[quote=zk][quote=Blogstar] So,yeah it does make sense to see what we get compared to the proles in other regions because it will equalize. Just a matter of a few generations. [/quote]
When I say “it” could happen in a few generations, I’m not talking about a consortium. I’m talking about a much lower standard of living in first-world countries, and possibly a marginally higher standard of living in other countries.
I don’t see enough consensus happening for any kind of consortium. Ever. Then there’s the logistical nightmare.
Likely I didn’t understand what you meant by consortium. I’m curious what form you see this consortium taking and (generally) how it would be accomplished.[/quote]
It’s not too difficult to imagine what this consortium would look like; it already exists today. Look at the wealthiest people in the world and ask yourself: would they rather keep and grow their money/power, or would they rather give it away during their lifetimes?
In some cases, they will want to give to charity in order to help others get a leg up. In many/most cases, if giving away money/power means less for them (relatively speaking), then they will do everything in their power to keep what they have, grow it, and protect it by any means necessary — even if that means others have to die in order for them to maintain their power/wealth. Since these people have access to lawmakers in ways you and I never will, guess who wins this zero-sum game?
Again, whether this group takes the form of a “public” entity or a “private” entity, it really doesn’t matter. What does matter is how the concentration of wealth and power is affected. I can assure you, they are not trying to figure out how to “spread” their wealth and power among the working people, no matter which (public/private) hat they are wearing.
