When all the people see what the United States has on the Internet around the world and want the same needs no matter the resources we will have a huge resource scare. Money will not matter that much. The population around the world will triple also so resources will be scarce. Check this out: Almost half the world — over three billion people — live on less than $2.50 a day. At least 80% of humanity lives on less than $10 a day.
This is an interesting thread. Though, $3 a day in India is different than $3 a day in the US. In India, I suppose that $3 would buy more...
Yes thanks for saying that. I also want to state that the united states living standards based on buying things will have to be cut back extremely to handle future resource consumption. We may be living as rich as any of our grandchildren will ever dream. Yes thats right about the currency change but its all based on the same goods that make up currency cost in that specific country as the worlds living standards rise. Resources will soon be world traded at world prices example oil (not based on dollars per barrel in the future).
I found a list of the 10 poorest places in the world (2010): 1. Niger 2. Ethiopia 3. Mali 4. Burkina Faso 5. Burundi 6. Somalia 7. Central African Republic 8. Liberia 9. Guinea 10. Sierra Leone Source: Huffington Post
Lets not forget 1% of the world is holding 40% of the worlds wealth. FACT Source UN Fact the rich around the world are getting richer and the poor around the world are getting poorer (FACT). WHY? The IMF with help from renewed contracts with the world bank are keeping the poorer countries in debt by giving them loads of money at very high interest for the cash they borrowed. They then sink deeper in debt all to keep trade at a cheaper price for the wealthy countries. Its all there for anyone to see.
Because the rich don't depend on the exchange of labor to obtain more wealth, while the poor do and in though economic conditions when work is harder to come by people get poorer. Most of the people can't manage their wealth and most struggle to build net worth. While the rich employ world class wealth management companies to manage their wealth. Money is king, and I don't care where you were born or what your financial circumstances are you've got to learn how to make money. My farther made that very clear to me from a young age.
The inaccuracy of this type of analysis is quite high . Natural resources exist but they are stretched to the limit by overpopulation , while 1.000.000 people might prosper from the resources of a island 3 million people on the same island will starve and only a few hundred will prosper . Accusing the financial mechanisms that they bankrupt the poor is a non-sense . The rich countries gained their wealth from their own ashes . 3 of the most prosperous countries of today where nothing but rubble 60 years ago . Is it a crime that they where superior in thinking and created a golden states from ashes ? To blame the rich is the most most common insult that the looser trow out , that and that the "system" is not made for them .
Most of the people cant manage their wealth because they were born into a poor family. This lack of intelligence because the rich hold all the wealth to further prosper their own generations is the problem. We could easily have the 1% of rich that hold 40% of the worlds wealth give up 20% of that, and that alone would feed and help all the poor that could then in part make new INIVATIONS to future the SPECIES. This would have no effect on the middle class but only the rich that will soon if not stripped of some wealth have 70% of the worlds wealth. The ratio is growing poor to rich no matter what your thoughts are on how that person should manage his finances. Its so off balanced and GROWING just imagine the future? Its time for you to read about how the IMF functions because it bankrupts a country until all of the smart people move out to other countries leaving a vast majority labor for nothing to survive. The IMF give loads of money to these third world countries with huge interest monthly to pay which puts them farther into debt. They are in hole that was made to keep them there. Anyone that gets smart enough gets the hell out of there leaves the rest of its people with no education to crumble. The world has many scarce resources that the population of the world will consume very fast once economically stable. Resources will be more important then money. Gold and diamonds have no consumption use and should have little value in the future.
Dude the financial institutions are like vitamins they can make you better but they won't stop you from dieing of starvation . Money is just tool for trading resources . So that was something well known . As for gold and diamonds they have a lot of awesome applications due to their inherited properties .
i used to sympathize with the tree huggers and people that are poor that want to help the poor but i think the greedy capitalists were looking towards the future the whole time. surprising topic but here we go. the way the tree huggers want things in the big picture forces the wiping out of populations periodically to satisfy their concept, in the big picture because of the amount of resources available for everybody. but that is inhumane, we can all agree with that at a humanistic level. the capitalists known this so they gather up all they can and the population that continues to populate will not have what they want or need but continue to be human and populate. what about that??????
Money has zero relevance to the poorest of the poor, unfortunately money can't make the rains com to water the crops. Money doesn't put more natural resources in the ground. The problems are far greater than anything monetary. 97% of the water on earth is un-drinkable sea water, the remaining 3% is being consumed by 7 billion humans who's bodies need to hold which on average holds 37 liters. Then you have 10's of billions of fresh water dependent land animals that also need to consume water and whos bodies also hold water. More and more water every day is becoming unfit for human consumption everyday. The demand for fresh water, this also includes crude oil already out strips supply by a factor of three. I pitty your ignorance if you think any human invention such as money can fix the problem.
this is just a small part of the picture...the interest payed on the "loans" is the least of the problems...in order to get "aid" or "loans" you have to give concessions or something in return... when you say "resources" you should not just focus on water and oil and minerals...plunging a whole country in to debt slavery is also good business, you practically get to take over the whole country for pennies... its the old IMF scam LOL: "we will give you money you NEVER asked for, that you CAN NOT pay back, and then we will raise the taxes in your country and spiral your economy in to crisis and claim it was -for your own good" ... bankers control the money, money controls politics...its amusing to me that americans complain about "lehman brothers" and the financial crisis when other countries are being financially raped by the bankers for decades upon decades... also comments such as "the poor blame their predicament on the rich" is as naive as claiming "the rich and powerful do not abuse power" LOL
It is an unfeasible technology simple because it eats massive amounts of electricity to produce a limited amount of water . Unless you're desperate for water this is not the way to go . @Alex You know dam well that the usage of financial tools is something completely voluntary . Not something that is forced upon you .
Exactly, water is the new crude oil. Enjoy the party while it lasts because nobody will be laughing when the day comes that water per barrel is level pegging with oil. The size of your bank account will determine whether you live or die in the end. There was an article a while ago of George Bush buying up underground water reserves in south America, all in the day of a bonesmen. Seems he's not so stupid after all. http://fromtheleft.wordpress.com/2006/11/29/bush-family-purchases-100000-acres-in-paraguay/
Do the math. Those numbers won't change, regardless of whether we are able to desalinate the worlds oceans for pennies, the IMF stops charging interest, Islamists suddenly abandon the idea of a caliphate, or the Serbs stop hating everyone. The best you can hope to do is bring up the bar by which the lowest live and compete the best you can within your own social group in an effort to graduate to the next. I doubt it. India, like most poorer nations, runs an extremely protectionist economy which taxes the living cr*p out of all things imported. The only things one buys cheaply under such an economy are things produced locally. Everything else is considered a luxury. Ask Helvetii, bragging about his P.O.S. low end import.
1) after decades of sanctions and "us foreign policy" you are forced to take money whether you want to or not...its survival its not a choice if you are in the middle of the dessert, because I put you there, and you are dying of thirst you do not have to take my bottle of water in exchange for your house, , im not forcing you ... 2) the IMF leands money to individuals who "represent" a country...its not like the whole country cries for $$$ they will never see a penny of, but will have to pay back...
So your whole maniacal diatribe is an indictment of the people who "represent" places like Montenegro. I suppose I can take that at face value, though I'd like to point out that the actual act of genocide is committed by the people, even if it is ordered by the leaders. It goes without saying that, in a democracy, you get the leaders you deserve. As true for you as it is for Gaza.
By that, I'm pretty sure you meant to say, "I concur, you're absolutely right. Good point Rebecca." My point was that the cost of living varies from place to place. An equal amount of dollars in the United States, India, Mexico, Australia, Japan, or Pakistan would not translate into an equal amount of goods and services in each place. So, making $3 a day does not mean the same in every part of the world. But, perhaps using India as an example was a bad choice. You're right, that's a possibility for the future. But, maybe it won't come to that. I found this article, it talks about attempts to make the process less expensive:
Oops. Sorry. Thats what I meant . Thats true, but from my experience, the places people think might be cheaper (poorer nations) are actually more expensive when comparing apples and apples. Take food for instance. In Central America, rice, beans, coffee, pure uncut cocaine, and tropical fruit are all local products that are available in plenty. For those products, your 3$ goes a long way. None of those countries produce their own cars, however, so buying a car will cost you 80-120% more, and even that isn't a fair comparison. None of those countries enforce import automobile safety standards, so vehicle producers like Toyota make "special" models stripped of many of the safety and luxury features the same car would have if sold in the US market. Throw on a 10% sales tax and a luxury tax for vehicles in excess of a certain value, and suddenly you have a variety of societies where only the wealthy have nice vehicles, if any vehicle at all. Housing is the same story. You might get the steel and concrete necessary to build a decent structure rather cheaply, but putting in quality electric switches, fixtures, appliances, finishes, etc can, and often does bring per/sqft prices of a structure above the cost of an equivalent structure in the US, despite the fact it was built with labor that costs dollars a day. So yes, 3$ a day is terrific if your desires are limited to rice, beans, and cocaine, and your housing needs are limited to a structure with bare walls that will probably kill you in an earthquake. Every country, including India, has a slightly different variation of the story, but the same rules apply.