101 (edited by Lizon 27-Jul-2009 00:57:06)

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

Oops, misread it, thought it meant rent and electricity. Even then though the costs are manageable when taking into account how many people usually live in each home. One thing though that I found it very hard to find was actual rent costs of the average Indian family. Every rent costs was catered to western style of living which was in the range of $200-$600 USD a month. I've been searching out for rent costs and I'll have to say. The numbers are erratic. I get everything from $0.50 a day to $2.00 a day from various sources. I also caught this bit of information.

http://www.slate.com/id/2218586/

Which states on the bottom:

"Mindful of this difference, the Indian government uses a flexible poverty line that varies with area of residence. Those who live in rural areas are considered impoverished if they makes less than 66 cents per day; the threshold for city-dwellers is 83 cents per day. India also adjusts the status for people who are cash poor but enjoy family assets, like a house or arable land."

I did a bit more research and I did find this:

http://99acres.com/do/quicksearch/search?sid=UiB8IFFTIHwgUiB8IDEgIzQjfCAgfCBTSCB8IzQjICB8IDEgIzkjfCAgfCBTRUFSQ0ggfCA2MTk3MDE3OCB8ICB8IDEgfCAxMiB8IzUjICB8IDEgIzIjfCAg&sortby=price_a

Granted this is a limited search but it does give us a rough idea. 2000 Rp a month equals about $43. Also note that in many of the descriptions it is stated that the Rent is Negotiable. How much is up to debate however.

I also found this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_states_ranking_by_household_size

This is average household density broken down by state. Lowest being 3.5 highest being 5.7

I also started rumbling through the reference sites data source. There's a lot there, haven't had time to read much of it.

http://www.nfhsindia.org/

This is specific data on the region around Mumbai

http://www.nfhsindia.org/NFHS-3%20Data/Maharashtra_report.pdf

If I were to take the 2000 Pp a month cost and then apply that to the average household density of 4.7 for that region, factoring in a theoretical income of $1 a day per working adult and taking into consideration that 1/3rd of the population is underage. This means on average you have 3 working adults per household giving an income of $84.00 USD or 4,046 Rp per month. So lets take this all into consideration and add up so me numbers again.

Previous:
TOTAL                                Rp 1296

Add:
RENT:                                 Rp 2000
FOOD*:                               Rp 2745
NEW TOTAL:                        Rp 6041

*Food costs are estimated to 2 additional adults and 1.7 children are extrapolated to .85 adult at a ratio of 2 child food consumption to 1 adult. This is a very rough estimate though.

While this may initially seem bad it actually works quite well in this simulation. First off I grossly overestimated food costs not taking into account bulk buying and costs of other perishable goods which are often lower in cost than the items I stated. The rent cost is that of your average middle class apartment whose income is in the $2.00 USD range instead of the $1 range per day. I haven't been able to find a reliable source of rent information for pucca's in Mumbai, but from the information I gathered from the Press Information Bureau of India the costs are a lot cheaper. They have their own averaged chart of expenses:

http://pib.nic.in/archieve/others/2008/oct/r2008103101.doc

item group      monthly per capita exp. (Rs.)
rural     urban
(1)     (2)     (3)
cereals & cereal substitutes     115     119
pulses & their products     24     32
milk & milk products     56     97
edible oil     27     38
egg, fish & meat     24     34
vegetables     43     57
fruits     12     28
sugar, salt and spices     30     38
beverages, refreshments and     31     74
processed food           
            
food total     363     517
pan, tobacco & intoxicants     18     19
fuel and light     66     117
clothing & footwear     49     83
education     22     92
medical     52     83
misc. consumer goods     39     85
misc. consumer services     55     180
rent     3     67
taxes and cesses     2     11
durable goods     26     59
non-food total     332     795
All items     695     1312

1312Rp = $27.23 at today current exchange rate.

This data is averaged out however. But if you look at the Urban food costs alone it's roughly HALF of what I put up. So if I take that data into consideration into my previous data you get a total monthly cost of around 4300 Rp a month. This is slightly over the $1 a day mark, more like $1.07 which by the way is below the poverty line. Most people in India make between $1-2 USD.

So here is an extrapolated family, complete with depends and rent for a 1b pucca style apartment with an absolute minimum cost of living of $1.07 per day. You are WAY overestimating room costs for your average family in India.

Now lets consider that the majority of Indians make between $1-2 USD a day, lets just say $1.50 for arguments sake. Now you have an income of $126 USD a month or 6000 Rp a month. This gives you a lot more wiggle room to work with in terms of other expenditures. Even if there is a pregnant other at most she'll have is 3-4 children max with an average interval of 36 months per child. The eldest of which is most likely to be working as soon as they hit puberty. But I can think you can reasonable see how even with these factors this family can survive, and survive fairly well.

The incomes here are gross not net, meaning this is their income after taxes, costs are averages out which means taxes there are included as well.

"Why didn't you factor those in?"
I didn't factor in transportation costs due to the fact that it's a relative unknown. It depends on where the person works. Most people travel by foot or bike in India. Those better off use scooters which have a low cost per person or mass transit. Depending on their job their cost vary, Most people though take transportation costs into consideration when getting a job, and thus many if not all have that costs factored into their living expenses separately. Some people may even carpool together, again messing up the numbers.

"Let's also factor in costs of education for the child / babysitting / daycare."

Education for the most part is free. And there are academic scholarships for those who wish to seek them out. Daycare and babysitting? I don't know about over there but useually it's the little cousin or uncle, or aunt, or grandmother that takes this job. Meaning the cost is negligible if non-existent.

"Let's include costs of health care for mother, father, and child."

I included costs of overall wellness in my simulation. I omitted health care because again it's a wild card. There is no way to really average this out and has to be taken up by a case by caste basis. In many cases though I would assume their families would help if need be. Many areas offer free clinics and checkups. While it won't really help in case of a major medical emergency it will help reduce the chance of that said emergency. Hell most families here in the States struggle when they suffer a medical emergency. Most bankruptcies are due to medical bills. Most people thankfully don't even encounter this.

"Let's also include costs of protection money paid to local mafia."

So if it happens in one area it must happen in all areas? Umm no, prove that it's persistent in all poor regions and this may be considered. Conjectures are not facts, no matter how much you want to believe in them.

"Let's also include cost of borrowing."

If people borrow it means they have collateral to borrow which implies some amount of wealth. People who don't have money don't borrow more of it to make ends meet. Usually it's those who live beyond their means that suffer from this. You'll find that the lower income brackets do not suffer from this as much as you would like to believe.

"Let's also include cost of paying taxes.

Yes.  They'd have to pay taxes, too."

Already factored into costs. ^.^

"Why don't we just cut to the chase, and admit 10 dollars / day just wouldn't cut it over there for a nuclear family.  "

Read above.

"Let's not even consider what would happen if the father died.

Let's not even consider the plight of single-mothers.

Let's not even consider how much they would have to earn to be able to afford to BUY their own home suburban bungalow with backyard, 2 cars, and college education for their child."

Most families don't suffer form the first 2, even from the reports from those regions. Something like 4% of households only have a single parent or something like that. The costs of that large house and 2 cars is a lower than you would think. A monthly income in the range of $500-600 USD in India would suffice.

"Why don't you jus admit that westernization / globalization is a grand failure for the VAST MAJORITY of the human population on planet Earth?"

Cause it isn't. Look at the data yourself.

---

So anyways, from the previous post I omitted housing costs on accident but I overestimated food costs so it balanced out for the most part. Went form $0.97 to $1.07 with housing and dependents. Now if I use the government sponsored chart it comes out to $0.97 again. -.-

Furthermore where else I provided references to my cost estimates you have provided none. So here are your requirements for your next post Xeno:

Prove the cost of daycare is what you say for the average household. If there is a cost at all. I want you to seriously consider families looking after each others kids. I want a report detailing it in.

Secondly prove that pregnant mothers are down for 6 months. No estimates, I want hard concrete facts showing it.

Show me actual costs of education in India. The only reference I found is this:

http://www.indiatogether.org/2007/oct/edu-townedu.htm

Which is 6000 rp for 2 children in a rural area. Urban areas are bound to be cheaper, but even if we take it down to 3000 rp per child it boils down to 8 rp a day or $0.16 USD for a yearly average.

I was going to consider making you prove that housing costs are lower than $100 a month but I believe the housing link I provided showing actual costs is proof enough showing how the estimate form the first reference is over-estimated.

These aren't requests Xeno. They are demands. Stop making up facts and provide hard cold evidence to back it up. If you cannot provide proof then everything you have stated to this point was a fabrication of your overzealous imagination.

Note: All references are for residence in the Maharashtra /  Mumbai regions. Costs may vary depending on location.

Fear not the Darkness, for without it there is no Light. Embrace the Light, for it brings forth Darkness. Embrace both, to embrace the gift of Life. ~Kai Master Creed
Kemralight.COM Contact Me Subscribe to my RSS Feed

102

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

One of the articles you refer to says this:

"In contrast, a $2-per-day laborer in Mumbai would spend nearly his entire income on a modest shanty in one of Mumbai's notorious slums."

http://www.slate.com/id/2218586/

This is pretty much the whole point.  No need to analyze fudged numbers.  People in the slums cannot get by on 2 dollars a day if they live alone, and certainly not with any dependents.

"This means on average you have 3 working adults per household"

Right, because they don't have families, they don't have wives, children.  They're single, living 3 or 4 to a room, JUST TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD RENT.

There's no way a father could provide for his family on $10 / day - we are talking 1, ONE, income earner per family.  You expect the kids to work?  The pregnant / nursing mother to work?

Now, let's get right down to the issue.  What percentage of the population earn more than 10$ a day in the world - GLOBALLY?

Less than 20% according to the UN.

Less than 20% of people, therefore, are able to support a family.

But, I suppose you suppose that's how they suppose it's supposed to be, right?  That is, you would say that the current GLOBAL situation of having only 20% of humanity able to afford the 'quality of life' necessary to provide for a pregnant wife and child is by design; is as it should be, correct?

103 (edited by Lizon 27-Jul-2009 02:49:31)

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

"This is pretty much the whole point.  No need to analyze fudged numbers.  People in the slums cannot get by on 2 dollars a day if they live alone, and certainly not with any dependents."

Housing Cost:
http://99acres.com/do/quicksearch/search?sid=UiB8IFFTIHwgUiB8IDEgIzQjfCAgfCBTSCB8IzQjICB8IDEgIzkjfCAgfCBTRUFSQ0ggfCA2MTk3MDE3OCB8ICB8IDEgfCAxMiB8IzUjICB8IDEgIzIjfCAg&sortby=price_a

2000 Rp a month = $43

Household Size:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_states_ranking_by_household_size

4.7 in Mumbai

http://www.nfhsindia.org/NFHS-3%20Data/Maharashtra_report.pdf

30% under the age of 18 which means 3 working eligible adults per household size of average 4.7.

3 adults x $2.00 per day x 28 days = $168

$168 - $43 = $125 money after housing rent.

"Right, because they don't have families, they don't have wives, children.  They're single, living 3 or 4 to a room, JUST TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD RENT."

http://www.nfhsindia.org/NFHS-3%20Data/Maharashtra_report.pdf <----Page 46

70% Women and 60% of men are married.  Even if their not married the averages still hold out. 4.7 persons per home, 30% averaged out are children thus again 3 working adults per home.

"There's no way a father could provide for his family on $10 / day - we are talking 1, ONE, income earner per family.  You expect the kids to work?  The pregnant / nursing mother to work?"

As I've proven, $10 is more than enough, heck that's wealthy by Mumbai standards. I've just proven it for the second time. Heck I'm looking at the quality of life off of an income of $1.50 per day!

"Now, let's get right down to the issue.  What percentage of the population earn more than 10$ a day in the world - GLOBALLY?"

So your too scared to confront the numbers I've given you so you run away to try for a global standard? Poverty numbers are regarded by a case by case basis, country by country, and are wholly dependent on their Purchasing power parity (PPP). What you can't seem to understand is that $1 USD buys a lot more in some countries than what tit buys in others. This is basic economics.

"Less than 20% of people, therefore, are able to support a family."

Another one of your conjectures. Again prove it.

"But, I suppose you suppose that's how they suppose it's supposed to be, right?  That is, you would say that the current GLOBAL situation of having only 20% of humanity able to afford the 'quality of life' necessary to provide for a pregnant wife and child is by design; is as it should be, correct?"

Global situations are on a country by country basis. If you don't understand why that's the case then simply say "I don't understand why" and we'll be happy to explain that to you. In the meantime let's bring you back to Mumbai and force you to confront the numbers. Again try to prove me wrong on rent costs, food costs, and the overall cost of living. Prove that the numbers I say are wrong. If you cannot do so then your entire argument is a lie. It's as simple as that. You either prove it's wrong, or admit that your wrong.

I have provided you with the cost of rent, goods, food, and other items. It's up you you to prove me wrong. Make up a theoretical family like I did and put it all together.

---

I have to wonder. It seems that I'm the one doing all the actual research here. I'm the only one pulling up data, the only one searching for references.

Again no more conjectures, I want proof. If you cannot provide proof.....well I don't think I need to explain that one. wink

Fear not the Darkness, for without it there is no Light. Embrace the Light, for it brings forth Darkness. Embrace both, to embrace the gift of Life. ~Kai Master Creed
Kemralight.COM Contact Me Subscribe to my RSS Feed

104

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

You're going only by AVERAGES!  Don't you see the fallacy?

On AVERAGE, yes there are 3 working addults per household, but of those 3 adults 2 are SINGLE, no dependents.

Let's take your average household:

2 rooms with 250 square feet total.  One room for the family of 3 (mother, father, 1 child).

The other room for the other 2.

That's 5 people living in 250 square feet.  You call that a decent 'quality of life'?

And, we will have to tackle inflation soon.

Perhaps $10 / day is barely enough now, but what about 5 years from now?  How countries calculate inflation is an issue; how countries calculate poverty lines is another issue.

The ultimate fact we need to determine and discuss is what percentage of people can afford to bree; why they can; if it is by design that they can't; if so, why; if not designed; what can be done to allow EVERYONE the OPPORTUNITY to provide for their children.

1/2 of children on Earth are malnourished according to the UN

THIS IS SHAMEFUL

105 (edited by Lizon 27-Jul-2009 03:43:24)

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

"On AVERAGE, yes there are 3 working addults per household, but of those 3 adults 2 are SINGLE, no dependents."

Prove that this is true. You keep saying this but haven't provided proof. According to the survay 70% of women and 60% of men are married in india. Which means odds are the people living in this residences are...married.

"Let's take your average household:

2 rooms with 250 square feet total.  One room for the family of 3 (mother, father, 1 child).

The other room for the other 2.

That's 5 people living in 250 square feet.  You call that a decent 'quality of life'?"

http://99acres.com/Residential-Apartment-Flat-in-Badlapur-Mumbai%20Beyond%20Thane-1-Bedroom-bhk-for-Rent-spid-I2298207

Wrong again as usual. Furthermore I never said the living conditions were pretty, they are livable though.

"And, we will have to tackle inflation soon.

Perhaps $10 / day is barely enough now, but what about 5 years from now?  How countries calculate inflation is an issue; how countries calculate poverty lines is another issue."

Let me get this across to you. I'm basing my numbers on $1-2 USD a day. Not $10 a day. $10 a day is wealthy by the standards of India.

"The ultimate fact we need to determine and discuss is what percentage of people can afford to bree; why they can; if it is by design that they can't; if so, why; if not designed; what can be done to allow EVERYONE the OPPORTUNITY to provide for their children."

No the fact we need to determine is why you are unable to believe the numbers in front of you. I have proven that it's possible to live off of $1.50 per day not mentioning $10 a day which would be absurdly wealthy. It's up to you to disprove it with cold hard facts. Not conjectures, I want numbers and references with links.

"1/2 of children on Earth are malnourished according to the UN

THIS IS SHAMEFUL"

It's more shameful that you say these things with no proof to back it up. Again, provide evidence or abandon your argument. Those are your only choices.\

Correction, it's not shameful, it's downright embarrassing.

Note: If you insist on increasing their income to $10 a day they can live in someplace like this:

http://99acres.com/Residential-Apartment-Flat-in-Kamothe-Mumbai%20Navi-3-Bedroom-bhk-for-Rent-spid-L2370092

5500 Rp a month = $113.68 USD

3 adults x $10 per day x 20 days (5 day work week) = $600 USD

$600 - $113.68 = 486.32

Even if we reduce this to a 2 income family their still making $286.32 a month extra which considering the cost of goods in India is MORE than enough to keep a family of 5 going.

Fear not the Darkness, for without it there is no Light. Embrace the Light, for it brings forth Darkness. Embrace both, to embrace the gift of Life. ~Kai Master Creed
Kemralight.COM Contact Me Subscribe to my RSS Feed

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

I found this quote cute.



> xeno syndicated wrote:

> And, we will have to tackle inflation soon.

Perhaps $10 / day is barely enough now, but what about 5 years from now?  How countries calculate inflation is an issue; how countries calculate poverty lines is another issue.




That's not how inflation works, xeno.  As the value of money decreases, the price of goods purchased with that money increases.  That's a two-way streak.  It means those people making $10.00 a day today, doing the same activity year after year, would see an increase in their pay, relative to inflation.  I'm not saying it results in a net increase in wealth by any means.  But the increase in expenses and the increase in income due to inflation balance one another out.

Clear example of you just not knowing what the hell you're talking about.



This thread has been like two hours of my life that I want back... X(

Make Eyes Great Again!

The Great Eye is watching you... when there's nothing good on TV...

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

"This thread has been like two hours of my life that I want back..."

Can't agree with you more. If Xeno doesn't begin proving his arguments with actual sources I'll consider it an admission of gross incompetence. He seems to live in this fantasy world where he is the king of all the facts and everybody else must be wrong cause they don't agree with what he believes.

Fear not the Darkness, for without it there is no Light. Embrace the Light, for it brings forth Darkness. Embrace both, to embrace the gift of Life. ~Kai Master Creed
Kemralight.COM Contact Me Subscribe to my RSS Feed

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

Silence is foolish if we are wise, but wise if we are foolish.
--Charles Caleb Colton

Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools talk because they have to say something.
-- Plato

109 (edited by xeno syndicated 27-Jul-2009 06:00:46)

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

"http://99acres.com/Residential-Apartmen

110

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

No the fact we need to determine is why you are unable to believe the numbers in front of you. I have proven that it's possible to live off of $1.50 per day not mentioning $10 a day which would be absurdly wealthy.

A decent "quality of life" is NOT affordable on $10 / day in urban areas of developing countries.

Calculate COMMUTE time.

Calculate POLLUTION

""1/2 of children on Earth are malnourished according to the UN

THIS IS SHAMEFUL"

It's more shameful that you say these things with no proof to back it up. Again, provide evidence or abandon your argument. Those are your only choices.\"

I did give a source.  The UN!

Calculate food QUALITY

Calculate emotional suffering due to loss of dignified work environments.

Calculate a thousand other things.

111

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

"I'm basing my numbers on $1-2 USD a day. Not $10 a day. $10 a day is wealthy by the standards of India. "

It is NOT wealth by the standards of urban living in Mumbai.

You just don't get it, do you, Lizon?

HOW the majority of human is living is a shame on ALL of us as a species.

112 (edited by xeno syndicated 27-Jul-2009 06:16:13)

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

"Note: If you insist on increasing their income to $10 a day they can live in someplace like this:

http://99acres.com/Residential-Apartmen

113

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

The point is, living half as dignified as even the lower-middle class in socialist western countries would cost MORE in developing countries.

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

"That apartment is in belavali village.  We're talking about URBAN areas"

I did a general search of the greater Mumbai area. If you want to do some other searches you can see it for yourself. Most everything is between 2000-3000 Rp for a 500-600 sq ft flat.

"A decent "quality of life" is NOT affordable on $10 / day in urban areas of developing countries."

Anything you say is irrelevant without proof. Since you have provided none while I have provided some then it is in fact true that $10 a day can provide a decent quality of life. Regardless of anything you say to oppose it. If you provide proof saying otherwise then I will gladly change this stance. ntil then the current conclusion stands.

"Calculate COMMUTE time.

Calculate POLLUTION"

I don't see how this really has anything to do with the conversation. Grasping at straws now?

"I did give a source.  The UN!"

No. Simply saying "according to the UN" is not giving a source. You must provide a reference link to back it up. Else it's your word saying the UN said so. For all I know you made it up in your disillusioned mind. Provide proof. I provided mine, where's yours?

"Calculate food QUALITY"

Ok so I assume now that your admitting that the food costs are lower than you expected and now your trying to argue about the quality of the food? LMAO

"Calculate emotional suffering due to loss of dignified work environments."

Provide proof please.

"Calculate a thousand other things."

Why don't you? Oh wait, I know why....you can't. ^.^

"It is NOT wealth by the standards of urban living in Mumbai."

Yes it is, I've already proven it with links and references to back it up. Show me where I was wrong.

"You just don't get it, do you, Lizon?

HOW the majority of human is living is a shame on ALL of us as a species."

I obviously get it a lot more than you do. I'm not disillusioned with false conjectures. I actually look things up and do something I like to call "research" and I provide something called "evidence".

"This is in Badlapur, not Mumbai.  How much is the train ticket there and back to Mumbai?"
Property Address : Kamothe, Kamothe, Mumbai Navi, Mumbai - 410206

"http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index

Fear not the Darkness, for without it there is no Light. Embrace the Light, for it brings forth Darkness. Embrace both, to embrace the gift of Life. ~Kai Master Creed
Kemralight.COM Contact Me Subscribe to my RSS Feed

115

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

Why do I have to post so much just to convince people that there is a problem?  Why can't we move on to discussing some solutions?

Why is there virtually no will on this forum to discuss ideas to improve the quality of life for our fellow human beings?

Why is there so much resentment to even considering there may be other ways not thought of or not yet implemented to improve the way things are 'supposedly' getting better.  Clearly, the way in which our societies are improving people's quality of life could be better. 

Now, actually, it doesn't matter that the majority of humans are suffering loss of dignity due to poor "quality of life".

The goal of our discussion (and, moreover, the direction of our global society) should be for us to find ways to improve it.

What would happen tomorrow if all the Earth were ONE TRANSPARENT, LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC country, and every human's vote was of equal value?  Would the people running things on the international stage be re-elected? 



I think not, because, to put it simply, the international community does not seem to have the improvement of peoples' quality of life as a priority.  The global majority (if they had a vote) would vote for a global party who would.

But this is not the world we live in.  Depending on which country we are from, our votes (and even ourselves, apparently) are not of equal value as others.

This state allows for sentiments of resentment / dehumanization / vilification between people's and increases the likelihood of war between nations.

This state of perceived inequality of the value of human life between countries is bad for ALL of us, especially as developing countries develop nuclear weapons capabilities.

It would be better to face the challenges of poverty and start discussions on possible solutions to improving quality of life for all, rather than bantering often misleading / manipulated statistics back and forth and arguing about whether or not there is even a problem.  There can be a solution which is mutually beneficial for everyone.

Like Lizon, it seems the west is in a state of denying there is even being a problem.

There is so much to discuss regarding this topic.  Our society is experiencing a global apartheid, not between black and white, but between the west and rest.

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

> xeno syndicated wrote:

> Why do I have to post so much just to convince people that there is a problem?



Everyone: Take note of this.

Make Eyes Great Again!

The Great Eye is watching you... when there's nothing good on TV...

117

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

""1/2 of children on Earth are malnourished according to the UN

THIS IS SHAMEFUL"

It's more shameful that you say these things with no proof to back it up. Again, provide evidence or abandon your argument. Those are your only choices.\"

I did give a source.  The UN!


Here:

"Number of children in the world
    2.2 billion
Number in poverty
    1 billion (every second child)
Shelter, safe water and health

    For the 1.9 billion children from the developing world, there are:

        * 640 million without adequate shelter (1 in 3)
        * 400 million with no access to safe water (1 in 5)
        * 270 million with no access to health services (1 in 7)

Children out of education worldwide
    121 million
Survival for children

    Worldwide,

        * 10.6 million died in 2003 before they reached the age of 5 (same as children population in France, Germany, Greece and Italy)
        * 1.4 million die each year from lack of access to safe drinking water and adequate sanitation

Health of children

    Worldwide,

        * 2.2 million children die each year because they are not immunized
        * 15 million children orphaned due to HIV/AIDS (similar to the total children population in Germany or United Kingdom)"

Source: State of the World

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

"Why do I have to post so much just to convince people that there is a problem?  Why can't we move on to discussing some solutions?"

Only when you know the question will you know what the answer is -Deep Thought, "The hitchhikers guide to the galaxy"

Xeno you just don't know what the questions should be. You think you know but you really don't.

"Why is there virtually no will on this forum to discuss ideas to improve the quality of life for our fellow human beings?"

It is improving, and according to historical evidence things will continue to improve. They did before, no reason it won't be different again. History itself is against your argument. That's a tough battle to win against.

"Why is there so much resentment to even considering there may be other ways not thought of or not yet implemented to improve the way things are 'supposedly' getting better.  Clearly, the way in which our societies are improving people's quality of life could be better."

I'm sure there are better ways. But going over ideas that have already been pounded into submission for close to a century and proven to be inadequate is not "new".

"Now, actually, it doesn't matter that the majority of humans are suffering loss of dignity due to poor "quality of life"."

Dignity and Quality of Life are relative. There is no universal standard. That's why you have to base studies on simple survival. It's the only thing that is truly universal.

"The goal of our discussion (and, moreover, the direction of our global society) should be for us to find ways to improve it."

And it is improving, despite your insistence that it isn't. Not our fault your blind to the truth.

"What would happen tomorrow if all the Earth were ONE TRANSPARENT, LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC country, and every human's vote was of equal value?  Would the people running things on the international stage be re-elected? "

I'll try to get on the first transport to Mars ASAP. ^.^ And you would be happy as a clam because everyone would be equal and have the same of everything cause everyone would be making the same amount of money and have the same houses, it's your dream world Xeno.

"I think not, because, to put it simply, the international community does not seem to have the improvement of peoples' quality of life as a priority.  The global majority (if they had a vote) would vote for a global party who would."

Knowing that 99% of the people out there are no smarter than your common house cat that wouldn't be advisable. People vote for whoever looks the flashiest and makes the most promises, not necessarily would do the best job. Sad but true.

"But this is not the world we live in.  Depending on which country we are from, our votes (and even ourselves, apparently) are not of equal value as others."

Your just now figuring this out? Where have you been all this time?

"This state allows for sentiments of resentment / dehumanization / vilification between people's and increases the likelihood of war between nations."

This is your personal opinion of course. I disagree though.

"It would be better to face the challenges of poverty and start discussions on possible solutions to improving quality of life for all, rather than bantering often misleading / manipulated statistics back and forth and arguing about whether or not there is even a problem.  There can be a solution which is mutually beneficial for everyone."

You cannot face a challenge if you do not understand it. That's something we've been trying to tell you this whole time. You simply don't understand what poverty is and thus are illequiped to formulate answers. You don't understand anything about cost of living, PPP, or even simple addresses. -.-

"Like Lizon, it seems the west is in a state of denying there is even being a problem."

No, me and other people like me perceive the problem in a different way from a perspective that is obviously beyond your ability to comprehend. You simply do not have the knowledge or life experiences to see it that way and thus you blindly accuse us of not seeing the issues.

"There is so much to discuss regarding this topic.  Our society is experiencing a global apartheid, not between black and white, but between the west and rest."

Let the people who know the right questions formulate the answers. You can go off to your tree-house or something, don't worry your little head about issues that are beyond your ability to comprehend. You'll only get in the way.

---

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man how to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.

The developing world is still in that learning part. They'll get there soon enough just like everyone else did.

Fear not the Darkness, for without it there is no Light. Embrace the Light, for it brings forth Darkness. Embrace both, to embrace the gift of Life. ~Kai Master Creed
Kemralight.COM Contact Me Subscribe to my RSS Feed

119

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

> Zarf BeebleBrix wrote:

> > xeno syndicated wrote:

> Why do I have to post so much just to convince people that there is a problem?



Everyone: Take note of this.


Why should everyone take note of this?  Of course I'm trying to convince people there is a problem.  It's clear to me, from what I've seen, experienced and read, and want to discuss SOLUTIONS to the problem.

This thread is called called "Solution to socio-political-economic strife" for !@#%$-sake.

But what has this thread been about?  Nothing but a first step debating whether or not there is a problem and whether or not thinking of solutions is even necessary.

Pretty much every single poster has been trolling this thread off-topic, beside me.  I'm putting up with this useless debating on whether or not there is a problem, because, Lizon, in spite of being a troll and a twit, is THE ONLY ONE POSTING ANYTHING REMOTELY RELEVANT TO THIS THREAD, @#%- damnit!

SOLUTION TO SOCIO-POLITICAL-ECONOMIC-STRIFE

Now, Zarf, Lizon, and the rest of you trolls, we can go on and on about whether or not there is a problem that requires solving, or we can admit there is SOCIO-POLITICAL-ECONOMIC STRIFE problems in our world REQUIRING solutions, and then, if ONLY this could @#%-ing happen, this thread could FINNALLY begin to be on-topic.

Or, if your IC forum reputation is so @#%-ing important to you and you want to keep wasting your time and mine, FINE.

BRING IT

My job is easy.  All I have to do is show there is socio-economic strife to solve. 

But, hopefully, if one of you have the insight and the balls to discuss with me ON TOPIC about solutions to this strife, I can start ignoring this Lizon twit-troll and maybe he'll go away.

120 (edited by Zarf BeebleBrix 27-Jul-2009 07:34:05)

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

> xeno syndicated wrote:

> Why do I have to post so much just to convince people that there is a problem?





Okay, I was going to make a semi-sarcastic thread to highlight the point... but I decided it would probably be better to just explain it.


If Lizon can win that there is no problem in the first place... then there doesn't need to be a solution.  It's the equivalent of if I were to ask for massive government funding so I could develop a cure to a zombification virus.  Oh, what?  A zombification virus doesn't exist?  Why should I have to prove it exists?  The more important issue is how to stop it!


Lizon is just asking you to establish this first step before we get into the issue of solutions.  Otherwise, you're basically trying to cure a zombie virus.

Make Eyes Great Again!

The Great Eye is watching you... when there's nothing good on TV...

121 (edited by xeno syndicated 27-Jul-2009 07:39:57)

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

To Lizon,

"Knowing that 99% of the people out there are no smarter than your common house cat that wouldn't be advisable. People vote for whoever looks the flashiest and makes the most promises, not necessarily would do the best job. Sad but true."

On behalf of 99% of the human race, #%@ YOU you pompous, arrogant, elitist TWIT.  Clearly, you don't know anything about the nature of intelligence and the capability of EVERY person's human mind.

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

> xeno syndicated wrote:

> Now, Zarf, Lizon, and the rest of you trolls, we can go on and on about whether or not there is a problem that requires solving, or we can admit there is SOCIO-POLITICAL-ECONOMIC STRIFE problems in our world REQUIRING solutions, and then, if ONLY this could @#%-ing happen, this thread could FINNALLY begin to be on-topic.




Lizon's argument is extremely on-topic.  He is saying that there is no change necessary, because the status quo is currently fixing the problem.  Whether his argument is right or wrong is up for debate, obviously.  However, don't accuse it of being off topic, because it's far from that.  He's answering your question quite directly.


Q: How do we fix socio-political-economic strife in the world?
Lizon's A: Don't change the squo, and it'll get fixed.


That's an answer.

Make Eyes Great Again!

The Great Eye is watching you... when there's nothing good on TV...

123 (edited by xeno syndicated 27-Jul-2009 07:53:02)

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

"Q: How do we fix socio-political-economic strife in the world?
Lizon's A: Don't change the squo, and it'll get fixed."

Xeno's A: Who said anything about changing the squo?
Lizon's A:  -

Xeno's Q: Is the way in which the squo is getting it fixed working?  I don't think so, because the majority of the human race is living in poverty.

Lizon's A:  Yes, and, according to the squo, the majority isn't living in poverty.
Xeno's R: That's debatable.  The UN says 80% of us are living on less than $10 / day.

Lizon's R: That's enough for them.
Xeno's R: No, it isn't.

Lizon's R:  99% of humanity is so stupid they don't need / deserve more.
Xeno's A:  Well aren't you a prick.  (I sure hope no one with that way of thinking EVER becomes part of the squo, and I sure hope none of the squo have that sort of thinking.)  I disagree.  The vast majority of humans are pretty much as capable in their own individual ways as any other.  Such is the nature of human intelligence.

Lizon's R: 

Still waiting, but hoping he just goes away.

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

> xeno syndicated wrote:

> "Q: How do we fix socio-political-economic strife in the world?
Lizon's A: Don't change the squo, and it'll get fixed."

Xeno's A: Who said anything about changing the squo?




Um...

If your thread is about fixing something, it is always a change in the status quo.  That's the very definition of change.

Make Eyes Great Again!

The Great Eye is watching you... when there's nothing good on TV...

125 (edited by Zarf BeebleBrix 27-Jul-2009 07:56:39)

Re: Solution to socio-political-economic strife

> xeno syndicated wrote:

> Xeno's A:  Well aren't you a prick.  (I sure hope no one with that way of thinking EVER becomes part of the squo, and I sure hope none of the squo have that sort of thinking.)  I disagree.  The vast majority of humans are pretty much as capable in their own individual ways as any other.  Such is the nature of human intelligence.




Um... xeno.


Squo=status quo=the way things work today.  smile

Make Eyes Great Again!

The Great Eye is watching you... when there's nothing good on TV...