Think tank polls support for issues among millionaires and the public, find millionaires shockingly - Polidicks

[QUOTE=OvB;44962567]You do realize most, if not all billionaires are so because they own companies worth a billion dollars? Just because you're a billionaire doesn't mean you have a billion dollars of spending money. You get that from over bloated salaries and wages. A billionaire could in theory (and sometimes in practice) live modestly with a low wage and a small house while still being a billionaire because they own Apple or something. I'm willing to bet the only peopen that DO have a literal billion dollars are criminals and war lords. Real billionaires don't have a billion dollars.[/QUOTE] What does it matter whether that property is in distributed holdings, cash or vuvuzelas? The only thing that matters is how much person's holdings are valued on the market and can be liquidated and converted to anything for that value at their discretion. [editline]31st May 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Sobotnik;44962639]Now that [U]China[/U] has industrialized, we should focus on getting up the [U]rest of Africa[/U] to that level.[/QUOTE] I know what you're saying, but it's still funny.

[QUOTE=Vlevs;44962652]What does it matter whether that property is in distributed holdings, cash or vuvuzelas? The only thing that matters is how much person's holdings are valued on the market and can be liquidated and converted to anything for that value at their discretion. [editline]31st May 2014[/editline] I know what you're saying, but it's still funny.[/QUOTE] Lemme fix that. I was referring to the undeveloped parts of Africa (some of it is already doing fairly well, especially Botswana).

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;44962709]Lemme fix that. I was referring to the undeveloped parts of Africa (some of it is already doing fairly well, especially Botswana).[/QUOTE] i think they were referring to it looking like you were calling China a part of Africa

[QUOTE=Vlevs;44962652]What does it matter whether that property is in distributed holdings, cash or vuvuzelas? The only thing that matters is how much person's holdings are valued on the market and can be liquidated and converted to anything for that value at their discretion. [editline]31st May 2014[/editline] I know what you're saying, but it's still funny.[/QUOTE] I'm saying some rich people do good through their business and cannot help the fact that they're billionaires because their business is worth a billion dollars. For example: Elon Musk is advancing human space flight and electric vehicle technology through his businesses. Elon Musk is a multi-billionaire because his businesses have inflated values. If Elon cashed in and gave all his money to the homeless, his businesses and dream would collapse because Elon himself was an intangible asset of those businesses. Elon is helping humanity, Elon is a billionaire. For Elon to cash in his wealth and give it to the needy would be a negative because it would result in the collapse of his businesses which help humanity themselves. Arguably the same with places like Google which make technology that change the world. (Although Google is a public company and they would just be bought out by another billionaire.) What I'm saying is, some billionaires are good and they can only do good as billionaires.

[QUOTE=person11;44961668]And another study says that the wishes of the majority of the 1% are granted by the government 98% of the time. Fun.[/QUOTE] headline: science finds out that money actually talks, more at 11 [editline]31st May 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=OvB;44962826]I'm saying some rich people do good through their business and cannot help the fact that they're billionaires because their business is worth a billion dollars. For example: Elon Musk is advancing human space flight and electric vehicle technology through his businesses. Elon Musk is a multi-billionaire because his businesses have inflated values. If Elon cashed in and gave all his money to the homeless, his businesses and dream would collapse because Elon himself was an intangible asset of those businesses. Elon is helping humanity, Elon is a billionaire. For Elon to cash in his wealth and give it to the needy would be a negative because it would result in the collapse of his businesses which help humanity themselves. Arguably the same with places like Google which make technology that change the world. (Although Google is a public company and they would just be bought out by another billionaire.) What I'm saying is, some billionaires are good and they can only do good as billionaires.[/QUOTE] well not quite, philanthropy and personal wealth are not the same, most billionares are content to just cut checks to well known foundations like the bill-n-linda foundation to properly use the money because they do have lives. bill gates is increadibly dedicated to philanthropy and made it his profession, so ya he's handled the job's philanthropy money among other things. elon musk could donate 1B today and his companies probably wouldn't falter at all because they are not directly funded by him anymore. Tesla has positive income and Space-x is partly government funded now while they are developing things, their ultimate goal is to be completely funded by launching stuff but right now their initial investment is gargantuan because of all the hardware, infrastructure, and software, as well as testing that needs to be done before then

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;44962639] I think people should prioritize the world as a whole instead of their own country. Now that China has industrialized, we should focus on getting up Sub-Saharan Africa to that level.[/QUOTE] lol at the rate the earth is heating up I don't think the human race can afford for many more countries to be benevolently industrialized like China has. When you take into account the level of income disparity that can be seen all around the world, this idea people have of "a rising tide lifting all boats" starts to ring false. This idea you have of "industrial progress" is nonsense. China's GDP might have skyrocketed but the standard of living for people there has increased marginally at best. Modern global capitalism is a system which serves to enrich those at the very, very top of the system; any benefits to the people who labor under that system are unintended and ephemeral. There is no great arrow of progress that moves, unarrestable, in one direction.

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;44962930]lol at the rate the earth is heating up I don't think the human race can afford for many more countries to be benevolently industrialized like China has.[/quote] A country can modernize without having to destroy the environment you know. [quote]When you take into account the level of income disparity that can be seen all around the world, this idea people have of "a rising tide lifting all boats" starts to ring false. This idea you have of "industrial progress" is nonsense. China's GDP might have skyrocketed but [b]the standard of living for people there has increased marginally at best.[/b][/quote] [img]http://www.planetfinancechina.org/sites/default/files/UN_HDR_2010-2-1.jpg[/img] [url]http://www.planetfinancechina.org/blog/un-human-development-report-2010[/url] [img]http://www.chinaglobaltrade.com/sites/default/files/us-china-trade-data-real-gdp-per-capita-us-china-1980-2030.jpg[/img] [url]http://www.chinaglobaltrade.com/fact/real-gdp-capita-us-and-china-1980-2030[/url] [img]http://gdb.voanews.com/AD7C365C-4AFA-4A32-8A18-C6DD3E8E79CD_w640_r1_s.png[/img] [url]http://www.voanews.com/content/analysts-china-health-care-improving-but-more-reforms-needed/1573022.html[/url] yeah sure [quote]Modern global capitalism is a system which serves to enrich those at the very, very top of the system; any benefits to the people who labor under that system are unintended and ephemeral..[/QUOTE] Identify the main problems in "capitalism" and how you would go about fixing them.

[QUOTE=Sableye;44962868]headline: science finds out that money actually talks, more at 11 [editline]31st May 2014[/editline] well not quite, philanthropy and personal wealth are not the same, most billionares are content to just cut checks to well known foundations like the bill-n-linda foundation to properly use the money because they do have lives. bill gates is increadibly dedicated to philanthropy and made it his profession, so ya he's handled the job's philanthropy money among other things. elon musk could donate 1B today and his companies probably wouldn't falter at all because they are not directly funded by him anymore. Tesla has positive income and Space-x is partly government funded now while they are developing things, their ultimate goal is to be completely funded by launching stuff but right now their initial investment is gargantuan because of all the hardware, infrastructure, and software, as well as testing that needs to be done before then[/QUOTE] But Elon doesn't have a billion in the bank so that money would have to come out of either Tesla or SpaceX, which he would have to sell his part of his ownership to do, thus hurting the company because it's watering down his role. Tesla is public so it wouldn't be as detrimental there, so he might be able to do that when he stands down from CEO which I think he wants to do some day anyway. But having "Elon Musk" as CEO for either adds to their value, so him cashing out partially or all the way would hurt Tesla regardless. Elon taking a billion out of tesla would probably cause their sky high stocks to plummet because investors would see that as the CEO jumping ship before a crash and they would do the same.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;44962989]A country can modernize without having to destroy the environment you know. [/QUOTE] Hasn't happened so far. Don't got a lot of time left for many more tries. [QUOTE=Sobotnik;44962989]yeah sure[/QUOTE] [URL]http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-25/tainted-air-kills-more-than-aids-diabetes-who-report-shows.html[/URL] [URL]http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/08/opinion/if-you-think-chinas-air-is-bad.html[/URL] One set of health problems has just been traded for another. [QUOTE=Sobotnik;44962989]Identify the main problems in "capitalism" and how you would go about fixing them. [/QUOTE] I'm no expert; I just wish you'd dispense with this idea that industrialization is this unstoppable march of progress that will replicate, in all these disparate countries in the 21st century, what it did to America in the 19th and 20th centuries. I don't see improvements in healthcare and small increases in the median household income as necessarily being the 1st steps in some impossible groundswell that somehow makes two billion people into an affluent, moneyed middle class, especially since we're seeing the death of the middle class in our very own nation. I don't trust the interests of bankers and CEOs to magically align with the interests of subsistence farmers and unskilled laborers.

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;44963055]Hasn't happened so far. Don't got a lot of time left for many more tries.[/quote] Yet it's entirely possible? People are getting into that environmentalism thing now. What stops people from making solar panels or wind turbines, or recycling? [quote][url]http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-25/tainted-air-kills-more-than-aids-diabetes-who-report-shows.html[/url] [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/08/opinion/if-you-think-chinas-air-is-bad.html[/url] One set of health problems has just been traded for another.[/QUOTE] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubU-dB8B-94[/media] You conveniently ignored the consistent rise in the Human Development Index, the drop in infant mortality, the increase in wages for the poor, and quite a few others. Yes they swapped one set of problems for another, but that's literally the entire fucking story behind all complex society. Once you solve one problem you encounter another.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;44963115] Yes they swapped one set of problems for another, but that's literally the entire fucking story behind all complex society. Once you solve one problem you encounter another.[/QUOTE] But the current standard of living in China is still untenable and you don't have any evidence other than bits and pieces of precedence to suggest that this will necessarily lead to further meaningful improvements in that society. That's conjecture. The idea that "industrialization" will replicate American history in every country it touches is an assumption and, considering the current, dire state of American economics, doesn't seem desirable anyway. Oh boy, once they become like the US they'll get to exploit the world's natural resources and second and third world nations and crash it's global economy over and over too, just like we did.

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;44963134]But the current standard of living in China is still untenable and you don't have any evidence other than bits and pieces of precedence to suggest that this will necessarily lead to further meaningful improvements in that society. That's conjecture.[/QUOTE] Except that's been the trend for decades? The UN HDI is based on multiple measurements such as life expectancy at birth, the quality of education in the country, and the wealth of the average citizen. China in 2014 is doing much better than it was in 1984, and certainly better than any point before that when Mao had the famines and cultural revolutions.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;44963167]Except that's been the trend for decades? The UN HDI is based on multiple measurements such as life expectancy at birth, the quality of education in the country, and the wealth of the average citizen. China in 2014 is doing much better than it was in 1984, and certainly better than any point before that when Mao had the famines and cultural revolutions.[/QUOTE] But we have also, for decades, seen the trend of widening income inequality and those two stats are going to be at odds.

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;44963256]But we have also, for decades, seen the trend of widening income inequality and those two stats are going to be at odds.[/QUOTE] This isn't an excuse to ignore the real improvements in China since the 1980s and start asserting lies.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;44963275]This isn't an excuse to ignore the real improvements in China since the 1980s and start asserting lies.[/QUOTE] I never did that I just said I don't believe in a singular, perfect "progress." Money means power in global capitalism and so I see the fact that more and more of the world's money is ending up in the hands of a smaller and smaller group of individuals as a threat to democracy and, thus, to human welfare. If the common people can't afford to compete with PACs and international chains and multinational conglomerates now what chance will they have ten or twenty years from now?

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;44963366]I never did that I just said I don't believe in a singular, perfect "progress."[/quote] neither do i you still can't ignore the significant improvements in living standards for the majority of the impoverished chinese however

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;44963438]neither do i you still can't ignore the significant improvements in living standards for the majority of the impoverished chinese however[/QUOTE] I'm not and never did, I just don't believe this will lead to meaningful political or economic emancipation. People will still be working in factories for marginally-livable wages and people still won't have any meaningful say in their government.

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;44963480]I'm not and never did, I just don't believe this will lead to meaningful political or economic emancipation. People will still be working in factories for marginally-livable wages and people still won't have any meaningful say in their government.[/QUOTE] [quote]China's GDP might have skyrocketed but the standard of living for people there has increased marginally at best.[/quote] It's a bit more than marginal. Even then, political emancipation is not far around the corner in China. Either the government will be forced to reform, or face popular revolution. When the next revolution comes in China, it won't be a repeat of 1989.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;44963495]It's a bit more than marginal. Even then, political emancipation is not far around the corner in China. Either the government will be forced to reform, or face popular revolution. When the next revolution comes in China, it won't be a repeat of 1989.[/QUOTE] Into what? The western model of Democracy, where the people are given a vote but are only able to choose between a small range of indistinguishable candidates whose selection is a product of the vested financial interests of the moneyed few? Awesome. Are they going to get the glacial American model or the European model, which just saw a groundswell towards far-right ethnonationalism on the back of a climate of economic disenfranchisement and paranoia?

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;44963532]Into what? The western model of Democracy, where the people are given a vote but are only able to choose between a small range of indistinguishable candidates whose selection is a product of the vested financial interests of the moneyed few? Awesome. Are they going to get the glacial American model or the European model, which just saw a groundswell towards far-right ethnonationalism on the back of a climate of economic disenfranchisement and paranoia?[/QUOTE] for all of their problems, you can't deny the huge improvement in freedom, political representation, and the reduction of corruption in say the USA compared to China the USA is a better society than China by far lol

sobotnik's(and other facepunchers) unwavering faith in capitalism is truly an amazing sight, income disparity is through the roof and rising, we have a HUGE climate change issue created exactly due to mindless industrialization(greatly aided by capitalism, profits first, everything else second) which is a timebomb, we don't have endless resources to support the very nature of capitalism(it requires endless growth), which is why capitalism is constantly in crisis, (up/down/up/down). i really wish i could be as utterly optimistic as you are sobotnik :v: , truly.

[QUOTE=Wizards Court;44963873]sobotnik's(and other facepunchers) unwavering faith in capitalism is truly an amazing sight, income disparity is through the roof and rising, we have a HUGE climate change issue created exactly due to mindless industrialization(greatly aided by capitalism, profits first, everything else second) which is a timebomb, we don't have endless resources to support the very nature of capitalism(it requires endless growth), which is why capitalism is constantly in crisis, (up/down/up/down). i really wish i could be as utterly optimistic as you are sobotnik :v: , truly.[/QUOTE] I see you've failed the ideological Turing test.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;44963900]I see you've failed the ideological Turing test.[/QUOTE] because i don't hail capitalism as god's gift to mankind? :v:

[QUOTE=Wizards Court;44963909]because i don't hail capitalism as god's gift to mankind? :v:[/QUOTE] No because you somehow assume my support for a market economy which allows for state intervention and gradual reform is somehow equivalent to me being Ayn Rand. You're just some vaguely left person whose arguments consist of saying a string of irrelevant things that you think I somehow support because I happen to fit your superfluous definition of what constitutes a "capitalist".

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;44962560]Do I have a right to tell you how you should spend your money?[/QUOTE] that is a super important right to have compared to the right to life isn't it i mean, what if i get super rich someday? i don't want some idiots taking half of my potential yacht-fleet away just so some morons who won't even bring me returns can keep polluting the air with their poverty-breath

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;44963951]No because you somehow assume my support for a market economy which allows for state intervention and gradual reform is somehow equivalent to me being Ayn Rand. You're just some vaguely left person whose arguments consist of saying a string of irrelevant things that you think I somehow support because I happen to fit your superfluous definition of what constitutes a "capitalist".[/QUOTE] they're not irrelevant, they're a few of many results or byproducts of capitalism, but they don't shake your belief at any moment, like i said, i'm impressed, you're the most optimistic person i have ever seen, reading your posts, one would think with capitalism, every single nation on the planet will become a western-style democracy that respects freedom of speech, human rights, and all nice things. :suicide:

what if i [I]want[/I] to have more power (monetarily) than some of the world's smaller governments?? if i'm rich enough and i [I]want[/I] it god damn it [I]it's my god given right[/I]

[QUOTE=innerfire34;44963970]that is a super important right to have compared to the right to life isn't it i mean, what if i get super rich someday? i don't want some idiots taking half of my potential yacht-fleet away just so some morons who won't even bring me returns can keep polluting the air with their poverty-breath[/QUOTE] How would you feel if someone took your things because they felt you don't deserve it because there are people poorer than you?

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;44964017]How would you feel if someone took your things because they felt you don't deserve it because there are people poorer than you?[/QUOTE] it's pretty stupid to compare an average person & their possessions and wealth to a billionaire and theirs

[QUOTE=Wizards Court;44963989]they're not irrelevant, they're a few of many results or byproducts of capitalism[/quote] Are they really a byproduct of capitalism? It's not like Socialist or Feudal economies suffered from those exact same problems you described. "Capitalism" (idk how exactly you define it since its often poorly defined) at its core is a set of basic principles regarding how we should best approach the economic question. [quote]but they don't shake your belief at any moment, like i said, i'm impressed, you're the most optimistic person i have ever seen, reading your posts, one would think with capitalism, every single nation on the planet will become a western-style democracy that respects freedom of speech, human rights, and all nice things. :suicide:[/QUOTE] Strong and healthy market economies require strong democratic institutions with a deep respect for human rights and freedom of speech. You can't have any of those things without excluding the others. You need them all for a healthy society.