The Rich and Poor Gap
-
hi all i'm quite new here.. but after looking at some very interesting threads started by many of u here.. i kinda wanna give a try too lol..
this topic tat i start has been around for many ages... many ppl in most countries wanna close the gap between the rich and the poor.. but is it possible?is the situation happening in Singapore?
how poor is poor actually? no $$ buy toto/4d/sportsbetting? no meals to eat? no place to live? no car to drive? is squeezing with many ppl in the bus or train = poor? many singaporeans complainted poor but when coe $2 the car market soar..
imagine there is a country with a very close income gaps between rich and poor..... so meaning lesser 'poor' ppl and lesser 'rich' ppl.. but i somehow couldn't explain the feeling tat i had... >> if there is no poor ppl... who willing to do those 'Hardcore' jobs? if no rich ppl who's gonna build up an economy? if all rich citizens = first world country then all poor ppl = third world country?
to say it bluntly.. the rich need the poor and the poor need the rich.. so means when there r rich ppl there will definitely have poor ppl...
how abt this scenario>> philipines and indonesia and our nearby southeast asia countries become developed countries... u think their citizens wan come work here in sg as maids, cleaners, pro, workers???? so then wad will happen??
how abt blagadesh become a nation something like singapore? then who's gonna build our buildings here in sg? can we the singaporeans with our golden hands do the work that they come here to help us do?
give some constructive comments pls
-
"From the moment when the machine first made its appearance it was clear to all thinking people that the need for human drudgery, and therefore to a great extent for human inequality, had disappeared. If the machine were used deliberately for that end, hunger, overwork, dirt, illiteracy, and disease could be eliminated within a few generations.... But it was also clear that an all-round increase in wealth threatened the destruction -- indeed, in some sense was the destruction -- of a hierarchical society. In a world in which everyone worked short hours, had enough to eat, lived in a house with a bathroom and a refrigerator, and possessed a motor-car or even an aeroplane, the most obvious and perhaps the most important form of inequality would already have disappeared. If it once became general, wealth would confer no distinction....For if leisure and security were enjoyed by all alike, the great mass of human beings who are normally stupefied by poverty would become literate and would learn to think for themselves; and when once they had done this, they would sooner or later realize that the privileged minority had no function, and they would sweep it away. In the long run, a hierarchical society was only possible on a basis of poverty and ignorance... Therefore, from the point of view of the new groups who were on the point of seizing power, human equality was no longer an ideal to be striven after, but a danger to be averted." -George Orwell, Nineteen Eight-Four
As a work of fiction, it is an excellent critique of society then, even today's society.
That is why globalisation has wrecked the economies of Third World countries and has worsened the income inequality between the First World and the Third. More pertinently, if the establishment wanted relieve human suffering (Yeah, right...and threaten their position), it could easily be done. There is a perpetual amount of energy in geothermal sources, information suppressed. The world has a surplus of food, again suppressed. And if we use our huge technological capability, manuel labour would be done by machines, eradicating the need for human labour. But then, that would mean the end of the monetary system, the end of political power, even though Humanity would have reached its zenith.
-
as for now, we already can't stop globalisation.... and singapore better pray her neighbouring countries dun flourish.. haha
well.. i only know if u wanna be in the 'rich ppl' grp u have to strive hard and stop wanting to have easy life.. if wan easy life can go countries like new zealand etc.. get yurself a farm and start planting yur own food.. got meat everyday also.. good life
or if u guys wan earn big $$ can go Dubai.. the waiter/cleaner there earn around $20sgd/hr... but remember dun live in 'selangon galens' there cause the residents there will look down on u.. becos the foreign workers' dorm there make their property look cheaper.. haha
oh ya they dun like foreigners smell either same as us too they like smell of money only.. -
as for now, we already can't stop globalisation
Some arguments against that:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2006/mar/05
http://www.opinionasia.org/Institutional
http://www.stwr.org/globalization/2008-the-demis
http://www.amazon.com/End-Globalization-Strate
There are arguments for everything you know.
-
there will always be critiques and arguments and debates for each theories,model or ideas.. just like E=MC2 only until recently then they confirm its true.. lol
anyway i stating we can't stop globalisation in sg.. for our free trade ports and our massive imports and our advanced technology.. its hard to even stop all of these and go back our kampung days.. globalisation in sg already started even be4 our ah kong ah ma come here work liao.. during days of british coloney..
alamak this topic not abt globalisation lah.. off topic liao..
ok as bro freedomclub has posted the article... heirarchry will 'sibeh jia lat' if all ppl hold almost the same wealth lvl... then lets discuss>> who wans to be in the lower part of the heiarachy???
obviously noone lah... then wad factors will determine our role in our hierarchical society?
-
Originally posted by starhawk:
as for now, we already can't stop globalisation.... and singapore better pray her neighbouring countries dun flourish.. haha
well.. i only know if u wanna be in the 'rich ppl' grp u have to strive hard and stop wanting to have easy life.. if wan easy life can go countries like new zealand etc.. get yurself a farm and start planting yur own food.. got meat everyday also.. good life
or if u guys wan earn big $$ can go Dubai.. the waiter/cleaner there earn around $20sgd/hr... but remember dun live in 'selangon galens' there cause the residents there will look down on u.. becos the foreign workers' dorm there make their property look cheaper.. haha
oh ya they dun like foreigners smell either same
as us too they like smell of money only..$20 dollar /hr?
minus their taxs, the cost of living
left at the most $2 per hour
-
No article. Merely quoting from Nineteen Eight-Four.
Obviously, the most prominent determinent of social status is wealth. Just think, what differentiates you from, for instance, LKY? Education, family name, morals (I assume, haha), the list can go on and on.
But my point was, Humanity has the means to abolish this hierarchy that breeds inequality and suffering, if people would only wake up and realise it.
-
Originally posted by youyayu:
$20 dollar /hr?
minus their taxs, the cost of living
left at the most $2 per hour
ya lo ya lo...imagine how cham our blangala frens earns here...
come here still get scold dirty
-
Originally posted by freedomclub:
No article. Merely quoting from Nineteen Eight-Four.
Obviously, the most prominent determinent of social status is wealth. Just think, what differentiates you from, for instance, LKY? Education, family name, morals (I assume, haha), the list can go on and on.
But my point was, Humanity has the means to abolish this hierarchy that breeds inequality and suffering, if people would only wake up and realise it.
ya~ yur point makes it clearer.. so now the qns is...>>>>> is this social hiearachry man-made? natural developed? or GOD's idea?is it like the yin-yang thingy? or the balance of nature thingy?
if its meant to be there for balancing, wad consequences if we topple the balance?
if its not meant for balancing, y its there???
-
if everyone has the same lvl of wealth there'd still be people to do sai kang one la
nobody sweep floor = demand for cleaners up
then wages will go up ma
then one cleaner earning 1 mil per year is not impossible le leh
-
then this social heiarachy is good or bad one???
if it's there.. there r ppl suffering
if it's not there.. also ppl suffering
dun say demand for cleaner lor... there wun be demand cos the govt also earning same level of pay.. who can afford cleaners?? -.-
-
me dun wan to pay so much for cleaner
so me thinks this hierachy thingy is good
hurhur
but
those at the bottom de shud not be living way below the poverty standard la
过得去 liddat can le
-
empty pockets never held anyone back.
Only empty hearts & empty heads can do that.
-
so wad is consider 过得去??
my fren say he very poor.no $$ change his comp.. his comp damn slow and his d/ling speed also slow so cannot watch his porn..
my next door neighbour auntie keep gossiping with my mum.. say everything price rise she not enough $$ buy groceries and toto and 4D and play mahjong.....
my cousin thinks char siew rice is a low class meal -.- ... my poor uncle
i'm sure there r some ppl who dun have internet or comp or tv but have a house to live in and 3 meals(chu cha dan fan) daily to eat >> r they consider under poor?
no aircon at home = poor?
my neighbour have maids, i dun have = inequality?
i squeeze in bus and mrt while my fren drives to work = suffering?
ppl fighting to live comfortably = poor?
ppl fighting to survive = poor?
so far i haven't hear news abt ppl dying of hunger in singapore... means singapore no poverty?
is the rich poor gap in sg smaller than other countries?
lai lai give constructive comments :)
-
Originally posted by ChoCoChips:
if everyone has the same lvl of wealth there'd still be people to do sai kang one la
nobody sweep floor = demand for cleaners up
then wages will go up ma
then one cleaner earning 1 mil per year is not impossible le leh
The reason you say that is because you cannot imagine a world without a monetary system that abolishes all present forms of hierarchy and a world where Humanity's technology is used for the social good instead of being used by the military-industrial complex. Would there even be a need for manual labour if machines to do? If money didn't exist, then the enormous resources of the world could be distributed to everyone without consideration to cost (because it wouldnt exist), and be geared towards human need.
-
You follower of Communism?
-
hmm.. this topic like not hot thread...
later i go start another thread on the mumbai and thailand protest killings..
catch me there~~
-
Originally posted by freedomclub:
The reason you say that is because you cannot imagine a world without a monetary system that abolishes all present forms of hierarchy and a world where Humanity's technology is used for the social good instead of being used by the military-industrial complex. Would there even be a need for manual labour if machines to do? If money didn't exist, then the enormous resources of the world could be distributed to everyone without consideration to cost (because it wouldnt exist), and be geared towards human need.
cannot exist one la
if all got same amount of wealth,
then eberione will sure fight for other things which puts them higher than the rest one
maybe world leader/s or sth.
unless everybody dies. then no more hierarchy to speak of le.
and just to guai lan abit
who's gonna maintain the machines?
maybe there'll be maintenance machines to maintain them machines
but who maintains the maintenance machines?
Originally posted by starhawk:so wad is consider 过得去??
my fren say he very poor.no $$ change his comp.. his comp damn slow and his d/ling speed also slow so cannot watch his porn..
my next door neighbour auntie keep gossiping with my mum.. say everything price rise she not enough $$ buy groceries and toto and 4D and play mahjong.....
my cousin thinks char siew rice is a low class meal -.- ... my poor uncle
i'm sure there r some ppl who dun have internet or comp or tv but have a house to live in and 3 meals(chu cha dan fan) daily to eat >> r they consider under poor?
no aircon at home = poor?
my neighbour have maids, i dun have = inequality?
i squeeze in bus and mrt while my fren drives to work = suffering?
ppl fighting to live comfortably = poor?
ppl fighting to survive = poor?
so far i haven't hear news abt ppl dying of hunger in singapore... means singapore no poverty?
is the rich poor gap in sg smaller than other countries?
lai lai give constructive comments :)
有瓦�头
å�ƒå¾—饱 or at least 饿ä¸�æ»
that is the bare minimum to not be poor lo imo
simi char siew rice low class la
no aircon la
no new comp la
if u are worrying about that instead of where to find money so that u can pay ur rent or even settle tml's meals hor,
u are definitely not poor.
-
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:
You follower of Communism?
Communism still maintained the monetary system and political hierarchy just like our great Democracy. This is totally different while using the earth's natural resources to further humane goals instead of corporate agendas of profit and power consolidation. For instance, if a community needs to build a geothermal energy reactor to work towards energy independence, instead of asking "How much does it cost?", we ask "Will it benefit the community?" and then "Do we have the necessary resources?". Rather than falling into divisive political labels that enable the establishment to divide and rule, why work to promote the social good (a humane-oriented society and worldview), instead of adopting the bullshitty and fraudulent left-right paradigm and consolidating the statist system.
-
Originally posted by ChoCoChips:
cannot exist one la
if all got same amount of wealth,
then eberione will sure fight for other things which puts them higher than the rest one
maybe world leader/s or sth.
unless everybody dies. then no more hierarchy to speak of le.
and just to guai lan abit
who's gonna maintain the machines?
maybe there'll be maintenance machines to maintain them machines
but who maintains the maintenance machines?
Thats based on mentality in a monetary system where competition and self-preservation totally preoccupies people. When scarcity has been eradicated, peoples' mentality will change. In a society of abundance, abberant behaviour will mostly disappear because the drive for money that causes complex social neurosis is gone. Of course, in such a system, political power disappears and our elites, the world elites, wouldnt want that. Thats why the education system and society in general has been conditioned to think within this box, and to help the elite maintain their power. In other words, social engineering, which Edward Bernays, the person who coined "public opinion" wrote:
"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organised habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democractic society"
On the technical issue of maintainance, I dont know. Neither do you, or anyone else for that matter. But given that supercomputers have breached the petaflop level and quantum computing is becoming a reality, it wouldnt be a problem. The real challenge that must be overcomed is the elites' resistance eroding their power and the psychological barrier that self-proclaimed defenders of the status quo has (for instance, your own mentality).
-
Originally posted by starhawk:
ya~ yur point makes it clearer.. so now the qns is...>>>>> is this social hiearachry man-made? natural developed? or GOD's idea?is it like the yin-yang thingy? or the balance of nature thingy?
if its meant to be there for balancing, wad consequences if we topple the balance?
if its not meant for balancing, y its there???
The monetary system, initially, was the natural result of scarcity. When goods are scarce, people put value on them. But in today's technological society, scarcity could be eliminated, removing the need for money. But by now, money is used as a tool of economic warfare by the elites on those being ruled. The fractional reserve banking system creates money through debt. Hence, bankruptcy and poverty is built-in and once you realise that, the fraudulent nature of the system becomes evident. Money today, is merely the new kind of slavery that society imposes on everyone to maintain the status quo. In other words, it is a tool to monopolise power worldwide.
-
But in today's technological society, scarcity could be eliminated, removing the need for money.
Scarity can be eliminated?
No need money?
Sounds far fetched.
-
You know that for sure, or are you conditioned to think that?
-
What about standing armies, will there still be standing armies?
-
Sarcity is a matter of perception. Some would feel a 1 room flat is more than enough, and some wouldn't be satisfied even if he had 2 bungalows and 3 cars.
Your stand is that the human's instinct for greed is directly related to need. That when we have enough we won't want more.
Somehow i doubt that.