Quote - NOTHING declares world-changing ambition like a space rocket

in #news6 years ago

The title quote is from an article in The Economist titled "The mega-rich have ambitious plans to improve the world. Should that be a cause for celebration or concern?"

They start by talking about all the wonderful things that Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Gates have done for the world and give glowing reviews of all the so called forward thinking accomplishments these people have made.

I do give The Economist a little credit for at least admitting "Although today’s philanthropists are more visible than those of previous generations, they account for less than a quarter of all charitable giving in America—which has remained roughly constant, at around 2% of GDP, for decades, according to David Callahan of Inside Philanthropy, a specialist website."

Is it truly trailblazing when it is profit motivated?

At no point in the article did they come close to explaining how reaching Mars is going to keep people from dying of starvation this year on earth?

I have never heard a single thing about how Facebook is going to make medical care cheaper and even though Mr. Gates has done a lot of work toward eradicating polio and malaria from the earth, the fact that every penny he spends helps make the extreme profits of the drug industry even higher and as of yet, have not managed to come close to eradicating either disease, leaves me to question are they truly trying to help or is there an ulterior motive.

Add in the fact that the less than 100 people who own 50% of the world are contributing less than 25% of charitable giving and I again have to question the motives.

Money is useless if you can't purchase anything with it

If you read the comments people leave around the internet, chances are good you have heard someone mention something along the line of "our economy has to be this way for it to work". I fully disagree with them.

I believe, the economy has to be this way to ensure only the very few will ever have the chance of having enough money to oppose those in power. Can I prove that? Of course not, but since the 2% of GDP has stayed reasonably constant while the number of ultra-rich has climbed, it is pretty obvious something is out of balance.

The definition of civilized society has changed

Throughout history, various groups have called themselves civilized society. Yet not a single civilized society has ensured the needs of the people are met before the desires of the ultra-rich. In my opinion, for a society to be called civilized, it must ensure that every worker can afford the necessities of life from their earnings.

This is not what has happened in our world.

Technological advances destroys jobs

I am sure few people will deny the fact that computers have done more to help advance technology than most people could image. But, have you ever known of a technological advance that actually created extra jobs? Technology is used to replace workers to save money for the companies. It is cheap to spend $XXXX number of dollars to buy a piece of equipment that requires one person to repair it occasionally than to pay XX number of people each week to do the job manually.

Every new technology signals the death warrant for the technology it replaces and ends up putting every person who used that technology out of work. That would be no big deal if every person who was replaced could be retrained to use the new technology, but when the goal is to reduce costs, the workers are the one who lose. Plus, even in the case where some workers can be retrained, not everyone is capable of being retrained within a reasonable amount of time, often requiring 4 years of schooling to be qualified for the new technology.

How many people do you know that can afford full time college after losing their paycheck? It is not unheard of for a new technology to replace large portions of the employees at every location that uses it.

The majority must come first!

Our economy is designed to make sure the rich gets richer and to take more and more power from the "lesser people". This must change or we will live in a world where the majority will have nothing and lose more and more rights.

Are alternate income sources going far enough

Slowly, new income sources are coming about that do not require you to work for someone else. Companies like Steemit are helping to change lives, but will it ever be enough? If I am honest, I have to say I don't know.

The number cruncher in me thinks it will change many lives in countries where the cost of living is much less than in America. But, it won't be as big of a help to people in America or any other country that has a similar cost of living.

When you think about what $100 will buy in America and compare it to what is will buy in a country where the average monthly income is only $200 and it is not hard to understand why the number cruncher in me feels this way.

Will being involved in multiple similar companies help? I can't answer that. All I can say for sure is Steemit offers more than just a monetary opportunity. I am not going anywhere, but I am starting to think I may need to seek other sources of income.

Sort:  

The answer is simple. Drop the assumption that a system of labor for money has to exist, that money itself has to exist. It doesn't.

Technology should free us, not impoverish us. But the fact of the matter is that in our monetary system we are slaves competing for work with our own tools, tools which we ourselves are improving all the time.

Unfortunately people have a hard time imagining a world without money, they think it's communism.

I don't think it is that simple and I don't think anyone who doesn't think it is that simple is a communist. Humans have one sense that no other animal on earth has. A sense of fairness. There problem with getting rid of all "reward systems" (that is what money is) is that there will always be some people who need to do various jobs.

While the number of people needed could be many, many times smaller than the current number of people working, without some sort of reward system, how long before the few doing those jobs will get upset and fight for fairness? Even a volunteer system cannot be sustained indefinitely. Eventually, there will come a time when the vast majority will not volunteer and the system will break down..

Plus, there is a part of humans that likes to be rewarded for their efforts. People do not respect things given to them nearly as much as things they work for. Can we change the idea of work to something different? Something that is not a necessity? Sure. But what happens when jealousy sets in and Sue thinks her creation is worth two of Mike's creation, not just one?

the point I am trying to make is without goals, without something to strive for and a reward system to go along with it, apathy sets in. People become unhappy. We don't need to do away with every type of reward system, we need to regulate the one we have with fairness, while working toward relieve the stress and pressures off people.

So nobody will do anything for anyone without thought of reward for themselves? Yup, that sounds like the typical reaponse from a market system supporter. All that means is that YOU wouldn't help people without rewards, but don't speak for humanity. One has to be incredibly short sighted to not at least try to contribute to a system that actually takes care of everybody. The "reward" is that everyone is taken care of. It's ok, just dismiss this, I can tell it's not getting through anyway.

OK, you have made it obvious that no matter what I say, I am wrong so have a nice life. Twisting my words doesn't bother me, it actually gives me a good laugh. So yes, as of this moment, I am dismissing YOU. The fact is, I was agreeing with you except for the fact that my ideas gets us to the exact same place, without killing off 93% of the worlds population. Your anger and apathy is already eating you from the inside out, so you sort of made my point.

Why don't you re-read this thing? I didn't twist anything around, you're the one who thought I said anyone who disagrees is a communist. And I gave you that attitude not because you were rude, but because I was annoyed at you not getting it and frankly you'd be annoyed too if you had explained these things to as many people as I have only for it to go over their heads almost every time.

https://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com/education/

That link has a free pdf you can download that explains everything far better than I've explained. I suggest you give it a read, it's a pretty long read but it's worth it.

Sorry, I have no need to read it yet again. I have tried to have an intelligent conversation with literally hundreds of people that jump first and ask questions later on this subject. I have been called every name in the book by people like you. It does nothing but prove to me you have little understanding of people. Perhaps you understand a small portion of the whole of humanity, but if your plans are to only bring the select few to your utopia, you will fail. You are not winning minds to your views by treating people like you are so far superior to them. Perhaps the most damning thing about those of you I have spoke with is, not a single one has been able to tell me how you plan to make this happen without killing off a large portion of the human race.

Ok, have fun with your point of view on life, that nothing can be done to change the system so we must just kill mpst people. Lead by example though, get us started, yeah?

Congratulations @fernowl13! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

Award for the number of posts published

Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honor on SteemitBoard.

To support your work, I also upvoted your post!
For more information about SteemitBoard, click here

If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

Upvote this notification to help all Steemit users. Learn why here!

In the current economic system the slaves, feed, clothe and house themselves while the money masters skim the fruits of their labor. Until fractional reserve is replaced we will always get stuck in this same situation because it requires that debt must always increase just to sustain the system.

As for sources of income, we are going through a rough patch here on Steemit. Largely due to the overall correction in crypto's. I knew we were due but I called it early a few times.

Things could stay down for six months to a year or more. Or they could start going back up tomorrow. Those of us that continue to build while things are hard will be in a prime position when things start to turn back up.

I agree with you on both points. Steemit, will be fine. It will go up and down just like all the other cryptos. But I don't think Steemit, by itself solves all the problems. It is a small part of the solution and change is not going to happen overnight.

The depth of you comprehension is awesome. The uber rich do not spend there riches on making money, but on acquiring power. Thus they spend a lot of money on bribery. That being the case there is a tool the regular person has to fight the B.S. It is called American Jurisprudence in America and known as common law in Europe. https://www.nationallibertyalliance.org/ has a great free course in civics and we need people just like you.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.20
TRX 0.12
JST 0.028
BTC 65682.90
ETH 3579.50
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.51