>Again, if this were so we would have the same level of wealth that the first people who walked the earth had. With our population as it is it would be spread very thin.
Not necessarily. Although the amount of resources available may be the same now as before (ignoring depletion), we have better ways of harnessing and using those resources to make things to better our lives. But without those raw materials there would be nothing to produce. And its access to those those raw materials and the things produced form them which is unfairly distributed.
>I can't tell you what a cop-out this statement is. I hear it often with no facts to back it up.
How about labor in general. Large corporations exploit the lower class by buying their labor at unfairly low prices. Corporations used to send people to poor countries and sell them the "American Dream", only to get them to America so they could be paid unlivable wages to work 12 or more hours a day. If thats not exploitation, I dont know what is. Things like this is what our current wealth (by your definition) was built upon. Although instances like this probably dont happen too much anymore because of regulations and such, we would _not_ be where we are today if not for the high levels of worker exploitation that occured in the past.
>Did you even read the article I posted?
Yep. "The numbers on world economics are good, too. World poverty fell more than 20 percent between 1990 and 1999..."
Thats fine and dandy, but how many more are still living in extreme poverty. Were heading in the right direction, but we still have a long way to go. Furthermore, I was talking about this country-which the gap between rich and poor is widening.
>Oh really? Just how should we use it? Give it away? of course we should. Let's just decrease our resources so nobody will be increasing the world's quality of life. Producers are key
I guess I didnt explain what I meant. I mean that we use our power to strong arm other countries. Thats what they despise more than our success.
>Besides, you're just out to argue with everything I say anyway
Im sorry if I came off that way. That wasnt my intent at all. Its just I read through all the posts and I wanted to respond, but didnt want to read through them all again. So I chose your posts since you seemed to be the one arguing the opposing opinion the most.
Dont get me wrong, I think capitalism is probably the best system we have come up with so far (maybe socialism, but I dont know enough about it to make a judgement). Its just that we have a long way to go and I think admitting the problems inherent in the system is the first step to improving the system.