Where do we even begin?

85 people in the world have more than the bottom-netting 3.5 billion;

Now, some people say time & chance DO NOT happen to all men, & that the rich are necessarily & always just “that much” better: how much is “that much”? The average top-85-netter really 41,176,471 times “better”¹ than the average person from the bottom-netting 3.5-billion?

41 million, 176 thousand, 471 times “better” —

“Ha ha” is what I have to say that; you’re kidding me.

But what a cruel joke — because it’s real.

Sit down any of these top-85 netters & talk to them: you will see they, as the saying goes, put their socks on one foot at a time, too; they are not 41 million times better in any respect – *laughs*. how about we measure their sense of fairness?

Too, some say “Well, inequality; there must be some inequality, because some have higher & lower abilities” – income & wealth ‘variation’ is not what we mean; we are not un-understanding of that. I believe we SHOULD each have the fruits of our labor, as the Biblical saying goes, & get what we earn.

But when you produce 100$ profit an hour for your boss, & he pays you 10$, & then your co-worker too earns your boss 100$ an hour, but he pays her only 10$ for that same amount of time — are we really getting the fruits of our labor, then, or are people taking, or are our bosses taking the fruits of OUR labor, as their exorbitant profit? I believe they are taking the fruits of OUR labor, not you are jeopardizing the fruits you steal from us.

So really, I agree we should receive the fruits of our labor – that applies more to the people earning 41,176,471 times less — unless you feel the average worker among the poorest 3.5 billion DOES DO 1/41,176,471 times less work, on average, than the usual top-earning-85 person does. Otherwise: you see the unfairness.

& The truth is we are not evil. Power ossifies, but the those top-85-netting people – what some would call an old boy’s club – have not volunteered to beyond the shadow of a doubt make this fair; So the we will act where they will not.

* * * *

How?

One idea is employeed-owned business models & co-op business models; employee-owned businesses & co-ops are fundamentally different than normal ‘winner-take-all’ type business models.

As I understand them: profits are distributed more fairly / totally fairly, & decisions are no bureaucratic but democratic, more often. Also every worker feels they have a stake in the business, so they, if they are somewhat sensible, responsible, they tend their business more, with more passion, than getting minimum wage with little hope of increasing their income through their efforts.

This way people do make more money – the fruits of their labor – & do a better job, providing better goods & services cheaper.

Why not subsidize, campaign for, & yourself start innovative employee-owned or co-op businesses, & wave what like gold will not de-value: ethical doing.

* * * *

Poverty is a serious issue. According to UNICEF, 22,000 children die everyday due to poverty.

If 22,000 people died a day of another preventable cause, we’d be flailing — much less children: 22,000 children die everyday due to our Greed, & wealth inequality, etc. To defend this is unconscionable. If you were at a party & many children were dying, unless you gave them 100$, then wouldn’t you give 100$ in almost every circumstance — only saving more lives I could think of would trump it — & save many children’s lives? it might be hard but in the end it’s the right thing to do.

we should think of global inequality the same way, & stop being so Greedy.

* * * *

footnote:

are these top 85 earners really, on average, 41,176,471 times “better” than 3.5 billion people¹, even those without large sums of wealth?: 

from freenode #math:
<mobuto> yes, 3.5/85 is the multiple for avg incomes in those 2 cohorts
<mobuto> 3.5 bil i mean

3,500,000,000 ÷ 85 = 41,176,470.5882; i rounded up to 41,176,471 for the multiple of times supposedly “better” they are, according to those who claim the rich are just all-out “better” than the poor. if that is not true, is the idea, if the rich are not just fundamentally better than the poor, & time & chance as we’ve heard in the Bible happeneth to them all, then this is actually a measure of the unfairness, with the genuine difference in abilities (considering we should eat the fruits of our labor) still needing some amount – maybe not totalized by some poorly-designed ‘measure of merit’ — the genuine difference of abilities needing some factorization.

* * * *

as a final note, consider contributing your opinion on inequality in conversation with your friends & family, & via social media. Thank You.

~ Joe