Must everyone be rich.

@Darksideinthenight2 one cannot think outside the box in a communist society

@DeWayfarer You don't have to... I did follow the thread and my previous message is a summary of your ideas as I perceived them.
I'll copy and past my summary here:
That does not suggest any alternative system to me. At worst it seems like you're a closet revolutionary (anarchist) or at best that you're ok to let nature take its own course.

If you feel I have perceived you wrongly, then my power of comprehension and your ability to explain yourself properly may both be limited.

@chilloutab2

@DeWayfarer The same to you, too! 😊

@notyouraveragedummy 👍

@Entwistle When humans didn't have money, we had something that we used instead, which was an approximation of money... the barter economy was also based on what had intrinsic value for people involved in transactions... economics has always existed since primitive times.
We innovated to survive because innovators got their due in society.

Would Mozart have been Mozart without Austrian royal patronage? Would art, literature, etc. have flourished without someone footing the bill? Whether Da Vinci or Michelangelo? The answer is no.... the historical precedent is clear - human endeavour has been predicated on economic power

Capitalism is the default position of all living things - demand and supply.
The best way to move forward is not to replace capitalism but refine it... and that can only be done by creating better individuals.... by turning more towards humanism.
Communism is anti-humanistic

@chilloutab2 I've never mentioned communism.
Creating,making and sharing what's required is the way forward.
Letting people starve because that have no paper or metal discs to give in return is pathetic.
You aren't thinking it through.

@Entwistle @Entwistle Creating, making and sharing is already happening... as it has always happened and always will. That is how society has always functioned.

And by what mechanism do we stop people who do not have money from starving? Is it by charity... would that charity be forced in that case... like someone with a gun or stick mandating how much each of us has to shell out from our income in charity?

And then, what happens after we give the starving their 4 square meals? that's like the fish that feeds them for a day... what happens when we no longer have fishes to give and we've not taught them to fish either? Who feeds them for their lifetime, then?

Starvation and poverty is not simply about poor redistribution of resources... it's more often about under-creation of value.
I know exactly what I'm talking about coz I come from a "third-world" country... the problem is way more complex than to simply approach it with feelings and an outraged conscience.

I'm assuming you're from the US... so would you do something that is really required - press for the removal of all import tariffs on goods coming to the US from "third-world" countries? Coz that's a concrete step towards removing poverty.
Would you Americans also make it super easy for qualified people from under-developed countries to access your job markets and bar under-qualified people from entering your land? Coz that's another thing that would help reduce poverty.

But neither of these two important initiatives are happening.. as that would require a huge sacrifice from the "haves" of the world.
Instead, we have arm chair pundits with hurt consciences clamouring for "redistribution" and "sharing" to assuage their guilt.

@CestManan Jeff Bezos needs that much. Who are you to question him? /Sarcasm.

Yes, this is why I now propose nukes.

@HannaM it is a myth. There are very few people starving nowadays. If you research about poor drinking water it is because locals do not make an effort and are usually in the hands of petty corrupted dictators.

@chilloutab2 my point is based on your first submission. If we are all rich. We will only help for helping sack and no one will have to be a slave to the other.

@HannaM We can help for helping's sake even now, when everyone is not rich, but people don't. Why? Coz that's how human beings are. Making everyone rich woudl not inherently change the human being as an animal.
The real change is changing people. not changing the economy - and changing people takes millennia.

As for being slaves to others, that is also an inherent human trait - trying to impose ourselves on others and on our surroundings. you don't have to be rich or poor to do or not do it.

@notyouraveragedummy I'll do it. Someone has to man up and bring about Armageddon.

Then poof!

No mankind means no problems and no worries! 😆

@hunkalove its very much disturbing. At least everyone should be able to have a comfortable life.

@HannaM And that is happening... gradually.
Almost everyone these days has a more comfortable life than their great grandfather's generation. There are more heathy and well-fed people on the planet today than there were, say, 75 years ago.

@RogueLoner Not arguing. I don't see why you can't partially disagree with someone on a topic you care about these days without it being an argument, but alright.

I am aware you said 40 years ago, but I was refering to it being at least somewhat exploitative back then and today if not properly compensated with proper conditions for workers.

Plus, I think they had specialized farming machines back then. But I don't know much about that.

Just think 1982 was not ancient history in the scheme of things.

Either way, carry on.

@RogueLoner Lol. I'm with you on that part.

@swirlie In a way yes but there is a limit.