Poverty doesn't need to exist

[Lord_Butters_I]

{Scrubbed}

[thubby]

you can also dredge up throngs of responses with evidence against everything the movie talks about.
fully electrical cars have more problems than I'm sure you're considering.
magnetic trains are very expensive to build and maintain, i don't know where the idea that a lack of moving parts somehow makes things easier. monorails and their ilk break much more easily because their equipment is much more sensitive.
genetically manipulated plants take more land for less yield.
if you knew engineering, you'd know the absurdity of spanning the oceans with tunnels.
and no, we can't live in some eutopia. humans are too selfish and greedy. in such an innocent society but one corrupt person would run roughshod, and as the movie itself tries to show, the world is full of them.

[LCR]

Electric cars, while generally a good idea, suffer from the fact that they still need electricity. Which has to be generated. Which in turn requires either coal to be burnt or nuclear power plants to be built, neither of which is particularly environmentally friendly. While there are alternatives like harnessing solar or wind energy (or geothermal energy), those are just not cost-efficient right now.
Magnetic trains are really grand, except that they, too, need energy and are so hellishly expensive that Germany, while having the necessary technology available, couldn't even decide on having tracks connecting the Munich airport to the inner city built.
All manufacturing and most service jobs can be done by machines? I seriously doubt that. And even if that would be possible, what would you do with all the people that got pushed out of their work by Robby Robot?
Genetically optimized plants are a joke. You don't even know the long-term effects of those on the ecological system, barring the huge problems we already have with monoculture.
About the monetary system: Sure, it has its flaws. Do you have a better idea, short of centrally planned economy?
I don't think so.

[thubby]

Electric cars, while generally a good idea, suffer from the fact that they still need electricity. Which has to be generated. Which in turn requires either coal to be burnt or nuclear power plants to be built, neither of which is particularly environmentally friendly.

well...power plants are more efficient than cars.

[Yarram]

Yeah poverty doesn't need to exist at all. Bill Gates has enough money to buy all the land, and EVERYTHING, this is cars phones televisions toothbrushes and absolutely everything in the entire of New South Wales. (For all you foreign types, NSW covers about 1/5 of Australia)
Is it madness?
Is it madness?!
Well yes... But if you were a multi-billionaire would you give up your hard earned billions for people you've never met? Probably. But most wouldn't.
The problem with the world, is everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others. If people in poverty had an education, poverty wouldn't exist. It's not a question of electric cars and buying food for poverty stricken people. They need to get educated.
It doesn't matter how much money you give a Derro. They will always remain a Derro because they don't know how to do anything else, and they're too lazy to do anything else.

[thubby]

derro? :smallconfused:

[dish]

I'm guessing it comes from 'derelict' aka 'tramp'.

[Emperor Tippy]

You have no idea what you are talking about. I can't go into much more detail on these forums because of the rules against personal attacks and discussing politics but suffice it to say that you have no understanding of the material science involved in what you propose or the effects of poverty or the lack their of on human society.

You don't understand history, psychology, sociology, human nature, or science. Once you actually understand some of the above, and if you still maintain your absurd idea, then we can discuss it.

[Spiryt]

I must agree with Tippy.

This all sound very nice, but nothing in the world is in 1/100 as easy as you are describing.

And Zeitgeist is movie about conspiracy theories. It isn't very good source for such discussion.

The great Evil conspiracy behind goverments is always nice thing to put the blame on.
But ithe word isn't D&D, you know.

[Gitman00]

It's not a question of electric cars and buying food for poverty stricken people. They need to get educated.

Bingo. Feed the starving, and what will they do? Breed. Thus increasing the population, and the amount of food needed to feed them. Just feeding the hungry will not solve the problem of starvation. They need to be educated about, among other things, birth control.

Any utopian society would depend, ultimately, on people not being bastards. That's why many ideas for a utopian society look great on paper, but would never work in reality. Human beings are selfish, evil, and destructive. It's inherent to our very nature, common to every single one of us, and no solution for that can be found in this world.

Fortunately, there is a solution if we look beyond this world. Unfortunately, discussing it here would violate forum rules. :smallwink:

[Yarram]

You have no idea what you are talking about. I can't go into much more detail on these forums because of the rules against personal attacks and discussing politics but suffice it to say that you have no understanding of the material science involved in what you propose or the effects of poverty or the lack their of on human society.

You don't understand history, psychology, sociology, human nature, or science. Once you actually understand some of the above, and if you still maintain your absurd idea, then we can discuss it.

That was a bit patronising =P. No need to sound scathing.

Yeah Derro = Derelict which is the same as a bum for you probably.


Bingo. Feed the starving, and what will they do? Breed. Thus increasing the population, and the amount of food needed to feed them. Just feeding the hungry will not solve the problem of starvation. They need to be educated about, among other things, birth control.

Any utopian society would depend, ultimately, on people not being bastards. That's why many ideas for a utopian society look great on paper, but would never work in reality. Human beings are selfish, evil, and destructive. It's inherent to our very nature, common to every single one of us, and no solution for that can be found in this world.

Fortunately, there is a solution if we look beyond this world. Unfortunately, discussing it here would violate forum rules. :smallwink:

Exactly! We just finished studying Utopias in Ext. English last term. =D
Utopia would only work if people weren't wang-doodles.

[truemane]

First of all, poverty will ALWAYS exist because it is, by definition a relative state. The poorest welfare bum living in a trailer park has more luxury today than high-ranking nobility in the Middle Ages. He's got indoor plumbing, heated water, a televsion, a phone, etc. BUT the poor welfare bum doesn't have as much stuff as the Middle Class guy. SO he's poor. It's relative.

If you feed everyone and give them all everything they need then the people with the least will be poor and the people with the most will be rich. The ONLY solution to that problem is to make sure everyone has exactly the same amount of everything. Which is problematic at best and absurd at worst and can't take into account non-material wealth like prestige and social/ political influence and fame. So it's a dead end.

Secondly, it's not that people are evil. It's just that they're not as selfless as people seem to want. And most utopias seem to define perfection as a state in which everyone is perfectly selfless and wants nothing and needs nothing. If you define perfection in that way, then by definition there will never be perfection. I could just as easily describe a perfect society as one in which everyone gets exactly what they deserve and one which is perfectly fair. And that could be Free Market Capilatism.

Depends on your definitions.

[Emperor Tippy]

This all sound very nice, but nothing in the world is in 1/100 as easy as you are describing.
1/100? Try 1/1,000,000. Or worse. Making an under the ocean tunnel from LA to Tokyo (easier than what the OP proposed) would require significant advances in material sciences. You would have an easier time building an Arcology than you would that tunnel.


The great Evil conspiracy behind goverments is always nice thing to put the blame on.
But ithe word isn't D&D, you know.

That doesn't mean that there isn't a great evil conspiracy though. :smalltongue:


That was a bit patronising =P. No need to sound scathing.
The OP deserves a scathing response.

He goes on about electric cars but never seems to realize that they cause more total pollution than a Hummer (those batteries are down right nasty). No super capacitor has been created that can approach the energy needed to power a car for a similar distance to a full tank of gas.

If he is going to go on about such things he should at least do his research, the MAGIC engine (runs on magnesium and water, causes no pollution) is a much better choice than an all electric car.

The reasons for starvation are many and varied but a large part of it is that the food has to be transported in from places like the US because the area just isn't secure enough to set up farms on location. Africa could be turned into the bred basket of the world but it would require a secure area, and that won't happen until some nation is willing to impose security. That won't happen for at least another hundred years, prolly longer.

[Yarram]

First of all, poverty will ALWAYS exist because it is, by definition a relative state. The poorest welfare bum living in a trailer park has more luxury today than high-ranking nobility in the Middle Ages. He's got indoor plumbing, heated water, a televsion, a phone, etc. BUT the poor welfare bum doesn't have as much stuff as the Middle Class guy. SO he's poor. It's relative.


We're also talking about the poor Africans that don't have clean water, electricity or a home... They have it ALOT worse than high-ranking nobility in the Middle Ages.

[Lord Tataraus]

Well, I can't add much, though truemane hit on a really important fact, poor is relative. The Soviet Union had poor people, China has poor people, but they are places where everyone is supposed to be equal, but the fact of the matter is everyone is not equal. And if someone says that's just being pesimestic or a bent understanding due to society or whatever, explain to me how an IQ 160-something Ph.D. engineer is equal to my down syndrome friend who went to high school until he was 21? Those people aren't equal, the down syndrome boy is slow and has some amount of dependency and will never reach a Ph.D. status.

I will agree that there is a fair amount of corruption in the world and if that corruption was removed for a few years a lot of people's lives would be improved. However, you then run into issues of who is corrupt? Some people think PETA are a bunch of angels while others say they are a terrorist group (as an example most people should recognize, and if you think they are angels, open your eyes a bit).

As for the monetary system, well, that is probably the worst sort of corruption in the world today, and unfortunately every single political person who tried to stand up to it got shot (though some survived). Usury was made illegal for a reason, it destroys the economy and as it being the basis of the economy, depressions are expected. So, because of this current depression I can see why people start clinging to Utopian promises, but that's just avoiding the real problem that the power in the world lies in the bankers' hands.

[Spiryt]

First of all, poverty will ALWAYS exist because it is, by definition a relative state. The poorest welfare bum living in a trailer park has more luxury today than high-ranking nobility in the Middle Ages. He's got indoor plumbing, heated water, a televsion, a phone, etc. BUT the poor welfare bum doesn't have as much stuff as the Middle Class guy. SO he's poor. It's relative.


I think you're oversimplifing it. Yes, boom can watch television, but he doesn't have a great piece of unspoiled natural land where he can hunt with friends and servants whenever he wants, for example. Not to mention other things.

Aside from the fact that the changes in life often act in two ways, some things hadn't changed too much.

Besides maybe I'm living in some totally different world, but bums doesn't usually have television here.

[Destichado]

We're also talking about the poor Africans that don't have clean water, electricity or a home... They have it ALOT worse than high-ranking nobility in the Middle Ages.

But in most cases, those that have not been driven off their lands by war have it better than their own ancestors. In many cases they will not say so, in large part because the past always looks brighter than it really was, but when you look at available conveniences, access to trade goods and technology and base-level education, it's usually indisputable. The world *is* moving forward. So at what arbitrary point do you stop and say "this no longer poverty"?

[Dallas-Dakota]

Oh sure, its a plausible answer, but the truth is, humanity sucks and this won't work, even if you get toghetter a group to work on it, the 'superrich' group will band toghetter to beat the **** out of you and put you in jail or get you killed.

Sorry man, hope is just to optimistic.

[bosssmiley]

Political video adspam is not welcome here. Reported. :smallmad:

PS: sunk costs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunk_cost). You might want to think about these before going off on a quixotic quest to rebuild most of the world's infrastructure from scratch. :smallannoyed:

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff of Moddingham: Real world politics and religion are inappropriate topics for this forum.