Equitist wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2011 at 8:13pm:


You would legislate against entrepreneurial endeavour?

Here's a scenario that I would ask everyone to consider...

If you held a birthday party for your 7 year old son or daughter and invited 19 guests: would you allow your child to take 19 out of 20 equal-sized pieces of that cake for themselves, thereby leaving a final 1/20th for the remaining 19 to share!?

I would hope that you would denounce such a scenario as totally unfair and unreasonable - not to mention that it would be teaching the child selfish and anti-social attitudes.

So, I now ask you to answer this question honestly: at what age would you start teaching that same child that it is OK for the top 5% of individuals to control hoard 95% of the nation's (or world's) resources!?

I am especially keen to hear from the Xtians amongst us!

Ah, smack it - I'm gonna start a separate thread!

Equitist wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2011 at 8:32pm:



Why 20?  Surely if people are equal, it doesn't matter if it's 2x or 2000x. Inequality is inequality.
And even if every single person was paid the same, the wealth would soon concentrate, as some use it wisely, some do not.  How would you then fix that inequality?

... wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2011 at 8:41pm:


Redistribute of course, but I assume that was a rhetorical question right?

Equitist wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2011 at 8:58pm:


The roots of the GFC were the bastard love child of socialistic policies mixed with reckless financial bastardry of the highest order.

Equitist wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2011 at 8:32pm:



Why not extend this stupendous scheme to all human endeavours? No painting is to be worth more than 20 times what any other painting is worth. No musician or singer is to be paid more than 20 buskers.

Equitist wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2011 at 9:17pm:


Thy, with respect, I think you realise where the sub prime mortgage market originated.  I don't for a second excuse the derivatives and the way which they were packaged and sold; effectively financial terrorism.

I am very thankful, and as a nation of citizens we all should be, that Peter Costello and the army of advisers directed by his department, had the wherewithal to assemble and strengthen the Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority which protected the Australian banks from themselves.

I don't for a second defend the 'Bankers' responsible for the outcomes; a banker would sell his mother to 3 different people and let them work it out.

It is however fanciful to suggest that the root cause of the problem wasn't an American citizens legislated right to access mortgages.  It is patently ridiculous to lend to someone (even a sovereign) who simply can't afford to maintain the repayments and no means bar the sale of assets to retire the capital.  

Relying on property to always appreciate in price is similarly ridiculous; when that common believe belief is widely challenged you wind up with the financial sh!t storm we witnessed and still lingers.  

Governments Internationally need to get their respective houses in order.  Unnecessary debt need be avoided and budgets need to be at least balanced or when for whatever reason that isn't possible, a clear plan to return to that in a reasonable time frame is in order.

Banks both private and Central need high quality capital and stringent lending standards.

In our lifetimes we will witness the emancipation of the north African region and if we're lucky see an end to tyranny; I just hope we don't wipe ourselves off the face of the earth before we get to witness the event.