Forum Post: We need a culture that strives for balance not wealth.
Posted 12 years ago on March 29, 2012, 8:48 a.m. EST by jph
(2652)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
In a universe where mater and energy can freely exchange, perhaps it would make no difference HOW MUCH matter/energy one individual claimed to own as their own personal 'wealth', however we don't live in such a circumstance. Where does the 'right' to own anything come from? Saying 'I claim ownership of this oil field, as I payed for a deed from this guy over here.' is just a link in a chain of control. We can only truly own that which we create with our own will. The rest is parlor games, smoke and mirrors, and standing armies.
The wealth is not the natural resources, 'the wealth' is the claim to them. I dispute the claim.
I do not see the value in a 0.01% of people controlling the majority of my planet. Had they done 'good' and made the world a better place, perhaps we would not be having this conversation, but this is where we are. A VERY FEW have had 'ownership' of A VERY LOT for far too long. We have seen that road, endless human suffering under wars, repression, and artificial scarcity, with those few owners doing well. Lets flip the script, lets reverse the concentration of ownership and level the field. Lets create a consensus based democracy, with systems designed to keep the power evenly distributed. This does not mean that there can be no great and influential people, good ideas should always spread.
We need a culture that strives for balance not wealth.
How much many perishable resources are wasting away on store or warehouse shelves? Most of these goods are destroyed and thrown away when they come within a week or two of expiring. Instead they could be given away to people in need who could greatly benefit from them. How's that for some artificial scarcity?
Talking to a dumpster-diver from way back ;)
Many of us know that there exists more than enough food to feed the world, and yet we as a species have just not overcome greed. Specifically the greed of a few. For the few to have so much, many must go without. I for one find excessive wealth to be disgusting! I just wish this was the cultural norm, unfortunately this culture is upside-down. Praising the guy who has taken more than he needs seems wrong-minded to me.
Great post, jph. You are a deep, insightful thinker. I'll second rayl and say right on!
right on, whose planet is this anyway?
My theory is that since each of us arise from the planet, we all are responsible for it.
Some people have been claiming all the power, however none of the responsibility for exercising it for their own enrichment. Selling off a forest for clear cutting that neither the seller nor the buyer have ever seen, is a tad disconcerting, to me anyway.
This planet produces people, these people are just an outgrowth of the planet. Many claim to not see that we are, but a part, of a larger system, they view life as 'themselves against the universe'. That seems ass-backwards to me, like the mentality of a cancer cell. Embrace the life you see around you, promote peace and equality, and life will support that.
that pretty much sums up my view, thanks. :)
nice way of stating what so many feel - thanks
Very nice post.
So get your government take it over and run it. Then everything will be great!
The system that our gov. is build from is thoroughly corruptible (and currently corrupted!), give the power to a 'representative' and they will be manipulated, period. We need to remove the 'representatives' from the equation. There are many systems that can easily replace this broken one, we only need the will to change.
You can set up today an online brokerage accoint today for free and buy all the wealth you want thru oil, gas, and mining stocks.
No one has any advantage over anyone else in terms of "owning" anything. Private property rights have evolved down from the Middle ages when in fact it was true that a king did own everything.
John Locke articulated tese rights:
Locke uses the word property in both broad and narrow senses. In a broad sense, it covers a wide range of human interests and aspirations; more narrowly, it refers to material goods. He argues that property is a natural right and it is derived from labour. In Chapter V of his Second Treatise, Locke argues that the individual ownership of goods and property is justified by the labour exerted to produce those goods or utilise property to produce goods beneficial to human society.[20] Locke stated his belief, in his Second Treatise, that nature on its own provides little of value to society; he provides the implication that the labour expended in the creation of goods gives them their value. This is used as supporting evidence for the interpretation of Locke's labour theory of property as a labour theory of value, in his implication that goods produced by nature are of little value, unless combined with labour in their production and that labour is what gives goods their value.[20] Locke believed that ownership of property is created by the application of labour. In addition, he believed property precedes government and government cannot "dispose of the estates of the subjects arbitrarily." Karl Marx later critiqued Locke's theory of property in his own social theory.<<<
His ideas, along with others, are the basis for America. Karl Marx ideas were and are a complete failure.
The point is that billionaires can not show the work. Where is the 'labor' to account for the vast claims to natural resource wealth? How is it since, as you say, "No one has any advantage over anyone else in terms of "owning" anything.", that these same few families and individuals maintain these claims to so much value?? Riddle me that? It is clear to most of us, it is easy to win in a rigged game.
You show your hand in your last comment, and it is sad. It is not a question of what 100 year old theory of economics that I support. It is a question of what outcome does the current system produce. You can not argue with reality, we can all see quite clearly and for our selves what the current system produces. We propose changing what we know does not work.
Exactly !!
Locke was coming out of a world of monarchy and serfdom. Trying to gain fairness for the people. You are not understanding the true reality.
[Removed]