Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

freshwest

(53,661 posts)
10. That's what I thought, too. Like give a course to each person who might not have planning skills and
Fri May 11, 2012, 02:00 PM
May 2012

Redistribute the wealth. A lot of this I guess is coming from the fact that there are around 9 billion people on Earth. And they are fighting over who owns what and currency or money, whatever, is a category representing real goods.

All these people, and how would they benefit from a one-time distribution? Would they squander it, continue to make wars with each other, steal from each other, still be fighting and killing and oppressing each other? Would the money change anything? Not that I would do those things if given a distribution, but what level of trust do we have?

I think part of the problem is that money is a social construct, that our financial system is built on trust, and we have people who disrespected that trust and decided to steal all they could. At this point, as always in history, it's theirs now and they'll kill anyone who tries to take it away from them, like all conquerors in history. Certainly Romney is of that ilk, in that he plundered and robbed whole communities and made himself so wealthy he believes he is now entitled to directly rule over us.

Although population may not be as much as issue, because we've always had disparities in less crowded eras. The human race has a lot of trouble regarding who gets to sit on what piece of real estate, as well. And you and I may not be realisitic about how societies are run. The human race has developed classes, possibly based on the supposition there may not be enough to support all of us or the conquest method.

So many humans have been and are kept in conditions I wouldn't keep a dog in, treated in ways no prisoner should ever be treated, and others get to live the life of ease and laugh at it.

There is a sense of peace in independent wealth, not beholden to whatever winds of change hit the political scene. We're seeing a collapse that was inevitable perhaps, based on available planetary resources, but I don't believe this had to happen. It's been out of balance a long time. We may not fairly call what happens a total collapse, because people like Romney, Greenspan, etc., live above the system we've worked all our lives to create to care for ourselves and our fellows.

Not that good an answer, just thoughts as to why a distribution of that may not work even if it was to come to pass. And this was a debt, wasn't it, too?

Our children or grandchildren will pay the bill for this in some form or fashion the way it is now. Perhaps this has always been the case, and the bill is not in dollars. It's in the kind of world and lives they will live. It's hard to see things outside the way we've been taught. I see no easy answers, but in getting older, I do wish to see more peace in the world.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Media»CORRECTION: Erin Burnett ...»Reply #10