rock bottom isn't so bad — Shamshir

Have you been there? I haven't.

https://www.businessinsider.com/even-the-roman-empire-wasnt-as-unequal-as-america-today-2011-12?r=US&IR=T

https://persquaremile.com/2011/12/16/income-inequality-in-the-roman-empire/

Prove me wrong. I am open to conviction.

Then supposedly if we don't have to struggle to live, then there would be more and more people to the point there would be too many people for too little resources, and again people would be forced to compete or die. — leo

I don't agree with that. The wealthier a society is, the less kids are born. Overproduction is a problem in poor communities not in the rich world.

The underlying sad state of affairs is that life is a competition. We kill other species to survive. It feels good to rule the world, but it probably doesn't to other species we destroy.


Within our own species, most of us compete with one another. We want as much power as possible, so the others can be as little a threat as possible. The other is the enemy. So a few accumulate power and don't want to give it away, they fought hard to get where they are, or they got lucky, but they don't want others to get on their level, because they fought precisely to be above them. — leo

Competition is a good thing I don't question that, it leads to innovation and other many positive things. Competition is necessary. What you've described is brutish, it's greed, but haven't we achieved a state where we should be able to be bigger than greed?

I think we have to create a sens of a common bond. For example, a school class has to work on a common goal, they have to work and study together that they achieve a good grade as a community, I mean it doesn't necessarily need to be a grade.
The school system today is already build on an egoistic basis. The better the university is, the harder you as an individual have to work to get your own degree, the less social minded you are. So it is only legit that you believe that you deserve now a wealthy life. Therefore you will also act egoistic as a CEO of a company because you worked incredibly hard to get there - it is indeed fair that you own 400 times more than the normal worker at your factory, who is hardly able to pay his bills. But he still works his 10 hours a day. Same thing in politics. But if students have to work together and get to a goal as a community they might start to include others. Everyone contributes something to the the whole with his own strengths. You would start to interact with people, you normally wouldn't, and this is what will open minds, rise empathy and respect toward others.

Many people think that the poor are dumb, but they actually aren't they all could be just as brilliant as Albert Einstein was, they just won't get the opportunity to make the same thoughts due to the lack of money they have. They spend all their life running after their bills. They are 24/7 under pressure. I talked today to a very young guy about if we could live completely without money. The conclusion was no, it is not possible. We are to 100% tied to money, it's a quite grim fact, isn't it?

I agree that you have to look after yourself first, but once you are comfortable you should act in oder to improve the bigger picture and not only your own bank account. Big companies aren't good for the economy and society anyway, small enterprises are key for a wealthy economy. Big companies would only make sense in a planned economy like in communism, but we don't want that either, do we?

That's some youthful idealism. I don't think the race has what it takes to change course. The best course of action is to fortify yourself inwardly, then you can begin viewing the world as the tragic comedy it is. — Merkwurdichliebe

I think, we do have. It only needs time and greater awareness.

Well the problem lies in the banks and the interests collected form the credits which are given form money that actually doesn't exists, they create new money, the money is increasingly as you said. Plus in the real economy the value of the interests is always somewhere missing. The overall calculation will never be fulfilled. So the problem lies in the interests, which always require economical growth, which isn't forever possible.

But why don't people in leading position, who are certainly aware of it, do something about it? They rather fight against new ideas. And there is the real problem hidden. The philosophy of the way we live. Let's be like, when I'm comfortable everything is fine. People only do something when they get wealth for them self out of it. Aren't we a human community? When we look up the sky all the way up to the next galaxy, we are only a tiny village.

So what is the worry with it? — Terrapin Station

Well with this attitude you won't get anywhere.

This is exactly the point. Since we are aware of what’s going on, shouldn’t it be different than in ancient Rome which lies more than 2000 years back? Awareness hasn't been rising since yesterday. Utilitarianism, as an example, was invented in the 17th century but, yet I have never seen this idea being practiced, maybe only on a very small scale. But there are people who could do so on a bigger scale such as CEO's of big companies but they rather invest in the army or in "New Retail" as Starbucks does. I mean, I understand if you run a small business that it can be hard to survive and that you look after yourself first. But in this case you are forced so. Forced so are also workers in relocated factories some were in Africa where a CEO decided to outsource his production because its cheeper. There his is also able to let people work under conditions which are forbidden in his own country. And there lies the next paradox. In the law. How can something so fundamental be forbidden here and only over the border be allowed? He might think, "yeah I mean the law allows it here so it can't be that bad".

But my question is; how can someone do such a decision? Is it greed? Is it the American dream? Is it the free marked? Would he act the same way if his family worked there?

And this is why empathy has to be taught, in an early age already. I think.


And I'm sorry for this late reply.





There isn't, maybe there was before humanity.