|
Post by Aj_June on Jan 10, 2019 6:01:11 GMT
Just so that you can ask me the question what's it for. It's a good thing you're keeping quiet since no matter what the point was, I was probably about to school you again. A simpleton who can't understand how reduction in poverty increases living standards (by various ways) and contributes to making the world a better place dreams about schooling people?
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Jan 10, 2019 6:22:53 GMT
CoolJGS☺ It's not just that extreme poverty is falling but also general poverty is falling. No matter what extreme poverty line you choose, the share of people below that poverty line has declined globallyI can't link the picture but you can read below. No matter what line you choose as cut-off whether it be $2.5 or $5 or $10 or more the poverty has decreased and % of affluent people have increased. ourworldindata.org/no-matter-what-global-poverty-line
|
|
|
Post by looking4klingons on Jan 10, 2019 7:03:49 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Jan 10, 2019 7:13:26 GMT
Yeah...social and economic injustice started happening after 1914 What point did you think you made, religious zealot? Ever heard of feudal days and what injustice was like living in those days? Great going, simpleton.
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Jan 10, 2019 7:33:09 GMT
Can't we just talk civilly to one another? Just kiddin'.
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Jan 10, 2019 9:06:12 GMT
This is one of the reasons I had said Catholicism is relatively better form of Christianity in my opinion. It doesn't encourage cultish behaviour as much as some of the other religious schools do. I'm not a member of any cult, and I believe we are in the Last Days right now. So am I. I believe we are in the last days of Earth. Last trillion of course. Then, the Sun will become a Red Giant, and Earth will cease to exist. But I probably won't be there to witness this.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Jan 10, 2019 12:04:04 GMT
CoolJGS☺ It's not just that extreme poverty is falling but also general poverty is falling. No matter what extreme poverty line you choose, the share of people below that poverty line has declined globallyI can't link the picture but you can read below. No matter what line you choose as cut-off whether it be $2.5 or $5 or $10 or more the poverty has decreased and % of affluent people have increased. ourworldindata.org/no-matter-what-global-poverty-line
The problem is poverty is not a dollar amount. The extremity of poverty is relative. If someone is making 2/day in the USA, they are facing extreme poverty &/or the nation is supporting their survival. It's like that in tons of other countries. It's not a true metric of how well people are doing. You are pointing to a horrible situation that verifies how bad off this planet is. You miss the point about why there is still poverty anyway because, for some reason, you are looking for some kind of straight upward line of stats when the Bible in no way indicates that. What it does say is that the world conditions overall will be worse and they are. If so many people are under extreme poverty and society is on an upward trajectory, why not just eradicate it? They can't because even as extreme poverty decreases, it's not tied to a desire to actually help them. Greed of the wealthy (& us wanting the cheapest price) is what moves them from extreme poverty to just poverty. Here's a good article on this that explains it better. qz.com/africa/1428639/world-banks-measure-of-poverty-is-flawed/
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Jan 10, 2019 12:19:39 GMT
CoolJGS☺ It's not just that extreme poverty is falling but also general poverty is falling. No matter what extreme poverty line you choose, the share of people below that poverty line has declined globallyI can't link the picture but you can read below. No matter what line you choose as cut-off whether it be $2.5 or $5 or $10 or more the poverty has decreased and % of affluent people have increased. ourworldindata.org/no-matter-what-global-poverty-line
The problem is poverty is not a dollar amount. The extremity of poverty is relative. If someone is making 2/day in the USA, they are facing extreme poverty &/or the nation is supporting their survival. It's like that in tons of other countries. It's not a true metric of how well people are doing. You are pointing to a horrible situation that verifies how bad off this planet is. You miss the point about why there is still poverty anyway because, for some reason, you are looking for some kind of straight upward line of stats when the Bible in no way indicates that. What it does say is that the world conditions overall will be worse and they are. If so many people are under extreme poverty and society is on an upward trajectory, why not just eradicate it? They can't because even as extreme poverty decreases, it's not tied to a desire to actually help them. Greed of the wealthy (& us wanting the cheapest price) is what moves them from extreme poverty to just poverty. Here's a good article on this that explains it better. qz.com/africa/1428639/world-banks-measure-of-poverty-is-flawed/Sure, it is relative but it seems you are missing the point. Poverty across continents is decreasing relative to what it was in those continents in prior years. So just because you see $ as the metric used, it does not mean the poverty decrease is being measured in dollar amounts only. It is being measured in terms of different time periods of countries. For example in China, more than 20% people were making below 1.5$ in 1981 but by 2013 there were less than 3.9% such people. Similarly, all income brackets have seen increase in income. Not just the lowest of the low. Not to forget literacy has increased, healthcare has increased, various measures that depict less struggle for humans have become better. Less woman die now in childbirth than they did in 18th century. Woman's literacy has increased in last 200 years, young children survive more, freedom has increased and so on....No one is saying that things are fine and dandy now. Of course, not. But things have been improving for sure. And the trend is going to continue.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Jan 10, 2019 12:41:33 GMT
The problem is poverty is not a dollar amount. The extremity of poverty is relative. If someone is making 2/day in the USA, they are facing extreme poverty &/or the nation is supporting their survival. It's like that in tons of other countries. It's not a true metric of how well people are doing. You are pointing to a horrible situation that verifies how bad off this planet is. You miss the point about why there is still poverty anyway because, for some reason, you are looking for some kind of straight upward line of stats when the Bible in no way indicates that. What it does say is that the world conditions overall will be worse and they are. If so many people are under extreme poverty and society is on an upward trajectory, why not just eradicate it? They can't because even as extreme poverty decreases, it's not tied to a desire to actually help them. Greed of the wealthy (& us wanting the cheapest price) is what moves them from extreme poverty to just poverty. Here's a good article on this that explains it better. qz.com/africa/1428639/world-banks-measure-of-poverty-is-flawed/Sure, it is relative but it seems you are missing the point. Poverty across continents is decreasing relative to what it was in those continents in prior years. So just because you see $ as the metric used, it does not mean the poverty decrease is being measured in dollar amounts only. It is being measured in terms of different time periods of countries. For example in China, more than 20% people were making below 1.5$ in 1981 but by 2013 there were less than 3.9% such people. Similarly, all income brackets have seen increase in income. Not just the lowest of the low. Not to forget literacy has increased, healthcare has increased, various measures that depict less struggle for humans have become better. Less woman die now in childbirth than they did in 18th century. Woman's literacy has increased in last 200 years, young children survive more, freedom has increased and so on....No one is saying that things are fine and dandy now. Of course, not. But things have been improving for sure. And the trend is going to continue. That is not the point of why you are bringing it out. You are using it as an example of why the stat contradicts Scripture which it doesn't do unless you add stuff to scripture that is needed to disprove it. You're saying half the world is poor which is better than 80% agrarian poverty and I'm saying if mankind had there act together there wouldn't be poverty in the first place. The reality is there has never been as many impoverished people on the planet as there is right now. Billions of them...
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Jan 10, 2019 12:43:06 GMT
Well yes. History is replete with turning points. 1815, 1455, 1215, 1066... you name it. Hmmm. And yet, here we are living in a way better world than they had in 1914. So it seems like this predetermined march towards disaster faded out. You must not live in the Sudan...or Chad....or Syria. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_armed_conflictsreliefweb.int/report/world/global-report-food-crises-2018Or do you think they are now living in a “way better world” than when they had food or peace? 2 Peter 3:3,4....”...in the last days scoffers won't think about anything except their own selfish desires. They will mock the facts to make fun of you. And they will say, “....Ever since our forefathers began to die, all things are continuing exactly as they always have.” You can't make a case that, on a global scale, the world is worse today by pointing to a few bad trouble spots. How about naming a century before the 20th century where you would argue that, on a world wide average, peoples' standards of living were better than today.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Jan 10, 2019 12:51:32 GMT
as in Sure, it is relative but it seems you are missing the point. Poverty across continents is decreasing relative to what it was in those continents in prior years. So just because you see $ as the metric used, it does not mean the poverty decrease is being measured in dollar amounts only. It is being measured in terms of different time periods of countries. For example in China, more than 20% people were making below 1.5$ in 1981 but by 2013 there were less than 3.9% such people. Similarly, all income brackets have seen increase in income. Not just the lowest of the low. Not to forget literacy has increased, healthcare has increased, various measures that depict less struggle for humans have become better. Less woman die now in childbirth than they did in 18th century. Woman's literacy has increased in last 200 years, young children survive more, freedom has increased and so on....No one is saying that things are fine and dandy now. Of course, not. But things have been improving for sure. And the trend is going to continue. That is not the point of why you are bringing it out. You are using it as an example of why the stat contradicts Scripture which it doesn't do unless you add stuff to scripture that is needed to disprove it. You're saying half the world is poor which is better than 80% agrarian poverty and I'm saying if mankind had there act together there wouldn't be poverty in the first place. The reality is there has never been as many impoverished people on the planet as there is right now. Billions of them...I It seems you areen't getting this discussion. I am not denying that things in the world can improve but my point to Tas-10 is that it is improving for last 200 years and has been improving as opposed to his claims. For example, Tas-1- said "Or do you think they are now living in a “way better world” than when they had food? and I clearly refuted his claim by showing that per capita claorie intake has increased and hunger has declined. And yes, there are many poor people on this planet but on average poverty has been declining. No one is disputing that poverty still exists. It's just less than it was 200 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Jan 10, 2019 12:54:54 GMT
You can't make a case that, on a global scale, the world is worse today by pointing to a few bad trouble spots. How about naming a century before the 20th century where you would argue that, on a world wide average, peoples' standards of living were better than today. His cunning cherry picking is seriously so sad. He even throws non-sequiturs from time to time. For example, he said there is so much inequality in the world. As if inequality didn't exist before 1914. The fact is that inequality has decreased a lot and there are more measures of holding people's right nowadays than it was in the feudal days. Perhaps these fanatics don't want to look at the feudal days of humanity. For them the world was great before 1914 and after that time period things have become drastically bad that there is a case for the end of the days.
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Jan 10, 2019 13:02:39 GMT
You can't make a case that, on a global scale, the world is worse today by pointing to a few bad trouble spots. How about naming a century before the 20th century where you would argue that, on a world wide average, peoples' standards of living were better than today. His cunning cherry picking is seriously so sad. He even throws non-sequiturs from time to time. For example, he said there is so much inequality in the world. As if inequality didn't exist before 1914. The fact is that inequality has decreased a lot and there are more measures of holding people's right nowadays than it was in the feudal days. Perhaps these fanatics don't want to look at the feudal days of humanity. For them the world was great before 1914 and after that time period things have become drastically bad that there is a case for the end of the days. Nice job in finding those graphs by the way. And I even understood what they were for.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Jan 10, 2019 14:01:26 GMT
as in That is not the point of why you are bringing it out. You are using it as an example of why the stat contradicts Scripture which it doesn't do unless you add stuff to scripture that is needed to disprove it. You're saying half the world is poor which is better than 80% agrarian poverty and I'm saying if mankind had there act together there wouldn't be poverty in the first place. The reality is there has never been as many impoverished people on the planet as there is right now. Billions of them...I It seems you areen't getting this discussion. I am not denying that things in the world can improve but my point to Tas-10 is that it is improving for last 200 years and has been improving as opposed to his claims. For example, Tas-1- said "Or do you think they are now living in a “way better world” than when they had food? and I clearly refuted his claim by showing that per capita claorie intake has increased and hunger has declined. And yes, there are many poor people on this planet but on average poverty has been declining. No one is disputing that poverty still exists. It's just less than it was 200 years ago. im addressing that point directly Things are not improving at all just because you present one extremely flawed metric of “poverty going down”. That’s the entire point and I know it is since you have repeatedly said that’s the point.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Jan 10, 2019 14:08:12 GMT
as in It seems you areen't getting this discussion. I am not denying that things in the world can improve but my point to Tas-10 is that it is improving for last 200 years and has been improving as opposed to his claims. For example, Tas-1- said "Or do you think they are now living in a “way better world” than when they had food? and I clearly refuted his claim by showing that per capita claorie intake has increased and hunger has declined. And yes, there are many poor people on this planet but on average poverty has been declining. No one is disputing that poverty still exists. It's just less than it was 200 years ago. im addressing that point directly Things are not improving at all just because you present one extremely flawed metric of “poverty going down”. That’s the entire point and I know it is since you have repeatedly said that’s the point. Just because you feel so doesn't make it so, smithy boy. It's well documented whatever measure you take average poverty as well as extreme poverty is going down. Even fall in hunger has documented proof. And then there are stats such as child mortality and death rate, literacy rates etc that depict increase in living standards of human beings. Unfortunately, you can't do anything about improvements in those stats. Sure the last days are upon us.
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Jan 10, 2019 14:29:17 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Jan 10, 2019 14:39:53 GMT
Yes, poverty is, and has always been, the world's number one problem. But unless want to assert that it wasn't as bad on a global scale in the centuries before the 20th century, then your video sidesteps the point.
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Jan 10, 2019 14:40:30 GMT
My problem with "The Last Days" issue...
We never have a defined definition of the time period.
You can cite Noah... and say that it took 120 years for him to build the ark... but, Noah is said to have lived 900 years.
The time period is still within a lifetime.
Once you start hitting the 3rd or 4th generation, "Days" seems to become the wrong word... Sure, you can say "A thousand years is like a day to God"....
But... Gods, we ain't.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Jan 10, 2019 14:48:09 GMT
This debate is not about existence of poverty. No body in his right mind can ever claim that there is no poverty. The debate is about whether poverty is declining or not and whether there was less struggle and higher standards for human lives prior to 1914. Your video has a scene from a slum in India. I am an Indian and almost all economist in India agree that poverty is declining (and has declined in India in past).
India saw GDP growth rate of 5.4% from 2010-2018 and yet population increased just by 1.2%. Now there is inequality but inequality doesn't mean all the created wealth goes to rich people. As a matter of fact the number of people residing below extreme poverty line as measured by the Indian government declined from 306 million in 2011 to 70 million in 2018. Even according to UN standards, poverty declined dramatically in India in last 10 years. Not just the people in extreme poverty saw improvements but even those in less poverty saw improvements in their circumstances.
I actually live in a poor country. It's funny to me when western people mention poor countries such as my country without being totally informed. There are a few countries in Africa where poverty is rising. But overall, in most parts of world the poverty is declining. Whether that be extreme poverty or general poverty.
Over 10 Years, Poverty Rate In India Reduced To Half: UN Report
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Jan 10, 2019 15:05:49 GMT
This debate is not about existence of poverty. No body in his right mind can ever claim that there is no poverty. The debate is about whether poverty is declining or not and whether there was less struggle and higher standards for human lives prior to 1914. Your video has a scene from a slum in India. I am an Indian and almost all economist in India agree that poverty is declining (and has declined in India in past).
India saw GDP growth rate of 5.4% from 2010-2018 and yet population increased just by 1.2%. Now there is inequality but inequality doesn't mean all the created wealth goes to rich people. As a matter of fact the number of people residing in extreme poverty line as measured by Indian government and declined from 306 million in 2011 to 70 million in 2018. Even according to UN standards, poverty declined in India dramatically. Not just the people in extreme poverty saw improvements but even those in less poverty saw improvements in their circumstances.
I actually live in a poor country. It's funny to me when western people mention poor countries such as my country without being totally informed. There are a few countries in Africa where poverty is rising. But overall, in most parts of world the poverty is declining. Whether that be extreme poverty or general poverty.
Over 10 Years, Poverty Rate In India Reduced To Half: UN Report
Violence has also decreased considerably. Anyone interested in the subject can read Steven Pinker's "Better Angels of our Nature"
|
|