Topic: 80 richest people on the planet have the same wealth as the poorest 50% - page 4. (Read 6214 times)
January 20, 2015, 04:07:13 PM
If the medicine advances so much in the future as to prolong the life expectancy to like more than 200 years than it's worth collecting huge amounts of money. Right now it's just getting golden toilets, Bentleys and chocolate desserts with golden toppings for $100k. Thanks but no thanks.
January 20, 2015, 01:52:36 PM
1% of peaple on the planet have the same wealth as the poorest 99%
January 20, 2015, 01:48:59 PM
The game is one not of our choosing, played to rules not of our design, and played in an alien venue. And we lose everytime.
Technology, I believe, is fast approaching being able to formulate new games. Games whose rules are rational and arrived at via consensus. We will choose to play because the advantages to all who participate will be obvious - and to not participate would be to render oneself ill suited to the new world and its new democratic and participatory paradigm. Technology will, so to speak, transcend certain academic debates by putting practical solutions into the hands of people - and the answers that were always illusive, will instead,in practice, be made manifest.
Define wealth. Strikes me that wealth is amorphous. From where does wealth originate ? Where do we locate value ? Bitcoin will never, in spite of deflation, have a monoploy on value (or wealth). So it can only ever be seen as a part of the solution - obviously.
Technology, I believe, is fast approaching being able to formulate new games. Games whose rules are rational and arrived at via consensus. We will choose to play because the advantages to all who participate will be obvious - and to not participate would be to render oneself ill suited to the new world and its new democratic and participatory paradigm. Technology will, so to speak, transcend certain academic debates by putting practical solutions into the hands of people - and the answers that were always illusive, will instead,in practice, be made manifest.
The difference with Bitcoin is that inflation will decrease and the wealth will eventually be irrevocably distributed.
Define wealth. Strikes me that wealth is amorphous. From where does wealth originate ? Where do we locate value ? Bitcoin will never, in spite of deflation, have a monoploy on value (or wealth). So it can only ever be seen as a part of the solution - obviously.
January 19, 2015, 08:38:12 PM
The difference with Bitcoin is that inflation will decrease and the wealth will eventually be irrevocably distributed.
With fiat, the ruling wealthy can continuously inflate the currency and still maintain their wealth without redistribution.
With fiat, the ruling wealthy can continuously inflate the currency and still maintain their wealth without redistribution.
Speaking as a Bitcoiner,
1. Bitcoin is a deflationary currency.
2. There is no guarantee it "will eventually be irrevocably distributed."
January 19, 2015, 06:28:00 PM
Quote from: Dr. Gary E. Aylesworth, Eastern Illinois University, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2005 link=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/postmodernism/#6
Baudrillard presents hyperreality as the terminal stage of simulation, where a sign or image has no relation to any reality whatsoever, but is “its own pure simulacrum” (Baudrillard 1994, 6). The real, he says, has become an operational effect of symbolic processes, just as images are technologically generated and coded before we actually perceive them. This means technological mediation has usurped the productive role of the Kantian subject, the locus of an original synthesis of concepts and intuitions, as well as the Marxian worker, the producer of capital though labor, and the Freudian unconscious, the mechanism of repression and desire. “From now on,” says Baudrillard, “signs are exchanged against each other rather than against the real” (Baudrillard 1993, 7), so production now means signs producing other signs. The system of symbolic exchange is therefore no longer real but “hyperreal.” Where the real is “that of which it is possible to provide an equivalent reproduction,” the hyperreal, says Baudrillard, is “that which is always already reproduced” (Baudrillard 1993, 73). The hyperreal is a system of simulation simulating itself.
(Red colorization mine.)Quote from: Leo Tolstoy, Tolstoy (1988) by A. N. Wilson, p. 146. link=http://izquotes.com/quote/273222
The truth is that the State is a conspiracy designed not only to exploit, but above all to corrupt its citizens… Henceforth, I shall never serve any government anywhere.
Tribe is hyperreal and begets possession. Possession is real and begets money. Money is hyperreal and begets state. State is real and begets hyperreality.
Tribe is a genesis of a money and its state; therefore, a money will tend to tribe.
January 19, 2015, 09:56:57 AM
The difference with Bitcoin is that inflation will decrease and the wealth will eventually be irrevocably distributed.
With fiat, the ruling wealthy can continuously inflate the currency and still maintain their wealth without redistribution.
With fiat, the ruling wealthy can continuously inflate the currency and still maintain their wealth without redistribution.
Speaking as a Bitcoiner,
1. Bitcoin is a deflationary currency.
2. There is no guarantee it "will eventually be irrevocably distributed."
Spending Bitcoin != wealth distribution.
Payment for asset or service represents transfer of value, tangible or otherwise.
Ergo, the spender can theoretically recoup said expenditure by trading in the value of his purchase at a later date.
An obvious exception here is consumables, but the cyclical nature of value transfer within the BTC ecosystem on a macro scale will even things out.
So, to reiterate, spending Bitcoin != wealth distribution.
January 19, 2015, 09:39:21 AM
The difference with Bitcoin is that inflation will decrease and the wealth will eventually be irrevocably distributed.
With fiat, the ruling wealthy can continuously inflate the currency and still maintain their wealth without redistribution.
With fiat, the ruling wealthy can continuously inflate the currency and still maintain their wealth without redistribution.
Speaking as a Bitcoiner,
1. Bitcoin is a deflationary currency.
2. There is no guarantee it "will eventually be irrevocably distributed."
Spending Bitcoin != wealth distribution.
Payment for asset or service represents transfer of value, tangible or otherwise.
Ergo, the spender can theoretically recoup said expenditure by trading in the value of his purchase at a later date.
An obvious exception here is consumables, but the cyclical nature of value transfer within the BTC ecosystem on a macro scale will even things out.
So, to reiterate, spending Bitcoin != wealth distribution.
January 19, 2015, 09:36:51 AM
It's simply disgusting, if you're interested in making a change, investigate the Zeitgeist movement, they offer real solutions, yet I don't see any changes without violence. Mark Twain once said, the earth isn't dying, it's being killed, and the people responsibe have names and adresses.....
The problem with RBE is the transition. Bitcoin is bloodlessly disruptive of the status quo.
January 19, 2015, 09:33:13 AM
The difference with Bitcoin is that inflation will decrease and the wealth will eventually be irrevocably distributed.
With fiat, the ruling wealthy can continuously inflate the currency and still maintain their wealth without redistribution.
With fiat, the ruling wealthy can continuously inflate the currency and still maintain their wealth without redistribution.
Speaking as a Bitcoiner,
1. Bitcoin is a deflationary currency.
2. There is no guarantee it "will eventually be irrevocably distributed."
Spending Bitcoin != wealth distribution.
Payment for asset or service represents transfer of value, tangible or otherwise.
Ergo, the spender can theoretically recoup said expenditure by trading in the value of his purchase at a later date.
An obvious exception here is consumables, but the cyclical nature of value transfer within the BTC ecosystem on a macro scale will even things out.
So, to reiterate, spending Bitcoin != wealth distribution.
It's simply disgusting, if you're interested in making a change, investigate the Zeitgeist movement, they offer real solutions, yet I don't see any changes without violence. Mark Twain once said, the earth isn't dying, it's being killed, and the people responsibe have names and adresses.....
Indeed. It is beyond tragic.Thank for the Zeitgeist rec. Will read later, at the very least.
January 19, 2015, 09:23:01 AM
It's simply disgusting, if you're interested in making a change, investigate the Zeitgeist movement, they offer real solutions, yet I don't see any changes without violence. Mark Twain once said, the earth isn't dying, it's being killed, and the people responsibe have names and adresses.....
January 19, 2015, 09:20:14 AM
The difference is that fiat has been in existence for as long as creation of our current banking system. Bitcoin is only around for 5 years plus. So essentially you can't compare directly between both.
January 19, 2015, 09:19:03 AM
The difference with Bitcoin is that inflation will decrease and the wealth will eventually be irrevocably distributed.
With fiat, the ruling wealthy can continuously inflate the currency and still maintain their wealth without redistribution.
With fiat, the ruling wealthy can continuously inflate the currency and still maintain their wealth without redistribution.
Speaking as a Bitcoiner,
1. Bitcoin is a deflationary currency.
2. There is no guarantee it "will eventually be irrevocably distributed."
January 19, 2015, 09:14:03 AM
The difference with Bitcoin is that inflation will decrease and the wealth will eventually be irrevocably distributed.
With fiat, the ruling wealthy can continuously inflate the currency and still maintain their wealth without redistribution.
With fiat, the ruling wealthy can continuously inflate the currency and still maintain their wealth without redistribution.
Speaking as a Bitcoiner,
1. Bitcoin is a deflationary currency.
2. There is no guarantee it "will eventually be irrevocably distributed."
January 19, 2015, 08:48:21 AM
The difference with Bitcoin is that inflation will decrease and the wealth will eventually be irrevocably distributed.
With fiat, the ruling wealthy can continuously inflate the currency and still maintain their wealth without redistribution.
With fiat, the ruling wealthy can continuously inflate the currency and still maintain their wealth without redistribution.
January 19, 2015, 07:53:46 AM
Make of this what you will.
• By 2016, the top 1% of the world’s population will have more wealth than the other 99%
• 80 richest people on the planet have the same wealth as the poorest 50% (3.5 billion)
• The poorest 80% own just 5.5% of the world's wealth
• The richest 80 doubled their worth in cash terms between 2009 and 2014
• More than a third of the 1,645 billionaires listed by Forbes inherited some or all of their riches
• Britain’s 100 richest had the same wealth as 30% of UK households
• The financial sector contributed $571 million to various campaigns during 2012 U.S. presidential elections
• In 2013, financial and insurance lobbies gave $550 million to policymakers in Washington and Brussels
ps: Before anyone blindly starts proselytizing about Bitoin, keep in mind the same pattern has/is emerging in crypto as well.
Less it be forgotten, the top 100 addresses own 20% (2,875,298 BTCs) of all BTCs mined thus far (13,736,250, as of block #339,450).
• By 2016, the top 1% of the world’s population will have more wealth than the other 99%
• 80 richest people on the planet have the same wealth as the poorest 50% (3.5 billion)
• The poorest 80% own just 5.5% of the world's wealth
• The richest 80 doubled their worth in cash terms between 2009 and 2014
• More than a third of the 1,645 billionaires listed by Forbes inherited some or all of their riches
• Britain’s 100 richest had the same wealth as 30% of UK households
• The financial sector contributed $571 million to various campaigns during 2012 U.S. presidential elections
• In 2013, financial and insurance lobbies gave $550 million to policymakers in Washington and Brussels
ps: Before anyone blindly starts proselytizing about Bitoin, keep in mind the same pattern has/is emerging in crypto as well.
Less it be forgotten, the top 100 addresses own 20% (2,875,298 BTCs) of all BTCs mined thus far (13,736,250, as of block #339,450).
Jump to: