Here are some numbers in support of my prior post, which roughly said everything will turn out OK since there will be an enormous world middle class.
"The global middle class is rising faster than expected, in numbers and in wealth. Last year 70 million people joined the emerging-market middle class, with incomes between $6,000 and $30,000. "
"The Chinese bought more cars than Americans did last year, and India has as many Internet users as the U.S. does. By 2030, more than nine of every 10 mobile phones will be owned by people in the developing world, with India and China leading the way. Coca-Cola recently forecast a doubling of worldwide revenues to $200 billion over the next decade, thanks to another 1 billion people expected to join the middle class by 2020."
source:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/234589
By the way, the world "GDP" fell last year. That is why it is so impressive that (if?) 70 million people joined the middle class.
I won't add anything into Moe's bizarre natural ditch digger theories aside from everything he is saying is neatly refuted in great detail in many well established fields of research. Since he is clearly aware of none of them I would suggest beginning with the popular book Guns, Germs and Steel.
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- We would rather be ruined than changed
We would rather be ruined than changedFollow
Who left the back door open? 
yossarian wrote:
Here are some numbers in support of my prior post, which roughly said everything will turn out OK since there will be an enormous world middle class.
"The global middle class is rising faster than expected, in numbers and in wealth. Last year 70 million people joined the emerging-market middle class, with incomes between $6,000 and $30,000. "
"The Chinese bought more cars than Americans did last year, and India has as many Internet users as the U.S. does. By 2030, more than nine of every 10 mobile phones will be owned by people in the developing world, with India and China leading the way. Coca-Cola recently forecast a doubling of worldwide revenues to $200 billion over the next decade, thanks to another 1 billion people expected to join the middle class by 2020."
"The global middle class is rising faster than expected, in numbers and in wealth. Last year 70 million people joined the emerging-market middle class, with incomes between $6,000 and $30,000. "
"The Chinese bought more cars than Americans did last year, and India has as many Internet users as the U.S. does. By 2030, more than nine of every 10 mobile phones will be owned by people in the developing world, with India and China leading the way. Coca-Cola recently forecast a doubling of worldwide revenues to $200 billion over the next decade, thanks to another 1 billion people expected to join the middle class by 2020."
Everything will turn out OK because people are consuming more stuff? Mobile phones, fizzy sugar and cars....
Put me down as, 'Not convinced that all will end well as long as ever increasing consumption is used as a standard measure of development'.
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.
paulsol wrote:
Everything will turn out OK because people are consuming more stuff? Mobile phones, fizzy sugar and cars....
Put me down as, 'Not convinced that all will end well as long as ever increasing consumption is used as a standard measure of development'.
Put me down as, 'Not convinced that all will end well as long as ever increasing consumption is used as a standard measure of development'.
On the up side, I hear the Kiwi economy is entirely self sustaining, so you don't have to worry, mirite?
Liberals are like the Charlie Brown to the Government's Lucy. No matter how many times government fails to do what it promises to do, they keep continuing to believe that "this time", it wont ***** them over...
You mean to the GOP's Lucy, right? The party that intentionally tries to sabotage any possible successful government action out of fear that it might take some tiny amount of power away from the ultra rich?
I thought you did. "Government is the problem, no matter how hard we have to work to sabotage it!"
You mean to the GOP's Lucy, right? The party that intentionally tries to sabotage any possible successful government action out of fear that it might take some tiny amount of power away from the ultra rich?
I thought you did. "Government is the problem, no matter how hard we have to work to sabotage it!"
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
His Excellency MoebiusLord wrote:
[quote=paulsol] mirite?
No. But I never said it was.
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.
paulsol wrote:
His Excellency MoebiusLord wrote:
[quote=paulsol] mirite?
No. But I never said it was.
I know. s'whats known in these parts as "tongue in cheek." Remember, this is page two.
Smasharoo wrote:
Liberals are like the Charlie Brown to the Government's Lucy. No matter how many times government fails to do what it promises to do, they keep continuing to believe that "this time", it wont ***** them over...
You mean to the GOP's Lucy, right? The party that intentionally tries to sabotage any possible successful government action out of fear that it might take some tiny amount of power away from the ultra rich?
I thought you did. "Government is the problem, no matter how hard we have to work to sabotage it!"
You mean to the GOP's Lucy, right? The party that intentionally tries to sabotage any possible successful government action out of fear that it might take some tiny amount of power away from the ultra rich?
I thought you did. "Government is the problem, no matter how hard we have to work to sabotage it!"
Just out of curiousity, what was the problem when the Republicans couldn't stop anything? Or, what's the problem now when all the Democrats have to do to get their national health care reform is pass the bill in the House that the senate already passed so that it would hit the President's desk?
Oh, that's right. Because the Liberals are spineless and don't have the collective seeds to actually do anything even when the GOP is powerless to stop it.
His Excellency MoebiusLord wrote:
Just out of curiousity, what was the problem when the Republicans couldn't stop anything? Or, what's the problem now when all the Democrats have to do to get their national health care reform is pass the bill in the House that the senate already passed so that it would hit the President's desk?
The larger the bloc gets, the more diverse it becomes. Out of necessity, conservative Democrats were courted to run for seats in red districts. Now that they've won, they either have a conservative mindset that rejects the proposals or else are concerned about their re-election in a Republican district.
Really, the whole "But you have such a big majority!" argument always makes me wonder if the person making it is being intentionally dense or if it's a natural condition for them.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Joph wrote:
Really, the whole "But you have such a big majority!" argument always makes me wonder if the person making it is being intentionally dense or if it's a natural condition for them.
I think it's just too tempting a target.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Jophiel wrote:
Really, the whole "But you have such a big majority!" argument always makes me wonder if the person making it is being intentionally dense or if it's a natural condition for them.
It made as much sense as
Smasharoo wrote:
The party that intentionally tries to sabotage any possible successful government action out of fear that it might take some tiny amount of power away from the ultra rich?
publiusvarus wrote:
Quote:
Out of necessity, conservative Democrats were courted to run for seats in red districts
Erm. Ok.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
paulsol wrote:
yossarian wrote:
Here are some numbers in support of my prior post, which roughly said everything will turn out OK since there will be an enormous world middle class.
"The global middle class is rising faster than expected, in numbers and in wealth. Last year 70 million people joined the emerging-market middle class, with incomes between $6,000 and $30,000. "
"The Chinese bought more cars than Americans did last year, and India has as many Internet users as the U.S. does. By 2030, more than nine of every 10 mobile phones will be owned by people in the developing world, with India and China leading the way. Coca-Cola recently forecast a doubling of worldwide revenues to $200 billion over the next decade, thanks to another 1 billion people expected to join the middle class by 2020."
"The global middle class is rising faster than expected, in numbers and in wealth. Last year 70 million people joined the emerging-market middle class, with incomes between $6,000 and $30,000. "
"The Chinese bought more cars than Americans did last year, and India has as many Internet users as the U.S. does. By 2030, more than nine of every 10 mobile phones will be owned by people in the developing world, with India and China leading the way. Coca-Cola recently forecast a doubling of worldwide revenues to $200 billion over the next decade, thanks to another 1 billion people expected to join the middle class by 2020."
Everything will turn out OK because people are consuming more stuff? Mobile phones, fizzy sugar and cars....
Put me down as, 'Not convinced that all will end well as long as ever increasing consumption is used as a standard measure of development'.
You can read my prior post. I will not re-post it, although it is not a direct reply to your post, of course, it has more details.
Here is the direct reply: Flea's original question from the editorial of the guy who has watched a lot of movies (Ebert) is that the US will have to accept a permanently lower standard of living. The level of the 1990's will never return. I predict the opposite. I do not claim that this is what I wish for, or what I hope will happen. I see it as more likely then Ebert's view.
Lastly, a billion people joining the middle class from poverty (as defined above, making at least US$6000/year) is probably a good thing. Them actually buying stuff is an inevitable consequence of that.
You are probably correct to point out that the use of the phrase "everything will turn out OK" to summarize my prior post is misleading.
Jophiel wrote:
publiusvarus wrote:
Quote:
Out of necessity, conservative Democrats were courted to run for seats in red districts
Erm. Ok.
It's your fault, really, for continuing to read the things he says.
Smasharoo wrote:
Liberals are like the Charlie Brown to the Government's Lucy. No matter how many times government fails to do what it promises to do, they keep continuing to believe that "this time", it wont ***** them over...
You mean to the GOP's Lucy, right? The party that intentionally tries to sabotage any possible successful government action out of fear that it might take some tiny amount of power away from the ultra rich?
You mean to the GOP's Lucy, right? The party that intentionally tries to sabotage any possible successful government action out of fear that it might take some tiny amount of power away from the ultra rich?
Nah. We attempt to stop the country from making those mistakes in the first place. But when we fail to do so, it doesn't require any "sabotage" on our part for all the unintended negative consequences which we predicted would occur to come true.
Look. If a guy tells you "Don't jab that sharp thing towards your eye, or you might poke your eye out", but you ignore him and do it anyway, and then you end out poking out your eye just as he predicted, it's more than a bit absurd to then insist that he "sabotaged" your jabbing of sharp objects near your eye by making you poke out your eye. What's really happening is that he's smarter than you are...
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
gbaji wrote:
What's really happening is that he's smarter than you are...
Edited, Mar 9th 2010 10:37am by Uglysasquatch
Donate. One day it could be your family.
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
Uglysasquatch, Mercenary Major wrote:
gbaji wrote:
What's really happening is that he's smarter than you are...
Sure. But the libs manage to do it to themselves almost every single time. You know. They decry the "culture of corruption" in Washington and elect their chosen party, the Dems, into power. How's that working out? Oh. And they were told that if they didn't vote the Dems into power, unemployment would go over 8%. How's that working out? Heck. Remember when Obama implied he held a position on NAFTA just long enough to win a primary, only to then "clarify" his position to be the opposite of what everyone thought it was? Oh yes. Good times...
And that's just the recent stuff. There's a long history of Dems appealing to the emotions of liberals on a host of issues, only to make thing worse over time. How are blacks faring in our fine nation today compared to say 30 years ago? Good thing that 98% of them vote Democrat, right? Not only do most of their social programs not work (and often make thing worse), but how many of them *ever* failed to cost significantly more over time than originally estimated? Yeah. But we can all believe them "this time" when they say it'll only cost X amount. Oh yes. This time the ball wont get yanked away, so go ahead Charlie Brown...
It's funny really. Sad. But funny.
Edited, Mar 9th 2010 5:59pm by gbaji
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Recent Visitors: 335
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (335)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- We would rather be ruined than changed
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC