• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Oxfam report

Forums New posts
I'd be very wary about the whole "ending poverty" argument. The richest 10% may well have enough resources to ensure everybody in the world has there basic essentials, but would it be sustainable? Yes those in poverty do need financial help, but just as importantly they need education, and skills to allow them to eventually fund their own existence....

.... and therein lies the problem. Some will become more adept than others, so will end up supporting their less able brethren in exchange for services. Imagine a town of 100 people, but only 10 are able to produce food to an adequate level. Potentially you'll have 10 people each feeding 10 others in exchange for the 10 others offering services such as house cleaning, manual labour, personal security etc. See where this is going? Just because no cash is changing hands, doesn't make the system any less capitalist.

Don't get me wrong, I believe that ideally there should be a minimum basic level that everybody has of food and shelter, but before this becomes workable society needs to evolve a fair bit. There will, however, always be inequality in the world, and this shouldn't be necessarily seen as a bad thing.
 
Cricko said:
True or not it just shows the way this world is going :(

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/341755

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure it does show the way the world is going, and the numbers don't seem to add up anyway. If the world's top 100 earned enough in 2012 to end poverty 4 times over, the Giving Pledge should more than deal with the issue. The Pledge, set up by Bill Gates and Warren Buffett has invited the world's billionaires to give away at least half of their wealth. In just two years, the number of pledges has extended to 92 families!

In other news, in 2011, total estimated charitable giving in the US reached $298 billion.

According to UK Giving 2012, over half of adults gave money to charitable causes last year (typically GBP10 per month), despite the combination of high taxation levels and less money in people's pockets generally.

There seems to be a growing tendency at the moment to point at anyone with money and assume they either don't work hard for it, have no social conscience, manage to completely isolate themselves from the world around them, don't give anything to charity, routinely evade taxes, drive at 33 miles per hour past schools, tailgate old ladies, etc etc.

There is much that happens that the world doesn't see.
Stereotypes and cheap, hyperbolic, shock-stat journalism do not make reality.
 
South Bank Hank said:
I'm not sure it does show the way the world is going, and the numbers don't seem to add up anyway. If the world's top 100 earned enough in 2012 to end poverty 4 times over, the Giving Pledge should more than deal with the issue. The Pledge, set up by Bill Gates and Warren Buffett has invited the world's billionaires to give away at least half of their wealth. In just two years, the number of pledges has extended to 92 families!

In other news, in 2011, total estimated charitable giving in the US reached $298 billion.

According to UK Giving 2012, over half of adults gave money to charitable causes last year (typically GBP10 per month), despite the combination of high taxation levels and less money in people's pockets generally.

There seems to be a growing tendency at the moment to point at anyone with money and assume they either don't work hard for it, have no social conscience, manage to completely isolate themselves from the world around them, don't give anything to charity, routinely evade taxes, drive at 33 miles per hour past schools, tailgate old ladies, etc etc.

There is much that happens that the world doesn't see.
Stereotypes and cheap, hyperbolic, shock-stat journalism do not make reality.
Click to expand...

Can I add 'all immigrants are spongers' to that list as well.

Agree with that completely SBH.
 
I don't get this.

I haven't read the report but I read the summary. Global inequality has fallen every year since 1989 (that is from the World Bank data). That being the case, Oxfam arguing for a return to inequality rates of 1990 means they are arguing for more inequality!!!!!!

Further to that, those living on less than $1 per day (adjusted for inflation) was 403 million in 1970 and 152 million in 2006. Deespite a rising population the absolute number of people living on subsistence wages decreased by 63%. The main reason for it was the rising per capita income in India and China, where they have embraced market reforms. None of that growth was built on aid.

Sub-Saharan Africa has also seen real terms GDP per capita and inequality fall since 1990 as well.

I should also point out that the 1% here is a bit misleading. If you earn more than $35k (so £22.5k) then you should count yourself in that group.
 
Cricko said:
Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Rusty Shackleford said:
Yeah, I have a thought. Instead of sitting there plotting how we take these people's money, why don't we work hard to try and join them? Wealth is not a zero sum game.
Click to expand...

Agree with the above. The reward for managing to strike it lucky and make a small fortune is not having a yacht and lighting cigars with bonds but instead having Oxfam telling you to give your money away. Charity is a choice, not something the rich should be forced into.

That said, I don't agree with getting round tax rules etc but if the rules are there, then why not break them? If someone gave you an option of being able to get round paying income tax I guarantee most would do it, it's just we don't have clever accountants who can help us.

And I bet most of the people who argue for Oxfam's case have never once asked "how much for cash?" have they?
 
MK Shrimper said:
We did that already, hence the crap state it will forever be in.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Zimbabwe is in a much better state now the native chappies are running the shop. And that unpleasantness in Rwanda and the Congo - entirely the Belgians' fault. Africa is all about vibrant colours! They really should be winning the World Cup! It isn't a tribal cesspit full of primitive hatreds!
 
MK Shrimper said:
Er, slavery a good one for you? Pretty irrefutable.
Click to expand...

so slavery is the reason that Africa now has poverty?

Also, we actually had a very active and early role in the abolition of slavery. Throughout the Empire about 30 years before the USA, and slave traders prevented from operating as much as was possible by the Royal Navy
 
Crabby Shrimper said:
so slavery is the reason that Africa now has poverty?

Also, we actually had a very active and early role in the abolition of slavery. Throughout the Empire about 30 years before the USA, and slave traders prevented from operating as much as was possible by the Royal Navy
Click to expand...

Plus most slaves were from West and Central Africa, so how does that explain Ethiopia and Somalia?
 
Crabby Shrimper said:
so slavery is the reason that Africa now has poverty?

Also, we actually had a very active and early role in the abolition of slavery. Throughout the Empire about 30 years before the USA, and slave traders prevented from operating as much as was possible by the Royal Navy
Click to expand...

I'm not doubting we did, but it still went on for nearly 300 years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

.



Club News
Fixtures and Results
League Table
SUFC Ticket Stats
Shrimpers Trust
SoccerBase
SUEPA (Ex Players)
Shrimperzone on Facebook
Shrimperzone on Twitter
Shrimperzone on Instagram


ShrimperZone Sponsors

FFM MSPFX Foreign Exchange Services
Estuary MFF2
Zone Advertisers Zone Advertisers

ShrimperZone - SUFC Player Sponsorship

Southend United Away Travel


All At Sea Fanzine


Back
Top