hydro-electricity schemes (in the time of the Shah) - they were people we knew from India where they did the same and they loved the place and the people. Today? Today, the people would love to leave - even just to go to India, I bet!
What will actually happen with NK? I think, in a word, nothing. If I am mistaken though, and anything gets done, it will be by China, driven by its own commercial needs with the external markets.
As relief from the ubiquitous bloody football, I sometimes catch reports on the Gulf oil disaster. All I see is more political posturing. Obama makes a fourth visit - or is it now more - to the area and does what? What the hell can he do other than sound fierce and posture? Bush was pilloried for missing out on Kate's arrival - not an early enough visit - his replacement is just trying to avoid the possibility of the same accusation; but what can he do? Does he or anybody else with a brain really, really imagine BP isn't the single, most concerned entity in the whole damn disaster? But, as with the politicos, what can it do either? Fix it? Yes, so they are not trying - they enjoy losing all that oil and running up the debt of repair and inevitable lawsuits? Boy, in the true spirit of the ill wind, will those lawyers be happy!
The moment the press/TV/web latches onto something, reality flies out the window. What was that quotation? Truth is the first casualty of war?
Rob C
Rob, a very insightful post. You hit the nail on the head! It will take revolution and bloodshed to change the regime. I hope when and if it comes it doesn't convert to a free market economy where most of the population won't be any better off and only some will get rich. America eyes a take over of Cuba again. Most of the population will lose it's good education system and health system and suffer. A few will be become rich and the workers more impoverished. There has to be somewhere a balance between the rich and poor which will help the many and not the greedy few?
-
Would you care to elaborate on that? ...
I would be happy to... but then I read your next post and realized nobody could possibly elaborate any better than you:
... I hope... it doesn't convert to a free market economy where most of the population won't be any better off and only some will get rich... Most of the population will lose it's good education system and health system and suffer. A few will be become rich and the workers more impoverished....
On a side note, looks like you obtained your reading material at a Kim Philby's estate sale?
-
I hope when and if it comes it doesn't convert to a free market economy where most of the population won't be any better off and only some will get rich. America eyes a take over of Cuba again. Most of the population will lose it's good education system and health system and suffer. A few will be become rich and the workers more impoverished. There has to be somewhere a balance between the rich and poor which will help the many and not the greedy few?
There's so much nonsense in this thread that I have to respond against my better judgment: this Gini chart (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/34/Gini_Coefficient_World_CIA_Report_2009.png) is pretty telling; green countries have lowest income inequality, and are mostly "free market" economies with vastly better life expectancy (http://www.nationmaster.com/red/graph/hea_lif_exp_at_bir_tot_pop-life-expectancy-birth-total-population&b_map=1), infant mortality rate (http://www.nationmaster.com/red/graph/hea_inf_mor_rat-health-infant-mortality-rate&int=-1&b_map=1), nutrition (http://www.nationmaster.com/red/graph/hea_nut_of_und_fiv_suf_fro_und_mod_sev-fives-suffering-underweight-moderate-severe&b_map=1), infrastructure (http://www.nationmaster.com/red/graph/eco_inf-economy-infrastructure&b_map=1), literacy (http://www.nationmaster.com/red/graph/edu_lit_tot_pop-education-literacy-total-population&b_map=1), poverty (http://www.nationmaster.com/red/graph/eco_pop_bel_pov_lin-economy-population-below-poverty-line&b_map=1) and happiness (http://www.nationmaster.com/red/graph/lif_hap_net-lifestyle-happiness-net&b_map=1)than the rest of the world. What else do you need? Mermaids?
-
Mermaids? Feppe, you can arrange that?
Rob C
-
I would be happy to... but then I read your next post and realized nobody could possibly elaborate any better than you:
On a side note, looks like you obtained your reading material at a Kim Philby's estate sale?
Perhaps you could post some of your insights in order to see where you are placed in this debate? Sniping and not making yourself a target doesn't make for a balanced post?
-
There's so much nonsense in this thread that I have to respond against my better judgment: this Gini chart is pretty telling; green countries have lowest income inequality, and are mostly "free market" economies with vastly better life expectancy, infant mortality rate, nutrition, infrastructure, literacy, poverty and happiness than the rest of the world. What else do you need? Mermaids?
Unquote
I looked at this chart and noticed that the two green countries Norway and Sweden have good track records for looking after their poorest. A lot better balance between rich and poor than many other countries. In short looking after them means that they are more productive and they contribute more instead of paying minimum wages and raising resentment.
-
I looked at this chart and noticed that the two green countries Norway and Sweden have good track records for looking after their poorest. A lot better balance between rich and poor than many other countries. In short looking after them means that they are more productive and they contribute more instead of paying minimum wages and raising resentment.
It comes at a very high price. I take it you have not lived in a Nordic country, which have a crippling tax burden (http://www.forbes.com/global/2009/0413/034-tax-burden-spending.html), many argue unsustainable.
There's also higher minimum wage, so less work for those who need it most. Finally, structurally high unemployment means the poor are not more productive than elsewhere: people don't have to work but can still afford plenty of luxuries - all paid with taxes.
-
It comes at a very high price. I take it you have not lived in a Nordic country, which have a crippling tax burden (http://www.forbes.com/global/2009/0413/034-tax-burden-spending.html), many argue unsustainable.
There's also higher minimum wage, so less work for those who need it most. Finally, structurally high unemployment means the poor are not more productive than elsewhere: people don't have to work but can still afford plenty of luxuries - all paid with taxes.
It appears that you are arguing for a economy with low wages which means the rich profit more? The "normal" free market version of running a country. Fine if you are doing well, not so if you aren't. The usual argument is if you work hard then the benefits accrue There are plenty of people who work hard and receive little for the endeavours and plenty who do little and receive a good standard of life. In a nutshell nobody can become rich solely by their own efforts. They need others to work for them to make them rich. IMO society is a collective effort so a better distribution of wealth is needed? However this is straying far from the original post and I am surprised the moderator hasn't blocked it.
-
It appears that you are arguing for a economy with low wages which means the rich profit more? The "normal" free market version of running a country. Fine if you are doing well, not so if you aren't. The usual argument is if you work hard then the benefits accrue There are plenty of people who work hard and receive little for the endeavours and plenty who do little and receive a good standard of life. In a nutshell nobody can become rich solely by their own efforts. They need others to work for them to make them rich. IMO society is a collective effort so a better distribution of wealth is needed? However this is straying far from the original post and I am surprised the moderator hasn't blocked it.
Stamper, he hasn't blocked it because he knows perfectly well that it will atrophy and die of its own accord.
Rob C
EDIT: this should help -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bq4NhcfurgU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bq4NhcfurgU)
-
It appears that you are arguing for a economy with low wages which means the rich profit more? The "normal" free market version of running a country.
[emphasis mine]
In no way I even implied something like that, nor do I advocate such an absurd notion. I don't know where you even get the misguided idea that this is the normal way to run a "free market" country.
Economy is not a zero-sum game, ie. if we have more wealthy people, everyone is better off, and nobody has to necessarily give anything away. It is in everybody's interest to reduce poverty, something which we (the world) have done an excellent job (http://conferences.ifpri.org/2020Chinaconference/pdf/beijingbrief_ravallion2.pdf) (PDF) with, despite what numerous pundits would like the populace to believe. There's still a lot to be done, of course.
The usual argument is if you work hard then the benefits accrue There are plenty of people who work hard and receive little for the endeavours and plenty who do little and receive a good standard of life.
The poor in western countries lead a lifestyle a king from 1800s would have literally killed for: no fear of famine, low infant mortality and good healthcare, not to mention air conditioning, refrigeration, TVs and cars and computers. Many modern "kings" like Warren Buffet made themselves, but in the past you were stuck with the destiny doled out at birth.
In a nutshell nobody can become rich solely by their own efforts. They need others to work for them to make them rich. IMO society is a collective effort so a better distribution of wealth is needed?
That's because not all men are created equal, nor do they produce equal amount and value of work - and by value I don't only mean monetary value. If there are no incentives for smart and/or industrious people to produce more and better quality work, it would stunt progress.
As I pointed out in my earlier post most western "free market" nations have much lower Gini than other countries, so income redistribution has already happened: almost all western nations are already punishing success with progressive income taxation.
In fairness, there are still some regressive taxes left, tax on food being the prime example (poor spend higher portion of their income on food, so even a flat VAT on food effectively becomes a regressive tax).
-
It appears that you are arguing for a economy with low wages which means the rich profit more? The "normal" free market version of running a country. Fine if you are doing well, not so if you aren't. The usual argument is if you work hard then the benefits accrue There are
Correct Stamper.
But sweating, hard work, sacrifice, has never been the way to become rich.
This is just the way to work FOR the ones who know the real rules of the game.
-
Frankly, I think this is all bullshit. I have known quite a few very rich people personally and I can tell you this: they are not the same as each other; they are not all brilliant at life; they are not all wildly happy; they are not all intelligent; none I have known was in the arts of any description.
There is another factor at work that makes it tick for them - I suspect that they are as mystified about it as is the rest of us.
As for the power to self-destruct...
Rob C
-
But sweating, hard work, sacrifice, has never been the way to become rich.
This is exactly the kind of attitude which keeps (a certain subgroup of) poor people perpetually poor. Learned helplessness born from government handouts paid by the sweat and tears of hard-working classes further exacerbates the challenge.
-
Quote Feppe
Economy is not a zero-sum game, ie. if we have more wealthy people, everyone is better off, and nobody has to necessarily give anything away.
Unquote
Feppe. methinks that you are wearing rose tinted glasses. This notion was spouted by Margaret Thatcher and others 25 years ago, It was called the trickle down economy. It is now discredited. The belief that someone becomes rich then everyone else will follow is frankly ludicrous. The rich do everything in their power to avoid paying taxes which benefits the poorest. In Britain the gap between rich and poor is even wider. What sustains the poorest in society is a bigger burden of debt. If that debt was called in by the credit card companies then society would collapse tomorrow. Why should the working class of any country depend on the rich for a living? They can organize and run things for their own benefit and discard the rich. It is labour hiring capital rather than capital hiring labour. Feppe I assume that you are doing well out of the present system?
-
This is exactly the kind of attitude which keeps (a certain subgroup of) poor people perpetually poor. Learned helplessness born from government handouts paid by the sweat and tears of hard-working classes further exacerbates the challenge.
What you point is absolutely right.
I was talking more about the very very little part of the population that leads the game's rule.
An observation.
Paris, Madrid, I observe exactly the same phenomenon.
Just go in the tube in the morning, rush hours then the same on the evening, sit and watch for awhile with no prejudice, as if you where watching a movie.
After a while, the ridiculous of this scenery appears clearly.
An enormous mass of people, an immense energy is putting into action every single day, and for the vast majority of people, life is spent from 6 in the morning to 8 or 9 in being used by the machinery to make it work properly.
There is absolutly no freedom here, neither free will. They have to eat, pay the mortagage they have been influenced to get (many are paying amongs 30, 40 years for little horrible flats, overpriced by the speculation), etc...They are programmed to act so and the choice, if margen exists, is very very narrow.
For the vast majority of the people in our rich countries, (arrownd a 90%), life is spent between the rush, the tube or the mortorway traffic jams (some hours in Madrid, every single day of their lifes...), then the all day at work in something that they mostly hate, then when they come home at night, they need to eat and they are too tired for romance anyway because they have to sleep and wake up again next day at 6...this will be done every single day till the system decide they have contributed enough to the overall prosperity and put them on a side, a sort of dead end road. (cheap cruise etc... as a recompense for being a good guy)
But what about the Inner prosperity? This is something that does not matter at all for the powers.
What matters really is that they can reproduce clones (and that the clone does not even know he is trapped, generally he feels it but as there is little escape so this truth is rejected). For that, manipulation is used and abused.
To make that non-sense bearable, the very very old roman's rule "bread and games", we have the football world-cup, the soup operas tv show etc...cheap distractions for cheap lifes. The places where these masses lives are also cheap, depressing, unhuman.
You can see that Paris is big machine, but the parisians are contribuiting to make it work, and get very very little benefits.
Yes we do not starve, we have many gadgets and distractions, but we have to understand that to maintain this level of prosperity we "enjoy" in the west, we have to maintain the rest of the planet in a state of bondage and rob the ressources that are not ours. The irony and pathetic is when you see these buses of red neck western tourist in Africa or Asia, visiting these exotic countries without understanding that the exploitater is visiting its victim. But most of the people in our countries, if they will not die for hunger are just dead inside. That is why they all fear death. There is no accomplishment, there is slavery. The difference between our economies and the poorest countries is that our slavery differs in nature but not in essence.
In our country we do not have to worry that much (BUT THAT IS STARTING TO CHANGE) about looking for the basics; food, water, home and health care. But halth of the population is in mental therapy. In the poor countries, our phychological problems have no room. There is no psychanalist for the masses in Africa.
Whatever the system involved, until it is based on profits and not on harmony and cooperation, the old french saying will remains true:
I participate
You participate
He/she participate
We participate
You participate
They benefit
The "they" is known as being approx 3% of the world population.