Hello everybody who reads this! I was thinking about our economic system and I realised that one man growing richer always causes another becoming poorer. Do you think this is just how world economics worked, works and will work? At this moment, the Western world is at a point that things are going to change: The Asian countries are becoming richer while America and Europe are having growing debts, which will lead to their bankruptcy. Isn't it possible for mankind to just share the richness of Earth at some time? I am curious to your thoughts about this matter...
humans are by nature greedy and want to be better than their neighbours, therefore equality for all (true communism) cannot work.
But I think humans are still evolving to more and more social beings. More and more we want to be part of a society, we want to know what's going on and we want to be able to communicate with a growing group of other people. A little group of cavemen have evolved in to population of a village, the village became a city, the cities became a country, the countries became a union. The Internet united people all over the world... Maybe we will learn some day to prefer the good of mankind above the good of one man. Or am I wrong, and will we always live in a cycle of rich and poor..?
Has been for all life on the planet... "Survival of the fittest" as Nature calls it. Greed is just a manifestation of this concept and even shows in other beings on the planet. Dominant males having a Harem of women is the best example of "Greed" at work in other Species. If you truly want "equality" to work then we have to de-evolve into insects such as bees and/or ants. But equality for these species come at a high price... individuality and "being different" is highly discouraged in these species' societies, for they actually kill deformed or handicapped larvae as they develop. And being the colony's Queen is also not that great, for when you can no longer sustain the colony (by producing eggs) the entire colony stings/bites you to death, yeouch~!
greed is not prevalent in other species, they live in harmony with their environments. Humans are about the only species that appears to be incapable of doing so.
What about the dominant Elephant seal male and his Harem or ten or so females? Also some species of birds actually engage in infanticide, where a new male mating with a widowed female bird would throw off the female's still developing eggs from her former/previous male partner. This point I can agree with as man does ravage the land. But the crown of thorns Starfish is another... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_of_thorns_starfish .. that devastates its environment. However man still takes the cake as man also caused and still is causing the extinction of both Flora and fauna.... and had things gone way worse (if man didn't learn anything from the Holocaust) man would have also caused the extinction of itself. RFE: Added the bit about birds committing infanticide.
I think other species, most if not all, are still capable of greed. It's just that, yes, they are harmonious with their environment that it doesn't upset the balance. Humans, on the other hand, are perfectly capable of adapting to a wide range of environments to suit their needs. It's like putting a group of apex predators inside a delicate habitat. It upsets everything.
Humans DO NOT adapt to their environment... Humans adapt the environment to fit their needs. The only humans who "truly" adapt to their environment are Nomadic tribes.
A minor detail, but point taken. Actually, no. Both can happen. The human race as a whole can change its environment. Cities, parks, industrial spaces and whatnot. A human or a group of humans can live anywhere with a reasonable amount of resource to use in its environment. E.g. In the past, f they live someplace cold, they can make coats out of animal pelts. However, like I said, it's a relatively minor detail. Plus, we're going off-topic.
I think capitalism allows each human to grow independently with ability to exercise their rights. As far as any type of environment it at least produces enough monetary gain. Ya'll know about fiscal earnings and such I hope. Besides labor is not truly equal.
Why are people so hung up on "equality"? People can never truly be equal, so what's the point in chasing after such a stupid thing? All it does is drag people down and limit them; it doesn't actually promote growth at all, it's greed and competition that does that.
Things could have gone differently after the end of the second World War, or even after the Cold War. But thankfully things went through a "good" but not perfect path. Just look at how the media (Television, movies and even videogames) has come up with the many possibilities. What if Hitler and the Nazis have won? What if Russia didn't fall apart? The thing is, these events "had to happen" for man to see/learn how much maddened we had become.
Thanks for your opinions about this complicated subject! I didn't mean to say that everybody has to be equal in abilities and resources, it's just this: On one side of the globe lives a small group of people who have so much resources that they don't know what to do with it, while at the other side a way bigger group works ten times as hard, but earns hardly enough to feed their families. That's what I meant when I wondered if mankind is doomed to live in an ultracapitalistic world where one part of the population does all the work and the other part lives in extreme luxury... Do you think this is going to change in the future, or is this just te way human society works?
Who knows? Maybe when mankind gets over itself in thinking "we are teh superior species and everything else is below us", then maybe there is hope. But then as I said, such "human traits" go beyond human society. For example in wolf packs, it is always the "Alpha male & female" who gets first dibs and the leftovers are meant for the Omega wolf (the lowest member of the pack) and the pups. Having "Prestige" is earned through strength, for us humans it is with wealth, knowledge or Political will.
Lots of edginess and stupidity in this thread. It's fit for r/atheism. At its core, the economy is a system for the allocation of resources to meet people's wants and needs. Capitalism is the most efficient format we have. Read up on Adam Smith and the invisible hand. Not true. All production of wealth traces its roots to use of natural resources, from which nobody becomes poorer (unless you're one of those hippies that believe in "Mother Gaia" or whatever). Nations don't go "bankrupt" the same way that individuals and corporations do. When they run out of money, they can print or borrow more - it's just that these come with other problems. Dude you're hilarious. You act as though mankind has some sort of collective consciousness. Like, we realised that "hey we're gonna kill ourselves" and just decided to stop. Everything IS below us. It's not that the developed world has resources while the undeveloped world doesn't. It's that we have wealth generated from resources. One part of the population does all the work and the other doesn't? Speak for yourself. Developed nations work at innovation and investment, which are crucial for economic growth.
with or without technology? Take away human technology and you'll find that humans are far from apex predators.
