Total Posts:22|Showing Posts:1-22
Jump to topic:

Illogical wealth redistribution

DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2011 3:06:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The Left are constantly complaining inequality in wages, and wealth. They never address the issues regarding a hypothetical world in which everyone has an equal share in the wealth.

The Global GDP is $63,044,100,000,000, according to the World Bank.
The Global population is 6,840,507,000, also according to the World Bank.

$63,044,100,000,000 / 6,840,507,000 = $9,216.29

So if everyone was to have an equal share in the world's wealth, everyone would be making $9,216.29 annually; that's less than minimum wage.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2011 3:07:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/22/2011 3:06:09 PM, DanT wrote:
The Left are constantly complaining inequality in wages, and wealth. They never address the issues regarding a hypothetical world in which everyone has an equal share in the wealth.

The Global GDP is $63,044,100,000,000, according to the World Bank.
The Global population is 6,840,507,000, also according to the World Bank.

$63,044,100,000,000 / 6,840,507,000 = $9,216.29

So if everyone was to have an equal share in the world's wealth, everyone would be making $9,216.29 annually; that's less than minimum wage.

Agreed. Also, why give wealth to people who haven't earned it?
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2011 3:16:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The international poverty line is;
$324.48 Annually
$27.05 Monthly
$6.24 weekly
$1.25 Daily

Minimum wage in the US is;
$15,080 Annually
$1,256.67 Monthly
$290 Weekly
$58 Daily

I say we should feel lucky that we got what we got, and not be so greedy.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2011 3:18:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/22/2011 3:16:03 PM, DanT wrote:
The international poverty line is;
$324.48 Annually
$27.05 Monthly
$6.24 weekly
$1.25 Daily

Minimum wage in the US is;
$15,080 Annually
$1,256.67 Monthly
$290 Weekly
$58 Daily

I say we should feel lucky that we got what we got, and not be so greedy.

The international poverty line is $0.156 per hour by the way, and the US minimum wage is $7.25 per hour.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2011 3:28:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/22/2011 3:21:25 PM, wjmelements wrote:
Cost of living varies from place to place.

doesn't change the fact that an equal redistribution of the world's wealth is $9,216.29 annually
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
logicrules
Posts: 1,721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2011 3:41:48 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/22/2011 3:06:09 PM, DanT wrote:
The Left are constantly complaining inequality in wages, and wealth. They never address the issues regarding a hypothetical world in which everyone has an equal share in the wealth.

The Global GDP is $63,044,100,000,000, according to the World Bank.
The Global population is 6,840,507,000, also according to the World Bank.

$63,044,100,000,000 / 6,840,507,000 = $9,216.29

So if everyone was to have an equal share in the world's wealth, everyone would be making $9,216.29 annually; that's less than minimum wage.

If only GDP meant anything, that would be meaningful.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2011 4:17:53 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/22/2011 3:41:48 PM, logicrules wrote:
At 12/22/2011 3:06:09 PM, DanT wrote:
The Left are constantly complaining inequality in wages, and wealth. They never address the issues regarding a hypothetical world in which everyone has an equal share in the wealth.

The Global GDP is $63,044,100,000,000, according to the World Bank.
The Global population is 6,840,507,000, also according to the World Bank.

$63,044,100,000,000 / 6,840,507,000 = $9,216.29

So if everyone was to have an equal share in the world's wealth, everyone would be making $9,216.29 annually; that's less than minimum wage.


If only GDP meant anything, that would be meaningful.

Gross Domestic Product is the total value of goods produced and services provided in a country during one year. The Gross National Income is roughly the same as the Gross Domestic product.

for example the GNI of the US is $14.56 Trillion, while the GDP of the US is $14.58 Trillion.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2011 4:24:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/22/2011 3:06:09 PM, DanT wrote:
The Left are constantly complaining inequality in wages, and wealth. They never address the issues regarding a hypothetical world in which everyone has an equal share in the wealth.

The Global GDP is $63,044,100,000,000, according to the World Bank.
The Global population is 6,840,507,000, also according to the World Bank.

$63,044,100,000,000 / 6,840,507,000 = $9,216.29

So if everyone was to have an equal share in the world's wealth, everyone would be making $9,216.29 annually; that's less than minimum wage.

This is non-sequitur. Equal share of the nation's wealth means equal share of it's actual resources. It would effectively alleviate the need for tender altogether.
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2011 4:56:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
If everybody was paid the same thing, I doubt prices would be the same.

Many jobs would probably become irrelevant too. In the end, I think it is safe to say that while certain things would be produced in less amounts(which is good from a resource depletion stance), we wouldn't have as many luxuries. Not so much because of a lack of motivation, but because it wouldn't be possible economically.

Economic freedom is definitely more efficient in certain areas. I don't believe the standard of living would be as bad in a purely communist type world, if money was effectively done away with.

I don't think it is possible, however, and I don't think I could support the idea.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2011 5:46:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/22/2011 4:24:09 PM, Ren wrote:
At 12/22/2011 3:06:09 PM, DanT wrote:
The Left are constantly complaining inequality in wages, and wealth. They never address the issues regarding a hypothetical world in which everyone has an equal share in the wealth.

The Global GDP is $63,044,100,000,000, according to the World Bank.
The Global population is 6,840,507,000, also according to the World Bank.

$63,044,100,000,000 / 6,840,507,000 = $9,216.29

So if everyone was to have an equal share in the world's wealth, everyone would be making $9,216.29 annually; that's less than minimum wage.

This is non-sequitur. Equal share of the nation's wealth means equal share of it's actual resources.

Gross Domestic Product is the total value of goods produced and services provided in a country during one year.

It would effectively alleviate the need for tender altogether.

I believe you are revering to Marxism.

"In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.
We Communists have been reproached with the desire of abolishing the right of personally acquiring property as the fruit of a man's own labour, which property is alleged to be the groundwork of all personal freedom, activity and independence. " ~ Chapter 2 of the communist manifesto

I'll stick with capitalism thank you very much.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2011 5:55:44 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Pardon me, I meant to say that I don't think the standard of living would be as bad as some make it out to be.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2011 9:49:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
math for America alone, I would like to see that, wait let me just do that now.

14 trillion divided by 350 million = forty thousand

I am against minimum wage and wealth distribution, but thats an ok number.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2011 10:13:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/22/2011 9:49:45 PM, 16kadams wrote:
math for America alone, I would like to see that, wait let me just do that now.


14 trillion divided by 350 million = forty thousand

I am against minimum wage and wealth distribution, but that's an ok number.

Unless you have a college degree.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2011 10:19:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/22/2011 10:13:28 PM, DanT wrote:
At 12/22/2011 9:49:45 PM, 16kadams wrote:
math for America alone, I would like to see that, wait let me just do that now.


14 trillion divided by 350 million = forty thousand

I am against minimum wage and wealth distribution, but that's an ok number.

Unless you have a college degree.

lol It is a bad wage but it is livable
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/25/2011 12:55:57 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/22/2011 3:28:11 PM, DanT wrote:
At 12/22/2011 3:21:25 PM, wjmelements wrote:
Cost of living varies from place to place.

doesn't change the fact that an equal redistribution of the world's wealth is $9,216.29 annually

In America, it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to live on a few dollars a day.

In third-world countries, that's how many people survive.

This, I believe, is mostly because of varying food and shelter prices. It would be impossible to charge American prices in third-world countries because people wouldn't be able to afford the food.
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2011 4:53:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/22/2011 3:06:09 PM, DanT wrote:
The Left are constantly complaining inequality in wages, and wealth. They never address the issues regarding a hypothetical world in which everyone has an equal share in the wealth.

The Global GDP is $63,044,100,000,000, according to the World Bank.
The Global population is 6,840,507,000, also according to the World Bank.

$63,044,100,000,000 / 6,840,507,000 = $9,216.29

So if everyone was to have an equal share in the world's wealth, everyone would be making $9,216.29 annually; that's less than minimum wage.

$9,216 sounds like an awful number, but I have never heard anyone argue that everyone in America let alone the world should all have equal wages. I really don't know who your post is targeted for, certainly not "the Left".

The concerns about economic inequality mostly refer to opportunity, not outcome. No one argues that a thirty-something year old living in his mothers basement because he is to lazy to look for a job, should be making what hard working people make.

In today's America 1% of the country control over 1/3rd of the wealth. Do you really believe this is an indication of how hard people work? Do you believe that 1% of the country work so hard that it morally justifies them controlling that large a portion of the countries wealth?

This is the problem with capitalism. In an unregulated capitalistic society only the strong will survive, everyone else will perish. Yet society needs contributions from everyone (or close to) in order to advance. Yes some people will never contribute but most give up because the opportunities do not realistically exist. A potential business owner who wants to open up a hardware store will not be able to compete with Home Depot or Wal-Mart. A guy who wants to earn a high paying job by getting a college education, will wind up working for years just to pay off that education.

These are the disincentives you should be concerned about addressing if you want our society to improve, not figuring out how the rich can have more money so that they can grant us all the privilege of working for them.
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2011 6:07:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
To be a successful capitalist, you must be smart, adaptable, ruthless to an extent, and at least appear to be ethical.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2011 6:08:07 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Hard work is important, but hard work alone will just make you someone's mule.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2011 6:26:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/26/2011 6:07:05 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
To be a successful capitalist, you must be smart, adaptable, ruthless to an extent, and at least appear to be ethical.

Capitalize:

- to take advantage of; turn something to one's advantage (often followed by on ): to capitalize on one's opportunities.

- profit by, exploit, utilize.

...you're right, you must be all of those things, but you must apply them to exploiting people to be a successful capitalist. In fact, I'd say the likelihood that someone does not exploit a group of people in some way to become rich is about as likely as a horse fitting in the SIM release hole in an iPhone.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2011 8:17:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/26/2011 6:26:00 PM, Ren wrote:
At 12/26/2011 6:07:05 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
To be a successful capitalist, you must be smart, adaptable, ruthless to an extent, and at least appear to be ethical.

Capitalize:

- to take advantage of; turn something to one's advantage (often followed by on ): to capitalize on one's opportunities.

- profit by, exploit, utilize.

...you're right, you must be all of those things, but you must apply them to exploiting people to be a successful capitalist. In fact, I'd say the likelihood that someone does not exploit a group of people in some way to become rich is about as likely as a horse fitting in the SIM release hole in an iPhone.

Where the hell did you get those Left wing definitions?

Definitions;
S: (v) capitalize (draw advantages from)
S: (v) capitalize (supply with capital, as of a business by using a combination of capital used by investors and debt capital provided by lenders)
S: (v) capitalize (compute the present value of a business or an income)
S: (v) capitalize (consider expenditures as capital assets rather than expenses)
S: (v) capitalize (convert (a company's reserve funds) into capital)

http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu...

Synonyms;
S: profit
S: gain
S: benefit

http://www.synonym.com...
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle