Are wealthy countries in anyway responsible to lift poor countries out of poverty?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rozellelily
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Eric_Hyom said:
40.png
JanSobieskiIII:
And the fact that they’re buying those things has no impact on those children whatsoever.
Click to expand...
You are right, the rich are squandering their money on multi million dollar toys and ignoring the starving. You win.
Click to expand...
You seem to be missing the point that someone had to build those toys (aka jobs).

I’m not sure how old you are but in 1991 the US enacted a luxury tax on yachts, furs, expensive watches, expensive cars, etc. It was supposed to generate $9B in additional revenue. According to the attached, its first year it brought in $97M, and yacht retailers saw 77% drop in sales and boat manufacturers laid off 25,000 people. Now, who are those 25,000 people that lost their jobs?
 
Read the book economics in one lesson by Henry Hazlitt.

Pope Francis isn’t an economist.
 
DENNYINMI said:
About 44 million people in this country have no health insurance, and another 38 million have inadequate health insurance. This means that nearly one-third of Americans face each day without the security of knowing that, if and when they need it, medical care is available to them and their families.
Click to expand...
We need more rich people to start health insurance companies. Too bad the government will not let them compete across state lines and hampers their ability to provide service to the healthy by forcing them to take on risk or guaranteed losses to cover those with pre-existing conditions.
 
Israel has an excellent model of health care…it will allow the private insurance companies to remain but alleviates the middle man and bean counter for the rest of us.
 
The best way to help the poor is get them a job, not getting them a handout. Economic growth is more important than feeling good about yourself because you donated a blanket or $20 worth of canned goods or voting for a politician to raise taxes to pay for social programs.
 
KMC said:
You seem to be missing the point that someone had to build those toys (aka jobs).
Click to expand...
And when millions are spent on toys instead of bread, poor people suffer.
KMC said:
I’m not sure how old you are but in 1991 the US enacted a luxury tax on yachts, furs, expensive watches, expensive cars, etc. It was supposed to generate $9B in additional revenue. According to the attached, its first year it brought in $97M, and yacht retailers saw 77% drop in sales and boat manufacturers laid off 25,000 people. Now, who are those 25,000 people that lost their jobs?
Click to expand...
I am sure no jobs were lost, the rich just look to other countries were they can get a better deal. A bit like Apple, they ship their manufacturing to countries that pay a dollar an hour.
 
I find your IQ comment offensive and nearly xenophobic, what we Christians call “uncharitable”.
 
Their population is also only the size of the state of Virginia.
 
It would be intellectually dishonest to say that people in the poorest regions do have the lowest IQ scores, and it would be odd not to see a correlation there.
 
In Henry Hazlitt’s 1946 book Economics in One Lesson (Chapter 11 “Who’s “Protected” by Tariffs?”) he explains why protectionism and tariffs can never make a country better off, and in fact always have to make the protectionist country worse off, on net. Reason? We “pathologically” (see previous CD post featuring Hazlitt here for an explanation) substitute comparatively inefficient, high-cost domestic production for comparatively efficient, low-cost foreign production. It’s just an ironclad, stubborn and inflexible economic fact that you can’t artificially introduce massive and wasteful inefficiencies into an economy with protectionist policies, and somehow make the economy better off. Protectionists just can’t overcome the “protectionist math” that guarantees significant adverse economic outcomes from tariffs that include a net loss of domestic jobs, a net loss of domestic income, a lower standard of living, and reduced prosperity. Here’s Hazlitt: Now let us look at the effect of imposing a tariff. Suppose that there had been no tariff on foreign knit goods, that Americans were accustomed to buying foreign sweaters without duty, and that the argument were then put forward that we could bring a domestic sweater industry into existence by imposing a duty of on sweaters. There would be nothing logically wrong with this argument so far as it went.

SEND THE BOOK TO TRUMP. IT APPEARS HE NEEDS IT…hahaha
 
Eric_Hyom said:
I am sure no jobs were lost, the rich just look to other countries were they can get a better deal. A bit like Apple, they ship their manufacturing to countries that pay a dollar an hour.
Click to expand...
You’re making stuff up. If you respond back, please provide evidence for your claim.

Just learn a little bit about the 1991 luxury tax. It had bi-partisan support for repeal because of its negative consequences:



People lost jobs because of this…not wealthy people
 
On that we will agree lol, Trump’s tariff policies are dumb.
 
I don’t see a correlation between IQ and productivity/economical success and entrepeneurship. IQ only describes one aspect of intelligence, reaasoning, it isn’t accurate to measure creativity, knowledge or will.
Also, Europe isn’t the only place with high IQ.
 
When you compare these two maps, the first being a measure of wealth and the second being average IQ, it’s hard not to see a correlation between the 2. People with better reasoning skills make better economic choices.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
JanSobieskiIII said:
When you compare these two maps, the first being a measure of wealth and the second being average IQ, it’s hard not to see a correlation between the 2. People with better reasoning skills make better economic choices.
Click to expand...
Except IQ is an indicator of cultural intelligence and not reasoning…your and my IQ as related to our culture might be high, but our IQ for sub Saharan Africa, or an American inter city ghetto might significantly lag behind those living there.
 
KMC said:
Not sure what you mean, please be more specific. Thanks!
Click to expand...
Picture your hands extended, and God places his blessings into your hands…When your hands are full, no more can be added…however, if you gift your blessings to someone in need, what leaves your hands allows more room for further blessings from God.

This makes assisting those in need a personal act rather than an act relegated to the government.
 
Last edited:
What kind of economical parameter is wealth? Salary? GDP?
I see China has a high IQ rate, yet much of its workers work in conditions we would consider slavery.
I should have said causation , correlation doesn’t imply causation
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top