Reply by whit3rd ●January 7, 20222022-01-07
On Thursday, January 6, 2022 at 8:03:56 PM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

> On Thu, 6 Jan 2022 13:49:59 -0800 (PST), whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com> 
> wrote:
> >On Thursday, January 6, 2022 at 8:09:33 AM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: 
> > 
> >> The main reason for poverty now is bad politics. Compare the Koreas 
> >> for example.



> >Oh, there's population pressures and land depletion issues also...
> >Blaming 'bad politics' might be a cheap shot...



> >Politics is always involved, but so is gravity, and air, by the simple mechanism of 
> >ubiquity in human life.



> Does the climate change suddenly in the dmz between the Koreas? 


Well, it's another ubiquitous influence.   Most poverty, though, isn't represented by
North Korea.   There's a bit of international market presence of goods from that
little principality, the economy isn't a simple wreck.

<https://georgetownsecuritystudiesreview.org/2020/12/01/arms-for-oil-how-north-korea-and-iran-facilitate-each-others-security-strategies/>
Reply by ●January 7, 20222022-01-07
On Thu, 6 Jan 2022 13:49:59 -0800 (PST), whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com>
wrote:


>On Thursday, January 6, 2022 at 8:09:33 AM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>
>> The main reason for poverty now is bad politics. Compare the Koreas 
>> for example. Compare Venezuela to Costa Rica. Dictators wreck 
>> economies.
>
>Oh, there's population pressures and land depletion issues also; the  old days when
>a tribe could move into new territory, and herders find fresh pastures, and loners could
>forage in the wild, conferred a bit of safety that city-bound populations don't have.
>
>Blaming 'bad politics' might be a cheap shot; which is the cause, and which the effect?
>Economics of limited resources are subject to Malthusian logic.
>Politics is always involved, but so is gravity, and air, by the simple mechanism of
>ubiquity in human life.


Does the climate change suddenly in the dmz between the Koreas?

https://tinyurl.com/4pcdk3rj



-- 

I yam what I yam - Popeye
Reply by Anthony William Sloman ●January 6, 20222022-01-06
On Friday, January 7, 2022 at 3:09:33 AM UTC+11, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

> On Thu, 6 Jan 2022 01:46:58 -0800 (PST), Tabby <tabb...@gmail.com> 
> wrote:
> >On Friday, 31 December 2021 at 11:12:53 UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: 
> >> On 31 Dec 2021 08:38:07 GMT, Robert Latest <bobl...@yahoo.com> 
> >> wrote: 
> >> >Rick C wrote: 
> >> >> On Thursday, December 23, 2021 at 1:05:20 PM UTC-4, Robert Latest wrote: 
> >> >>> Rick C wrote: 
> >> >>> > Even the part that doesn't drive depends on the other part to get products 
> >> >>> > and food produced and delivered and support their way of life. 
> >> >>> Not as much as our lifestyle depends on their being paid so little that they 
> >> >>> won't ever be able to afford to significantly pollute the planet. 
> >> >> 
> >> >> What??? Have you gone off the deep end??? 
> >> > 
> >> >No. 
> >> > 
> >> >> What part of 7 billion do you not understand? No one needs to drive cars or 
> >> >> sit in hot tubs to pollute the planet when there are 7 billion of us all 
> >> >> working to the same end. 
> >> > 
> >> >Exactly my point. It is intrinsically impossible for all 7 billion to have that. 
> >> Everyone should have electricity, clean running water, reasonably 
> >> comfortable shelter, some sort of communications, transport, a decent 
> >> diet, basic medical care, access to education, and basic safety. 
> >> 
> >> There is no reason that 7 billion people shouldn't have that. The 
> >> fraction of the population living in extreme poverty continues to 
> >> decline. 
> > 
> >It declines despite the definition being revised upward. 
>
> >But the reasons for poverty are real, and not ceasing to exist any time soon.
>
> The main reason for poverty now is bad politics. Compare the Koreas 
> for example. Compare Venezuela to Costa Rica. Dictators wreck 
> economies.


So do right-wing politicians. The US has more poverty than Sweden. John Larkin won't be able to process this. He liked what Donald Trump did to the US economy, because the effect on his business was positive. Less well-off people were less impressed.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply by whit3rd ●January 6, 20222022-01-06
On Thursday, January 6, 2022 at 8:09:33 AM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:


> The main reason for poverty now is bad politics. Compare the Koreas 
> for example. Compare Venezuela to Costa Rica. Dictators wreck 
> economies.


Oh, there's population pressures and land depletion issues also; the  old days when
a tribe could move into new territory, and herders find fresh pastures, and loners could
forage in the wild, conferred a bit of safety that city-bound populations don't have.

Blaming 'bad politics' might be a cheap shot; which is the cause, and which the effect?
Economics of limited resources are subject to Malthusian logic.
Politics is always involved, but so is gravity, and air, by the simple mechanism of
ubiquity in human life.
Reply by ●January 6, 20222022-01-06
On Thu, 6 Jan 2022 01:46:58 -0800 (PST), Tabby <tabbypurr@gmail.com>
wrote:


>On Friday, 31 December 2021 at 11:12:53 UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> On 31 Dec 2021 08:38:07 GMT, Robert Latest <bobl...@yahoo.com> 
>> wrote:
>> >Rick C wrote: 
>> >> On Thursday, December 23, 2021 at 1:05:20 PM UTC-4, Robert Latest wrote: 
>> >>> Rick C wrote: 
>> >>> > Even the part that doesn't drive depends on the other part to get products 
>> >>> > and food produced and delivered and support their way of life. 
>> >>> Not as much as our lifestyle depends on their being paid so little that they 
>> >>> won't ever be able to afford to significantly pollute the planet. 
>> >> 
>> >> What??? Have you gone off the deep end??? 
>> > 
>> >No. 
>> > 
>> >> What part of 7 billion do you not understand? No one needs to drive cars or 
>> >> sit in hot tubs to pollute the planet when there are 7 billion of us all 
>> >> working to the same end. 
>> > 
>> >Exactly my point. It is intrinsically impossible for all 7 billion to have that.
>> Everyone should have electricity, clean running water, reasonably 
>> comfortable shelter, some sort of communications, transport, a decent 
>> diet, basic medical care, access to education, and basic safety. 
>> 
>> There is no reason that 7 billion people shouldn't have that. The 
>> fraction of the population living in extreme poverty continues to 
>> decline.
>
>It declines despite the definition being revised upward. 
>But the reasons for poverty are real, and not ceasing to exist any time soon.


The main reason for poverty now is bad politics. Compare the Koreas
for example. Compare Venezuela to Costa Rica. Dictators wreck
economies.



-- 

I yam what I yam - Popeye
Reply by Anthony William Sloman ●January 6, 20222022-01-06
On Thursday, January 6, 2022 at 8:47:01 PM UTC+11, Tabby wrote:

> On Friday, 31 December 2021 at 11:12:53 UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: 
> > On 31 Dec 2021 08:38:07 GMT, Robert Latest <bobl...@yahoo.com> wrote: 
> > >Rick C wrote: 
> > >> On Thursday, December 23, 2021 at 1:05:20 PM UTC-4, Robert Latest wrote: 
> > >>> Rick C wrote: 
> > >>> > Even the part that doesn't drive depends on the other part to get products 
> > >>> > and food produced and delivered and support their way of life. 
> > >>> Not as much as our lifestyle depends on their being paid so little that they 
> > >>> won't ever be able to afford to significantly pollute the planet. 
> > >> 
> > >> What??? Have you gone off the deep end??? 
> > > 
> > >No. 
> > > 
> > >> What part of 7 billion do you not understand? No one needs to drive cars or 
> > >> sit in hot tubs to pollute the planet when there are 7 billion of us all 
> > >> working to the same end. 
> > > 
> > >Exactly my point. It is intrinsically impossible for all 7 billion to have that. 
> > Everyone should have electricity, clean running water, reasonably 
> > comfortable shelter, some sort of communications, transport, a decent 
> > diet, basic medical care, access to education, and basic safety. 
> > 
> > There is no reason that 7 billion people shouldn't have that. The 
> > fraction of the population living in extreme poverty continues to 
> > decline.
>
> It declines despite the definition being revised upward. 
> But the reasons for poverty are real, and not ceasing to exist any time soon.


Sure. But the reasons for the real poverty that actually matters - kids not getting enough to eat or being well enough housed to be able to take full advantage of the education they - have been eliminated in Sweden, where the kids of single parents do just as well as the children of couples. They could be in other countries if the politicians were prepared to spend tax-payers money in the same way the Swedish government does, and Sweden collects 55% of the national income in taxes, which is higher than anywhere, without wrecking the economy.

Sweden is a fairly rich country, but richer countries do find all sorts of excuses for being less generous to the poor, and more generous to people with political influence.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply by Tabby ●January 6, 20222022-01-06
On Friday, 31 December 2021 at 11:12:53 UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

> On 31 Dec 2021 08:38:07 GMT, Robert Latest <bobl...@yahoo.com> 
> wrote:
> >Rick C wrote: 
> >> On Thursday, December 23, 2021 at 1:05:20 PM UTC-4, Robert Latest wrote: 
> >>> Rick C wrote: 
> >>> > Even the part that doesn't drive depends on the other part to get products 
> >>> > and food produced and delivered and support their way of life. 
> >>> Not as much as our lifestyle depends on their being paid so little that they 
> >>> won't ever be able to afford to significantly pollute the planet. 
> >> 
> >> What??? Have you gone off the deep end??? 
> > 
> >No. 
> > 
> >> What part of 7 billion do you not understand? No one needs to drive cars or 
> >> sit in hot tubs to pollute the planet when there are 7 billion of us all 
> >> working to the same end. 
> > 
> >Exactly my point. It is intrinsically impossible for all 7 billion to have that.
> Everyone should have electricity, clean running water, reasonably 
> comfortable shelter, some sort of communications, transport, a decent 
> diet, basic medical care, access to education, and basic safety. 
> 
> There is no reason that 7 billion people shouldn't have that. The 
> fraction of the population living in extreme poverty continues to 
> decline.


It declines despite the definition being revised upward. 
But the reasons for poverty are real, and not ceasing to exist any time soon.
Reply by Anthony William Sloman ●December 31, 20212021-12-31
On Friday, December 31, 2021 at 10:12:53 PM UTC+11, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

> On 31 Dec 2021 08:38:07 GMT, Robert Latest <bobl...@yahoo.com> 
> wrote:
> >Rick C wrote: 
> >> On Thursday, December 23, 2021 at 1:05:20 PM UTC-4, Robert Latest wrote: 
> >>> Rick C wrote: 
> >>> > Even the part that doesn't drive depends on the other part to get products 
> >>> > and food produced and delivered and support their way of life. 
> >>> Not as much as our lifestyle depends on their being paid so little that they 
> >>> won't ever be able to afford to significantly pollute the planet. 
> >> 
> >> What??? Have you gone off the deep end??? 
> > 
> >No. 
> > 
> >> What part of 7 billion do you not understand? No one needs to drive cars or 
> >> sit in hot tubs to pollute the planet when there are 7 billion of us all 
> >> working to the same end. 
> > 
> >Exactly my point. It is intrinsically impossible for all 7 billion to have that.
>
> Everyone should have electricity, clean running water, reasonably 
> comfortable shelter, some sort of communications, transport, a decent 
> diet, basic medical care, access to education, and basic safety. 


Quite a few Americans don't. Your access to education was limited by your enthusiasm for concentrating on what you imagined was going to be useful.


> There is no reason that 7 billion people shouldn't have that.


But quite a few Americans don't. Your society does insist on treating quite a bit of your population badly.
The children of single mothers in  Sweden do just as well as everybody else - they don't in the US. 


> The  fraction of the population living in extreme poverty continues to decline.


Because somebody is changing the definition of "extreme poverty"?

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply by ●December 31, 20212021-12-31
On 31 Dec 2021 08:38:07 GMT, Robert Latest <boblatest@yahoo.com>
wrote:


>Rick C wrote:
>> On Thursday, December 23, 2021 at 1:05:20 PM UTC-4, Robert Latest wrote:
>>> Rick C wrote: 
>>> > Even the part that doesn't drive depends on the other part to get products 
>>> > and food produced and delivered and support their way of life.
>>> Not as much as our lifestyle depends on their being paid so little that they 
>>> won't ever be able to afford to significantly pollute the planet.
>>
>> What???  Have you gone off the deep end???
>
>No.
>
>> What part of 7 billion do you not understand?  No one needs to drive cars or
>> sit in hot tubs to pollute the planet when there are 7 billion of us all
>> working to the same end. 
>
>Exactly my point. It is intrinsically impossible for all 7 billion to have that.


Everyone should have electricity, clean running water, reasonably
comfortable shelter, some sort of communications, transport, a decent
diet, basic medical care, access to education, and basic safety.

There is no reason that 7 billion people shouldn't have that. The
fraction of the population living in extreme poverty continues to
decline.



-- 

I yam what I yam - Popeye
Reply by Robert Latest ●December 31, 20212021-12-31
Rick C wrote:

> On Thursday, December 23, 2021 at 1:05:20 PM UTC-4, Robert Latest wrote:
>> Rick C wrote: 
>> > Even the part that doesn't drive depends on the other part to get products 
>> > and food produced and delivered and support their way of life.
>> Not as much as our lifestyle depends on their being paid so little that they 
>> won't ever be able to afford to significantly pollute the planet.
>
> What???  Have you gone off the deep end???


No.


> What part of 7 billion do you not understand?  No one needs to drive cars or
> sit in hot tubs to pollute the planet when there are 7 billion of us all
> working to the same end. 


Exactly my point. It is intrinsically impossible for all 7 billion to have that.