What is the New World Order?

bendix

Anyway, back to the Illuminati.

Where's smeagold with his powerful new proofs?

cepheus

julieq wrote: »

I didn't say it was uniformly evenly distributed, I said the distribution is more even globally that at any point in history. Which is obvious: wealth has moved from the West to the East. That's one of the benefits of globalisation.

Perhaps the big developing nations such as China are less poor relative to the West. However, there is an immense disparity of wealth between poor and rich within those countries, see bottom chart.

This is the best source I can find for the world. The Gini index an indication of inequality seems to have risen up to the 1950 then remained steady, perhaps decreasing slightly. However I suggest that a great deal of income isn't being declared since the 1950s when offshore havens took off, and this may be the reason why the official Gini Index hasn't continued to increase.

1820 1850 1870 1913* 1929 1950 1960 1980 2002 2002 2002
(1) Gini 15.2 25.9 31.9 44.3 48.0 55.0 54.0 56.8 52.6 63.0 59.9

2. Global inequality increased from 43-45 Gini points in the early 19th century to some 65-70 Gini points today. Even more remarkable is that the composition of global inequality changed from being driven by class differences within countries to being driven by locational income differences (that is, by the differences in mean country incomes). The latter accounted for only 15 Gini points around 1820, but account for more than 60 Gini points today.

Within countries, the UK, US and China have definitely become more unequal, even according to the official figures. Note the trend within Russia, do you believe this? Neither do I, there is obviously a lot of illegal hot money being shifted by the rich.

http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/IW3P/IB/2009/09/09/000158349_20090909092401/Rendered/PDF/WPS5044.pdf

julieq

I've got a horrible feeling I'm going to be spending the evening churning through an inpenetrable 27 page working paper on global equality, but before I do, let me make the point that I am not interested in having an argument on social justice or demolishing pillars of arguments relating to social justice, I have been discussing conspiracy theories.

On the document that was linked, it's not at all clear what it means by equality, but it does draw the conclusion that global inequality is reduced when a locality becomes more prosperous. As there have been shifts of wealth from West to East (in the 10 years since the study was made), it follows that wealth is more evenly distributed. And as I said, that doesn't mean it's evenly distributed, it just means that it is less located in one particular point in the world.

purch

Step up or shut up. I'll begin soon if any have got the bottle to take me on I'd be grateful for the cannon fodder.

You have an amazingly childish attitude to all this.

I will present evidence for it in a historical and logical manner and we can debate the evidence.

Why don't you do that then ?.

There is no debate from you on this thread.

[Deleted User]

julieq wrote: »

I've got a horrible feeling I'm going to be spending the evening churning through an inpenetrable 27 page working paper on global equality, but before I do, let me make the point that I am not interested in having an argument on social justice or demolishing pillars of arguments relating to social justice, I have been discussing conspiracy theories.

Then you shouldn't have made so many comments and replies to posts on that subject. Given that you followed this statement with the following:

julieq wrote: »

On the document that was linked, it's not at all clear what it means by equality, but it does draw the conclusion that global inequality is reduced when a locality becomes more prosperous. As there have been shifts of wealth from West to East (in the 10 years since the study was made), it follows that wealth is more evenly distributed. And as I said, that doesn't mean it's evenly distributed, it just means that it is less located in one particular point in the world.

Its clear that your not interested in being consistent either.

Maybe you should stick to inaccurate insults and bigotry.

bendix

Well, I for one am STILL waiting for informed debate from smeagold, but he seems to have disappeared. Perhaps the Illuminati have kidnapped him to stop him spreading their secrets.

Oh, wait a minute. There is no secret because the leaders themselves tell us they want a . . . ahem . . new world order. As conspiracies go, it's not that secretive, is it?

WHITEVANMAN

bendix wrote: »

Well, I for one am STILL waiting for informed debate from smeagold, but he seems to have disappeared. Perhaps the Illuminati have kidnapped him to stop him spreading their secrets.

Oh, wait a minute. There is no secret because the leaders themselves tell us they want a . . . ahem . . new world order. As conspiracies go, it's not that secretive, is it?

The illuminati also appeared to have robbed his spreadbetting gold and silver thread :eek:
Just after I paid repect to your criticsim of my comments Bendix.

Kohoutek

WHITEVANMAN wrote: »

The illuminati also appeared to have robbed his spreadbetting gold and silver thread :eek:

Probably something to do with the fact he was making claims that would make Bernie Madoff blush!

Cleaver

Four quick points, but I haven't read all of this thread so apologies if they've already been made.

1. My understanding of a supposed 'new world order' is that it's a group of governments all getting organised and coming together to control people for... well, I don't know what for, but for some reason. What troubles me with this theory is that governments can't seem to really get to grips with making sure simple things get done, like holes in tarmac, or making sure hospitals are clean, or Millenium Domes, or cleaning snow off roads, or filling in expenses, or building things etc. etc. Pretty much everything they do is botched, in that it costs three times more and takes three times longer than they planned. So how, suddenly, are they capable of becoming a super-organised global entity that will take over the world? Seems a bit far fetched when they can't really organise my bin getting emptied when there's a bit more rain than usual.

2. Smeagold, I don't want to sound like I'm having a go, but I remember you mentioning your wife, so I presume you're a grown adult. Yey you're starting threads on the internet to discuss with strangers whether a set of YouTube videos are evidence for a New World Order. I'm not being funny, but do you need to have a bit of a re-think about life? You're not 12. At least Asheron is 12 and has a bit of an excuse.

3. There's lots of talk about us all becoming 'slaves'. If you want to look at my life from the point of view of a teenager who has angst issues and loves conspiracy theories then I'm already a 'slave'. I have to get up every morning, go to work for the man, pay about half my money back to the government so that they can build milenimum domes and I basically have no choice about this. I'm trapped. But I don't feel like that. I feel like Julieq said: lucky to live my live freely. I imagine that my life is more free than 99% of people currently on this planet and more than 99% that ever lived. If I wanted to I have the money, freedom and power to do pretty much anything I like right now.

4. I agree with all the people who don't care. I'm here for about 80 years (hopefully) and after that I'm gone. I don't want to spend my time here worrying about stuff I have no control or interest in, like religion, and I look at this new world order stuff just like I do Islam or Christianity: as a bit of a quaint waste of time for people who like to read too much in to life and seem to them want to bother everyone else about it. You are born, you pretty much have to go to work and struggle by through good times and bad, you enjoy it as much as possible, you die, no one really remembers you and you make pretty much no impact on the wider world at all. That's it.

purch

What troubles me with this theory is that governments can't seem to really get to grips with making sure simple things get done, like holes in tarmac, or making sure hospitals are clean, or Millenium Domes, or cleaning snow off roads, or filling in expenses, or building things etc. etc

Of course not.

They are far too busy conspiring to waste time with the small stuff :eek: