Quote Originally Posted by Jaimecbr900
2 things:

-The whole "distribution of wealth" idea is ambiguos and based on whomever devices the formula. For example, in the chart you provided it shows that the U.S. although only 5% of the total world population has over 25% of the world's "wealth", which could be seen as some kind of great divide. But if you look at China, with over 50% of the entire world's population and it too having over 25% of the world's wealth.....what's that mean really?

I'm going to pretend for a second you're seriously not dumb enough to think that China's 1.2 billion people are half of the world's estimated 6.7 billion people.

In any case there's nothing ambiguous about it and you failed in reading the graph - Asia is represented and not China. Economic measures are not voodoo. This is economics, not Reaganomics. They're based on hard math. GDP is GDP and PPP is PPP no matter who calculates it. In any case, differences internationally in GPD have to do with the developmental status of a nation's infrastructure/economy/etc. International distribution of income/wealth isn't what were were talking about anyhow.

- Distribution of wealth is a Socialist idea, hence why it's so much more prevelent in Europe. It assumes equality of wealth as some sort of checks and balances device directed towards keeping the GOV'T in check. The idea, much like Communism, backfires because when you try and stiffle an individual's or corp's ability to advance, i.e. make more money, then you repress and ultimately irritate one very basic human principle....the principle that we always naturally strive to be better tomm than we are today. Why do you think that sometimes when you look at some of the most politically repressed countries they seem to be stuck in some kind of time warp where they never seem to advance with the rest of the world? Because the oppressive gov't basically kills the drive of it's citizens by basically capping their advancement in life.

Your argument is self defeating. Those European nations with socialistic policies that you mentioned, the ones you say backfire, they all score dramatically higher than us on all quality of life indices (which include things like personal freedom etc). Their governments are more democratic and afford greater personal freedom than ours.

Socialism != the crushing weight of an oppressive Government. I don't know what kind of TV you've been watching, but these countries you seem to think are stuck in a time warp because of their "oppressive governments" are more developed than ours.

You're thinking of sub-saharan Africa.
Anyway, my
Epic fail