Why can equality not prevail?

[Alpha]

*ahem*

And therefore, I can conclude:
Poverty is because Bill Gates is.

[$tyli$h Executive]

He admits.

Yes.

Is there not something called "natural death"?

Still, it must be because of something. Some disease or accident or something like that. Therefore, my previous argument would hold true in case of natural death too.

You use a decade to compare, and are talking about "rapidly"... 


Absolute poverty... not relative. Therefore, poverty exists.

Yes I used a decade. But you can compare with the previous year too. You'll see that, unless you suffered  a substantial business failure (God forbid), you are better off than you were. I used a decade just because I wanted to illustrate a sample timeframe.

I do not deny that poverty exists. I just claim that it is decreasing rapidly.

*ahem*

And therefore, I can conclude:
Poverty is because Bill Gates is

I just invalidated your previous arguments. Therefore, you cannot claim that.

[0kelvin]

The Matrix. Imagine if everything in the world, includding consciousness and self awarness, could be represented by a constant function f(x) = something.

[Deadly_king]

If you think well, inequality isn't bad. Everybody cannot be equal if man has to move on in life.

I don't imagine myself living in a world where everybody is poor, everybody illiterate, and everybody, a criminal. It can be in this sense too, nah.

Inequality is essential for human kind. GOD has created us different from each other for a reason.

Else everyone would have been clones of each other with the same wants.

But you can't also imagine yourself living in a world where everyone is rich, educated but lazy and waste a lot.

[Deadly_king]

There is some contradiction here. In the previous part, you said that we do have a right to prosper and earn the maximum. While in the latter part you said that greed is not good ie. possessing more than one needs/deserves. How can one prosper and earn the maximum and at the same time, possess not more than one needs/deserves?

I said you have a right. This does not mean that we must do it.

You should work just enough, not in excess and not less either. There's no doubt that the whole society will prosper in this way.

Also, the word need and deserve was used as the synonym. I don't think this is the case. In my opinion, whether someone deserves something is determined by whether he has it or not. You deserve it, so you have it. You don't, so you don't have it. Its pretty simple.

You have a point here.  

But unfortunately in our cruel world some persons who rightfully deserve it do not have it while those who don't deserve it, have it. This is why according to me, it's better that only people who need it, have it and not those who deserve it.

To be realistic, one needs very less. I need very less wealth to cover my basic needs (eg. shelter, food, security etc). Talking in that respect, I do not need to study in a good expensive school which offers Cambridge syllabuses. I can get my basic education in a local, feeble one. That would cover my needs well. While at the same time, I'm sure, this is something everyone including you would disapprove of.

The desire to acquire excessive wealth and materialistic possessions has been the root of all progress of mankind. It is a virtue and everyone should practice it, in my opinion. Everyone should have the excessive desire to acquire excessive wealth and they should work for it. This system will ensure our (the mankind, as a whole)'s progress.

It is only harmful when someone directly competes for the resources of others. What I mean to say is, take the example of a person. He has a friend who has more wealth than him. He becomes greedy of his friend's wealth.

Now, this can be expressed in two ways. First: Due to this desire, he can set his mind to be more wealthy than his friend. By doing so, he will have to do better in business and/or his job. Or he will have to look for other better opportunities which may feed his desire. Second: He becomes jealous of his friend and makes a plot to grab his wealth by some means.

The first one is a virtue, is good, and is something which has caused the human race to progress this far. The second one is not good and often backfires.

I hope I'm clear.

Well, my dear friend, our resources on Earth are limited and inter-related. We cannot progress without being the prime reason of our colleague's failure. Even if we're not at all jealous of our colleague and are in no case competing against each other.

I understand that we should acquire wealth for our own progress but if we limit ourselves to a specific height and personally take the resolution of not exceeding, even if we have the chance to do so, this will ensure the progress of the whole human kind. Not only the rich ones.

Our personal benefit should be preceded by the advantage of the human race.

[Alpha]

Yes.

Still, it must be because of something. Some disease or accident or something like that. Therefore, my previous argument would hold true in case of natural death too.

People die because they have to. It isn't necessary for a third element like a disease or accident to come in between you and death. 

Yes I used a decade. But you can compare with the previous year too. You'll see that, unless you suffered  a substantial business failure (God forbid), you are better off than you were. I used a decade just because I wanted to illustrate a sample timeframe.

I do not deny that poverty exists. I just claim that it is decreasing rapidly.

I didn't deny either. We're turning round. 

I just invalidated your previous arguments. Therefore, you cannot claim that.

How? I am not convinced. 

The Matrix. Imagine if everything in the world, includding consciousness and self awarness, could be represented by a constant function f(x) = something.

Can you explain further, please?

Inequality is essential for human kind. GOD has created us different from each other for a reason.

Else everyone would have been clones of each other with the same wants.

Agreed. My stand. 

But you can't also imagine yourself living in a world where everyone is rich, educated but lazy and waste a lot.

Lol. 
What I meant was to illustrate the Yin-Yang Chinese concept: without inequality, equality doesn't exist.

Well, my dear friend, our resources on Earth are limited and inter-related. We cannot progress without being the prime reason of our colleague's failure. Even if we're not at all jealous of our colleague and are in no case competing against each other.

Pareto optimality.*

[Alpha]

*ahem*

And therefore, I can conclude:
Poverty is because Bill Gates is.

By the way... 

The original quote is:

Poverty is because humankind is.

Poor Bill.

[0kelvin]

The Matrix.

In certain part of the movie Agent Smith tells that the first version of the matrix failed because the machines thought that a perfect virtual world would make all humans happy. The third version included some kind of evil vs hero variable into play, but at the same time, the whatever f(x) that should have kept the virtual world balanced, couldn't predict that at some point, the evil vs hero battle would destabilize that f(x).

Source: http://matrix.wikia.com/wiki/Matrix_betas

[$tyli$h Executive]

I said you have a right. This does not mean that we must do it.

You should work just enough, not in excess and not less either. There's no doubt that the whole society will prosper in this way.

I understand that we should acquire wealth for our own progress but if we limit ourselves to a specific height and personally take the resolution of not exceeding, even if we have the chance to do so, this will ensure the progress of the whole human kind. Not only the rich ones.

That is definitely not a good idea. This is all I can say.

[Deadly_king]

Agreed. My stand. 

Yupz........same point of view, I guess.

Lol. 
What I meant was to illustrate the Yin-Yang Chinese concept: without inequality, equality doesn't exist.

Yeah................that's certainly impossible. But it's upto us to maintain the balance.

Pareto optimality.*

I love that though I doubt it occurs in life nowadays. It has become very rare these days. 

But this would surely prove to be the best solution.

That is definitely not a good idea. This is all I can say.

Hmm..............that's your point of view.

I would love to have more details about it though.

[$tyli$h Executive]

I would love to have more details about it though.

Tired of repeating.

You have your own responsibility, not anyone else's. Neither would anybody else bear your responsibility.

[Alpha]

In certain part of the movie Agent Smith tells that the first version of the matrix failed because the machines thought that a perfect virtual world would make all humans happy. The third version included some kind of evil vs hero variable into play, but at the same time, the whatever f(x) that should have kept the virtual world balanced, couldn't predict that at some point, the evil vs hero battle would destabilize that f(x).

Source: http://matrix.wikia.com/wiki/Matrix_betas

Is that a concept of equality? 

Yupz........same point of view, I guess.

Yeah................that's certainly impossible. But it's upto us to maintain the balance.

First, to define this balance. 

I love that though I doubt it occurs in life nowadays. It has become very rare these days. 

But this would surely prove to be the best solution.

It's just an economic concept... pure theory. 

Tired of repeating.

You have your own responsibility, not anyone else's. Neither would anybody else bear your responsibility.

Harsh, but true.

Utterly true.

[$tyli$h Executive]

Harsh, but true.

Utterly true.

Thanks!

At least, you agree on something.

Yes, its true. We all should abide by it.

[***exam***]

its 21st century ! n its big time that equality should prevail ! all v need is a change in every individuals perception

[MiniLuv]

My opinion is that as long as religions exist, there will be no equality. I for one respect all religions, unlike religious people. The thing is, religion is what separates the world apart. Most Christians think of Muslims as terrorists, and vice versa. I know this is touchy, so please don't feel offended and I apologize if you do.