a) don't believe it will make a real diffrence.

b) don't care.

c) Are stockpiling thier wealth into the family knowing that thier survival and seed line is more important to them than some starving sub-humans half a world a way.

d) are not ALLOWED to help too much.

Although I imagine that a, b, and c are the legitimate reason of some of these billionaires, the fact that I absolutely KNOW that there are at least some few of those 1,700+ that really do want to help people, but that don't/can't, makes me think that "d" is a very real situation going on as well.

You don't make a billion dollars in today's society without atleast a 82% chance of soul loss/satan sell-out.

Seems very much correct - which is a large part of the reason why I said one isn't allowed to help too much.

We tax payers gave a fuck ton of money to detroit to stimulate the economy and all those money whores did was hold on to it while turning off the poor man's power.

And this is why if I were a billionaire, I would just go to Africa and Detroit myself and give directly without first siphoning the money through b.s. tax dollars given to a corrupt governmental system.

Good stuff, and thanks for reading all this run on if you did =)

I read it. Even upvoted. :) Cheers,

i just dont understand how you can be a billionaire, and not want to immediately fly over to africa and feed as many people as possible.

That's actually my thought as well.

I wonder, however, if any billionaire attempting to do something like this wouldn't get undermined and possibly killed before accomplishing the task.

Think about it. Let's say you had something like $10B. That wouldn't even put you in the top 120 people on that fucking list, by the way. Anyway, imagine what you could do with, say, $2-3B of that in Africa or anywhere else in the world that was impoverished.

You could completely turn around a country w/$2-3B wisely spent...and you'd still have $7-8 MILLION FUCKING DOLLARS LEFT OVER! More than you could ever possibly spend in your entire life!

Yet it doesn't happen.

Why?

I have a feeling it's because you're not allowed to REALLY help the world and the people in it out the way you could if you wanted to. If I were a billionaire, I could feed and clothe and help the entire nation of Africa and bring them back to health.

But I don't think that would be allowed actually. I think I would die a "mysterious and unfortunate death" beforehand.

Fucked up world, man. Fucked up world.

or even go to bad areas like detriot and southside chicago and buy lots of buisnesses to provide jobs for all of the unemployed people.

Exactly. Set up schools, set up agriculture businesses to help people eat healthy, etc.

No dyed in the wool capitalist would want to emancipate third world nations.

I wouldn't necessarily disagree with this. I guess I'm not a capitalist in any sense of the word then, because if I were a billionaire, at least a good portion of my money would go straight to the worst parts of the world to help there.

We don't want them healthy wealthy and wise as they'd be much harder to control and exploit. Broken corrupt governments and fractured socio political structures are great for business! So long as the costs are low trade routes are open the globalists don't give a fuck.

Correct. All sounds about right, unfortunately.

I wouldn't doubt that there is a decent amount of validity in this statement here.

I understand and even agree with the general sentiment stated here, sir. However, it seems the level of greed that exists on this planet has to be about a lot more than simply wanting more for yourself and less for others because - if one stops and really thinks about it for just one moments - one will realize that you yourself would actually be better off in a world where everyone were living in clean abundance and health. It’s easy if you stop and think about it: Would you rather have 80% of 20 or 20% of 90? Right now the world and the civilization can be said to be at 20% efficiency because of the actions of a few who are sequestering 80% of that dismal efficiency. If EVERYONE really decided to work together as one, however, then everyone’s standard of living would rise dramatically, and those who currently have 16 of those 20 units of wealth (i.e. 80% of it) would suddenly have 18 units of wealth - i.e. even more than they had before.

It’s a win win situation. Those who are wealthy now/already would become even more wealthy - maybe not in terms of fictitious fiat currency paper dollars in a cyber bank account, but in terms of REAL material worth and wealth in their lives and their standard of living. Doing things this way actually BENEFITS the greedy elite more than would otherwise be the case.

If I can think like this and come to this realization, then I’m confident that really almost anyone can. I’m confident that at least some if not many of these super rich types have realized this. I also feel confident that at least a few of them may have even actually tried going through with using some of their vast wealth to help others and change things in a manner, perhaps, similar to what I just explained above here.

And I have a sneaking suspicion that their efforts were thwarted somewhere down the line…somehow.

The fact that not one of those who have (presumably) tried this method have come even close to succeeding tells me that there is something - some power - beyond simple “human greed” that prevents it from happening. It reminds me very much of this quote.

Your first paragraph here seems to be saying that if everyone worked together, everyone's piece of the pie would stay the same and it'd only be the size of the pie itself that would grow.

Not in the least. I’m glad you said it seems because you let it be known that your thinking might be mistaken. I apologize for, perhaps, not explaining myself more clearly, but I absolutely did NOT mean that “everyone’s piece of the pie would stay the same and it’d only be the size of the pie itself that would grow”.

What I meant was that everyone’s piece of the pie would grow - period - including that of the wealthy.

EVERYONE would be wealthy (not “monetarily” only, by the way).

If humanity worked together going forward and prospered, there are some things that would be required first for this to happen. Government control would need to be severely curtailed, the central banking cartel would need to be totally overhauled or abolished, the MIC would need to stop waging wars of aggression all around the world for profit, etc., etc.

Absolutely. 100% agreed.

All of these things would lead to the current billionaires losing some percentage of the total world's wealth as the rest of us were gaining a larger percentage of the total world's wealth.

Not necessarily because what it seems would likely happen in a civilization where EVERYONE is living properly/correctly/equally is that (as I said above) although the super wealthy themselves may no longer have a hoard of “fictitious fiat currency paper dollars in a cyber bank account”, the “REAL material worth and wealth in their lives and [in] their standard of living” would likely increase exponentially. As such, they would indeed be more wealthy.

It’s kind of like the concept of trusts: You may “technically” not have any money or items that ACTUALLY belongs to you, per se (“It all belongs to the trust. I’m merely the executor of it.”), but YOU YOURSELF would nonetheless still be living in extravagant wealth if it happens to be a huge trust that you are the executor of and if you handle that trust wisely. Essentially, in the paradigm I’m speaking of, there could exist a level of equality whereby the very planet itself is looked upon as “the trust” and everyone benefits bountifully from its offerings in a manner far greater than would be the case via the current method of great inequality and draconian monetary policy.

And I apply this benefit for not only the poor, but for the uber wealthy s well.

I mean what if the solution to humanity's problem was to stop using currency at all?

That’s actually the very thing I am talking about here.

How would that benefit the world's billionaires?

This makes me think of this right here.

The benefit is not in the money one has, but in what that money can get you, and in the paradigm I’m referring to, one can obtain a LOT more than what would be otherwise possible through our current civilization.

The Venus Project is one step in this direction - though it is, of course, not exhaustive in its views. Even more yet could be done.

It would in fact directly fuck them because all of their billions and mountains of paper would be entirely worthless and they'd be on an even keel with all of us.

It would absolutely not fuck them because the “keel” they would be on would end up ultimately being even greater and higher than where they were previously at.

Even for a "non-evil" billionaire, I'm sure the prospect of slumming it with the common man is appalling and terrifying

I wouldn’t doubt that, but I’m not talking about or referring to any type of “slumming” it. Far from it, as a matter of fact.

so why would they work towards this goal by helping a large number of people?

They wouldn’t be working toward that goal. Not in the least. As explained above, they’d be working toward a planet that is so clean and abundant that they would be in better shape than would ever otherwise be the case actually.

Doing things this way actually BENEFITS the greedy elite more than would otherwise be the case.

I think it just seems this way to you or I because we're thinking of it from our own perspective.

I say it would seem this way to anyone if they stop and think about it logically and cogently for a moment. As I said before, would you prefer 80% of 20 (equaling 16) or 15% of 150 (equaling 22.5)? You end up with a greater net profit in the latter scenario.

How would it benefit the greedy elite to have a world full of self-sufficient people who work together to provide for themselves, don't require government, don't require fiat currency, etc.?

What everyone - even the rich - would get in a society valuing health, cleanliness, and equality - a society that puts great emphasis on technological growth and sustainability - would be a civilization vastly cleaner, healthier, and more robust than the cesspool of general filth that currently exists to such great extents that even the uber rich “exclusive” neighborhoods are not exempt from being adversely effected by it. I understand that many rich people live in opulent surroundings, but trust me. I live very close to some of the richest mansions in the United States, and RIGHT NEXT to some of them are neighborhoods that can nearly be classified as “section 8 housing”. They are nowhere near as removed from “the dirty masses” as they think or would like to be.

A world full of healthy, intelligent, educated, self-sufficient people would ensure that whatever neighborhood the uber wealthy today happen to live in and whatever air they and their children happen to breath will be cleaner and surrounded by health - not a world that is generally unhealthy, bad for you, and where the water you drink and the aquatic life in it that some people eat is contaminated, etc.

If your goal was control and your means of achieving it was fucking over your fellow man, why would you support anything that would empower them?

That’s a good question, but here we get into some even deeper waters because one has to at this point wonder if the goal is “benefitting oneself” or “control”. If it’s the former, then controlling the masses via draconian measures WOULDN’T actually be the best way to achieve a better life for yourself. Lifting EVERYBODY up together is by far the better way (what’s stronger, after all? One man who can life 1,000 pounds, or 2,000 only lifting one pound each?).

If the goal is control, however, and one is willing to gain that control at the cost of great sacrifice to one’s very own well-being (which is what the .01% are currently doing), then one does have to wonder why it is that one would be willing to sacrifice themselves for that level of control.

Trying to answer this question is when one finds out how deep the rabbit hole REALLY goes.

It only benefits the greedy elite if they actually have humanity's best interests in mind instead of their own, and I don't think that's the case at all.

Don’t know if you meant to type this particular sentence out, because you seem to be saying that it BENEFITS the elite to have humanity’s best interest in mind…and I’m actually AGREEING with that. This is pretty much exactly what I’m saying. It would BENEFIT them if they helped humanity as a whole out.

As far as whether some billionaire has tried to actually help people, I don't know. I'd need to see something to support that.

I certainly don’t know either. I guess all I’m saying is that it seems, to me anyway, only logical that, of those 1,700+ billionaires, at least ONE of them might have similar ideas. I guess I’m only saying this because I don’t think what I’m saying is all that unique a thought or idea.

Where I'm at now is pretty much, "He wouldn't be a billionaire if he wasn't fine with fucking people over, period."

Well, I would absolutely gear most of my own perspective toward this view as well. I tend to be a pretty benefit of the doubt giving person, however.

I don't know that there are any exceptions to that because I haven't seen any.

I haven’t either…but I also know that absence of evidence doesn’t necessarily mean evidence of absence.

But yeah, I'd say that if there is such a power, it's coming from the highest levels of the world elite (whoever that ultimately is), and we know they have many different means of blackmail and of getting what they want so it probably would be relatively simple to keep billionaires from getting too cute with their money or charitable causes.

Yep. Seems that way to me anyway.

And I fully agree with and understand the response you posted in your “EDIT”, sir.

Cheers,

I would prefer 15% of 150, but I feel like the huge majority of the self-proclaimed elite would not.

If the main motivation of the elite is greed, then it would seem they would want any scenario whereupon they get more wealth and are indeed better off. If their main motivation is control, however, then it would seem the fact that they would be willing to have it at the expense of their own further benefit has to be questioned. One really has to stop and wonder why exactly that would be…and I don’t think mere “greed” or “because they’re just crazy!” is really an adequate answer or explanation.

Having a bigger percentage of the total pie means having more power, means having more control over the rest of the pie, and that's what I think it's mostly about

That then seems to strongly indicate that their actions are actually not about them per se, but about something else - some “greater cause” or principle that they are merely a part of and are executing that goes/exists outside of mere wealth acquisition. Why do I say that? Because it seems indubitably obvious that the acquisition of wealth and control ONLY for the sake of wealth and control alone is actually WORSE for the individuals that strive for those things. And if somebody like me knows this…then I KNOW that the rich elite know this. I KNOW that they understand the extent to which their remaining in the imbalanced status quo as it currently exists is actually WORSE for them.

This, further, strongly indicates that there is something else going on and motivating the paradigm of great inequality that exists on this planet other than simple and basic “greed and control” alone. If my goal is to benefit myself as best as possible, and I discover that this end goal gets WAY more accomplished by living in a group where EVERYBODY is benefited also, then I’ll make sure and work toward THAT type of world and scenario even if I don’t care about the other members of the group. In other words, if helping you benefits me, then I don’t care whether I like you or not, I’m going to help you.

I KNOW the elite understand and grasp this concept, so the fact that they continue to actually HURT those not in their ranks and make sure that the great disparity in classes continues indicates that there, again, is most definitely something else going on other than just pure “human greed run amok”.

I'm sure that their standard of living is fine: fresh, non-fluoridated water, access to the best healthcare, clean food, opulent mansions far from the public eye, etc. I'm just trying to think about this problem from the perspective of someone like that.

What you just mentioned here reminds me of this. It doesn’t seem very possible to me to be able to benefit yourself at the expense of others and NOT end up being adversely effected yourself.

for what it's worth I'll say that it would be pretty cool if a few billionaires stepped up and tried to help humanity. I don't know if I'll be holding my breath though unfortunately.

I DEFINITELY don’t think it’s going to happen at all. I mean it hasn’t happened YET, so why would it happen now if it hasn’t for centuries? The opportunity that the elite have had to help the masses has existed for as long as history has existed, and they never helped then…so why would/should they start now?

I’m beyond not holding my breath either. I only posted this OP just to show (as I’m sure others have on other occasions) how easy it would indeed be TO bring the entire civilization up and make it much better.

Thanks for the thoughts,

Where we differ is that I don't see how helping the rest of us would benefit them at all from a power/control standpoint. I agree that there very likely is some "larger reason" for why this is what they're working towards, but I'm not seeing how helping the rest of us to prosper would make them more powerful or more in control - if you want to control a group of people, I think keeping them distracted, confused, fighting amongst themselves, etc. would be the way to go.

I can see what you’re saying here.

I guess my question is why do you think the elite would be better off from a control standpoint if they started helping the rest of us bridge the gap between us and them?

From a power and control standpoint, you have a valid argument. There is indeed a school of thought, however, wherein which a greater level of control is garnered by actually helping those you want to control rather than forcing them into it. In other words, although there are some people that are just crazy/socio/psychopathic, etc and that might very well kill their parents and loved ones regardless of how they’re treated and raised and helped, one has to wonder: What would work better? getting someone to work for you by forcing and threatening them to do it and killing them if they don’t? or by helping them, giving them good education and a good standard of living, being fair with them, and treating them nice/well?

It would seem the latter would work better as far as I can see. It would seem that would allow even better control because there wouldn’t be as much collateral damage that you would constantly have to sweep up after as a result of having an aggressive, imbalance society. A strict but fair justice system that DOES punish wrong doing across the board regardless who engages in it would, I imagine, help curtail those elements that go rogue, etc, as well.

All this, however, is under the assumption that we’re not living in a society wherein a secret cabal of human and/or non-human entities exist that have the specific interest and intent of actually aggressively ruling and enslaving (essentially “farming”) the human masses that they see as (or actually are) far beneath them in evolutionary development.

Money is a fictional entity, they have as much of that as they'd ever need and all of the resources and material wealth they'd ever need, so why would giving some of that away to us help them control us? I just don't see it.

From a strict control standpoint, it might indeed not be part of the plan. From a perspective of what would simply be better for this elite, what I’m saying would indeed make better sense. Again, however, from a strict control aspect, what you say is valid.

What we’re talking about here, then, REALLY drives the point home that this planet may very well ALREADY have extensive extraterrestrial (or, at the very least, non-terrestrial-human, non-homo sapien sapien) contact running through and controlling it.

I’m not certain that the power that’s responsible for giving the uber billionaire elite themselves the power and status that they have - i.e. the power responsible for helping them become the uber billionaire elite that they are and helping them forge this civilization into what it is today - is strictly terrestrial homo sapien sapien and from this planet.

From this stance and this foundation and this perspective, then I can indeed see the sense in the uber elite remaining super rich at the expense of everyone else - remaining in control to the extent that they are.

I can’t quite wrap my head around any other reason why this paradigm if inequality would make any real sense, however. I’m not super certain that human beings alone and by themselves are actually intelligent or advanced enough to have come up with all of this (this civilization, etc) on their/our own.

The only angle I understand about this is that by fucking the entire planet and environment over, they're also destroying their own home.

Yes. Absolutely. That’s kind of my main, basic counterargument to this entire dynamic. That’s it right there. It really makes no sense UNLESS they’re working for/under “somebody else” and/or unless their motivation and the reasoning for their actions is NOT purely about benefitting themselves and taking more and more for themselves at the expense of everyone else.

What do we eat when we've killed the last fish, and that video you linked - that idea

Correct.

And I don't know what the answer there is,

I don’t know for sure either, but it really does seem to be logically pointing toward a power and an influence that - in NOT having the best interest of the terrestrial human race in mind - quite possibly ISN’T, therefore, human itself.

maybe they know something we don't

Maybe they have information that they garnered from “higher ups” above even them and that might not necessarily be on this planet itself.

and maybe they have a plan or plans in place for when that occurs

Marine Captain Randy Cramer not only says that he spent 15+ years on Mars protecting an Earth human colony from two indigenous species there (and right here he makes a very valid argument showing why he’s not lying and is actually telling the truth in all this), but he has further gone on to say that many of the elite on planet Earth are using Mars as their “escape planet” once shtf here.

The truth about what’s really happening, it seems, is FAAAR, far stranger than fiction.

Because there are scenarios (obviously not all scenarios, but some) under which you actually end up with MORE for yourself under 1/5 than under 4/5.

Situations where everyone can buy private jets, skyscrapers, and islands?

Situations where everyone has a standard of living that is actually BETTER and cleaner and healthier than would ever be the case otherwise. You’d rather have a private jet, skyscraper, and an island when you yourself are a putrid mess inside and will live a miserable life in the process? or would you rather have a nice house, car, all amenities you need, AND have about as healthy a lifestyle and body as you could hope for?

The former scenario makes me think of this.

Wealth is proportional

No it’s not actually. Not across the board. Not in the least actually. This only applies to certain, very specific, monetary/fiat currency types of “wealth”.

that's why printing money causes inflation.

That’s not what causes the inequality and lack of overall, global wealth, however. It’s not that. It’s the tendency that some groups have to sequester that wealth at the expense of everyone else.

That's a hefty false dilemma, as if it's impossible to be wealthy and happy or poor and miserable.

I did not mean to imply that it's "either or" only. However, there actually was indeed a major study that was conducted a while back that wondered who in society is the happiest, and who in society is the most depressed/least happy. And what did the study find? It found that the worst off, most emotionally and psychologically unstable, most perturbed, and least happy types were rich WASPs. And the happiest? Poor African American women.

Go figure. I guess the point here is that at the end of the day, the dilemma is neither that false or hefty, and my point very much still stands.

You're ignoring the fact that 7 billion people can't have their own jet, skyscraper, or even a used motor vehicle.

Not "can't". "Don't".

Either way, you're ignoring the fact that if the billionaire elite weren't as putrid as they apparently are, this society wouldn't NEED jets in the first place at all. The technology would exist to thoroughly undermine their use completely and make them entirely obsolete.

And that's part of my point.

Those people that already have those things wouldn't do away with them and suddenly think they somehow had "more".

You're being far too simple in how you're interpreting this dynamic. Again, and as I said initially, those who already have those things would be more likely to give them up if they found something that was even better - which the civilization would ultimately be if the technology THAT ALREADY EXISTS were allowed to be let out and flourish.

This generally assumes the .01% aren't part of a cabal of control who's end game involves control more than "living an improved, ideal life". If it's the former reasoning, then - as already mentioned in prior posts - the elite maintaining a status quo that actually hurts them and keeps them from a better, healthier way of life is okay so long as it keeps the 99% subservient and under control (as is currently the case).

Things cost money, which is a representation of labor and capital.

But they don't need to "cost money". The only reason they do is because this civilization has been enslaved by the paradigm of money in the first place.

Actually, it is. Simply repeating it isn't doesn't really make it true.

Actually it's not. Simply repeating it doesn't really make it true.

How do you convince a group of people living on their own private island (of which there are apparently billions) to leave to build a skyscraper for free?

Wouldn’t be for free.

It's fantasy.

From your perspective, it is. You’re not looking at it correctly, however. You’re trying to do a math problem using a recipe for pancakes. Two completely different things altogether. Apples and giraffes.

You can't earnestly believe what you are saying

Your interpretation is faulty - not what I’m saying. What you are saying is wrong and can’t be done. That’s correct enough. I’ve mentioned no such interpretation, however. You’re knocking down straw men and thinking you’re addressing the actual argument.

that the worlds richest man will become richer by giving away his money to poor people.

Again. That’s not even close to what I’m saying. It seems you are convinced of only one perspective, however, and seem to be refusing to look at it from any other perspective…so I can’t help you in that way.

It's all silly.

Correct. It’s very silly indeed. What “it” is, however, is YOUR PERSPECTIVE and YOUR INTERPRETATION of what’s been said, and you don’t quite seem to understand that. It’s like you don’t realize that what you’re making fun of is YOUR OWN PERSPECTIVE and has nothing to do with anything I’ve actually said or meant. But okay.

Sorry, man. Couldn't even get past this last statement of yours I quoted above. Not worth going on back and forth at this point. It’s like you’re in your own little world and are convinced that THAT’S the only way it is and you interpret what anyone else says from the perspective of your own extremely insular mind. Then you continue to misinterpret and think you’re arguing against someone when in fact you’re having a conversation with your own faulty perspective. lol. It’s actually kind of funny when you think about it.

Can’t be bothered to continue at this point. Conversation’s over. You can have the last word and think what you want. I can’t say I’ll even be bothered to read whatever else it is you post or respond with on this topic.

Enjoy arguing with yourself and whatever your last post’ll be. Knock yourself out. :)

Agreed. This is the world we live in, however. This is the world we've been brainwashed to regard in this manner. It seems we have a very long way to go before we as a species break out of this indoctrination, unfortunately.

That 10 point plan seems nice in theory, but I have a feeling the actual practice of it would continue the same old status quo.

Exactly.

Such would certainly seem to be the case.