[vtsnowedin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('onlooker', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('onlooker', '.').. As a result, billions of people are living without the very basic necessities of life - food, water, housing and sanitation."

[ralfy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', 'B')rought over from another thread as suggested.

This "relatively few" people keep talking about. Dose that include the 330 million Americans that have a median household income over $50K? How about the millions in the EU? Japan? China? I'm a very average American and I wouldn't consider myself a slave or even an economic slave. The poor third world is poor most often because they have socialist and dictatorial governments and economies.

[ralfy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', '
') Life is a yes or no question. You are alive or you are dead. As these billions are alive they then by definition do indeed have the "necessities of life" . These idiots are trying to define "necessities" as those that provide a "good life" or a dignified life" or an "adequate life" but all of those definitions vary a lot between the extremes of Beverly Hills Ca. and the Bedouins of the Sahara.
How many gallons of clean water do you suppose a housewife in Beverley hills uses to raise her first born child for the first year of it's life. How many gallons will a Bedouin fifteen year old bride have to devote to the same task?

[vtsnowedin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ralfy', '
')
Another source from the same article defines a member of the middle class as someone who earns more than $10 a day.

The problem with this definition is that $10 daily will likely cover only basic needs and not middle class conveniences, like the ones mentioned in the article (such as cars and refrigerators). Of course, if people buy on credit and layaway plans (which is what happened in the U.S. in the past, where factory workers could buy Model Ts), then it's possible for such a class to grow to such a level even with lower pay.

[vtsnowedin]

[quote="ralfy"

Following this definition:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_needs

perhaps one can assume basic needs to be what is needed for human beings to experience optimal health. [/quote]
Optimal health? That is a pretty high standard that has never been the world norm.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')At the very least, that will include a balanced diet and adequate calories as determined by medical authorities, drinking water of a quality and quantity determined by the same, adequate clothing and shelter, etc. Of course, the amounts vary given circumstances (such as climate, soil arability, etc.), but it's hard to explain, say, a daily calorie intake of around 3,000 or even more.

[ralfy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', '
')Buying with credit cards dose not increase purchasing power. It decreases it through the interest charges, as unlike the government all personnel bills eventually have to be paid. An item charged to a credit card often ends up costing three times as much as if it was purchased with cash. The exception to this is a home mortgage loan which lets you pay for a home while you live in it where the alternative would be to rent at almost the same monthly cost without gaining any equity in the house. A four or five percent mortgage interest (tax deductible) or even a four percent auto loan (non deductible) is a good thing on those items you have to provide anyway but a twenty five percent credit card for Christmas presents is not.

[ralfy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', '
')Optimal health? That is a pretty high standard that has never been the world norm.

[vtsnowedin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ralfy', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', '
')Optimal health? That is a pretty high standard that has never been the world norm.

[onlooker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ralfy', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', '
')Optimal health? That is a pretty high standard that has never been the world norm.

[ralfy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', 'I')f optimal health is the norm why are life expediencies not uniformly high throughout the world?

[vtsnowedin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ralfy', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', 'I')f optimal health is the norm why are life expediencies not uniformly high throughout the world?

[vtsnowedin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('onlooker', '
')I think V, you are conveniently missing or ignoring the point that a substantial difference exists between the quality of life or standard of living between rich country citizens and poor country citizens. That is the key point given the ratio of 20% have access to 80% of the world’s resources and vice-versa. So at best Capitalism has only benefitted 20% of the world's population

[onlooker]

That is not quite true V. First off, those people in whose regions had the basic necessities since pre-historic times. Plus if you look at the 20th century it has provided spectacular riches for quite a number of people. Why did just a few countries though truly partake in this and not others? Something very inequitable is happening. Well it turns out that what is happening is Capitalism is functioning exactly how it is suppose to function. It is about cut throat competition. It is about exploitation. Those few countries have gone about systematically exploiting the poor areas and peoples of the world.
Actually it started with the first Western Empires specifically Rome and then continued with Great Britain and its colonization of many areas and enslavement of Africans and invasions etc. Now it is done it a more subtle way, with economic coercion via Debt, sanctions, economic dictates from so called impartial International Institutions like the World Bank, IMF, World Trade Council and some others. In reality these Institutions do the bidding of the rich countries and in fact were set up to systematically exploit the entire planet. Thus we were all thrust into the age of Free Trade and Globalization to allow the transnational Corporations to seek out the highest returns by cutting costs. This is easy when all the worlds resources are at your disposal along with all the worlds workforce. Thus you make everyone bid down for the priviledge of having business with a transnational Corporation. Bidding down meaning allowing your country to be exploited to the max as that is what Corporations ultimately seek ie. the highest rate of return. So surely you are familiar with all this mode of operation it is Capitalism 101. It is might make right, in this case economic might. If you want to know how down and dirty all this got, just research by reading for starters "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" then research School of the Americas. I think you will find V, if you honestly look, how brutal the Western Neo Liberal Capitalistic model really is.
Govts are installed that invariably go against their own people because nobody likes to be abused and exploited. Well, who has monopoly on violent force. Yes Govts. and it has not been pretty in areas like South American, Middle East and Africa.

[ralfy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', '
') Goals vs. realities? What liberal idiot is setting the goals?

[ralfy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', '
') Yes I understand that a poor person in the USA is rich compared to the poor of say Bangladesh. My point is that several billion people living in those countries that have switched to capitalism are now doing much better then they were before and though they are not making western indulgent levels of income they have food on the table plus cloths on their backs and a roof over their families heads.

[onlooker]

23622159_10159634593505607_6087484539244216775_n.jpg

[KaiserJeep]

I could dispute every single line of the above as not necessarily related to Capitalism. However, the bottom line is that Capitalism, aka natural ape behaviors, extended by human intelligence and technology, has allowed a species of primate to increase it's numbers to 7.5+ billion, and to subjugate the other plants and animals and replace them with our food species.

We keep inventing means of killing one another, called Fascism, Communism, Socialism, etc. After the havoc these alternatives inflict, people get sick of death and destruction, and Capitalism spontaneously erupts from the ashes of whatever the latest experiment was, and the humans in that area start to flourish again.

There simply is no disputing the facts. By the standards that we applied for tens of thousands of years, Capitalism is the only success story there is. Whenever there was another experiment - usually a variation of some of the bogus economic theories of Marx and Engels, eventually bone chilling violence and human genocide was the result. Without any doubt whatsoever, Marxist systems have failed over three dozen times, and killed millions of humans. The only such system for which any controversy remains is China, and may I remind everyone that Mao Zedong starved over 60 million people to death in dissident provinces when he consolidated his political power? Nor is China Marxist any longer, it is a curious hybrid, both Authoritarian and Capitalistic.

It is only when one redefines "good" and "evil" that there is even room to raise questions about Capitalism, which is running up against the constraints of a limited planet. There simply is not enought "stuff", not enough food/water/energy/materials, to give 7.5+ billion humans the lifestyles of the older Capitalist Democracies.

But hey, it worked for us, and we got more than our share of that "stuff". But you can't blame Capitalism for the excess humans.

[Newfie]

Sadly each of those represent some small improvement against our biggest problem, over population.

Oh what conundrums we face.

[radon1]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('KaiserJeep', 'M')arxist systems have failed over three dozen times, and killed millions of humans. The only such system for which any controversy remains is China,

[onlooker]

No, Kaiser you cannot dispute the price for many of the "success " of Capitalism for a relatively few. Every single one of those items listing the deaths and killings of many is related to the insatiable profit motive, to the imperialistic tendency of the US with the backing of western Europe in its drive to enlarge its wealth and power consistent with Capitalistic ethos of their types of Economies. And the few others is related to the extremely unjust and unequal conditions made possible by Capitalism. 80% of the planet's population consuming 20% of resources and the other 20% ,80% of resources is the byproduct of Capitalism