Heartland

http://www.globalrichlist.com/



Now you try it and eek too.

top end on the spectrum..


I am one of the rich and not so famous.....

Hey Accountants cant help it...

That's just a nasty guilt making way of making you give money to charity.

Bastards.

interseting,but like so many people brandishing charity boxes trying to acost you in the street and embarrass you into donating it simply doesnt work on me.

peel away the the accusation of how well off you are in this,then ask yourself how willing you are to accept one group/persons scale for how rich you are....
besides its not that simple is it really?
according to that im in the top 30%.......based on what?how much in pounds someone else in anothewr country earns where maybe/maybe not the cost of living is comparitively lower than here?

dont like the tactics,dont appreciate being patronised by people who believe they can guilt trip me into hadning over £££ to them when they cannot prove to me its going to the cause its supposed to be going to.

its just another form of the hard sell with that extar helping of guilt ridden sentiment thrown in.

if your going to give something,shouldnt it be willingly and without coersion?

Serendipityhaven wrote:interseting,but like so many people brandishing charity boxes trying to acost you in the street and embarrass you into donating it simply doesnt work on me.

peel away the the accusation of how well off you are in this,then ask yourself how willing you are to accept one group/persons scale for how rich you are....
besides its not that simple is it really?
according to that im in the top 30%.......based on what?how much in pounds someone else in anothewr country earns where maybe/maybe not the cost of living is comparitively lower than here?

dont like the tactics,dont appreciate being patronised by people who believe they can guilt trip me into hadning over £££ to them when they cannot prove to me its going to the cause its supposed to be going to.

its just another form of the hard sell with that extar helping of guilt ridden sentiment thrown in.

if your going to give something,shouldnt it be willingly and without coersion?

i'm with you on this one.

Yeah, yeah, but is it true or not?

If it's true, f**k, how do we really have the nerve to use expressions like "distribution of wealth"?! We should call it "distribution of poverty" instead.

how exactly are you supposed to work it out to be fair?
personal circumstances and predicaments are unique to each family or whatever and so are the necessities too(and the expense that comes with that).
i dont mean the cost of that extra landline for conveniance sake or the second car which avoids arguments with the wife,i mean what really matters like medical costs for example.
the cost in the uk for one dr prescribed medicine on its own isnt jaw droppingly steep,but i know several people in a position where they have to have several different types of meds on a weekly basis to be well enough to exist on a basic level and thus earn a living too.
on paper they may initially appear to be doing as well as joe bloggs the co-worker but the reality is very different.

bring into the mix differing countries where one has no prescription charges but the cost of fuel for example is high compared to in the uk and the issue becomes more complicated again.

just taking everyones take home pay then converting it all into one currency and thats that doesnt give a true or accurate picture.way too many factors beyond that which affects income+the ability to have one in the first place.

@Serendipityhaven

I'm sorry but that site refers to the millions who don't have access to medicine (not to mention medicineS) or fuel.
All they probably have is a bowl of rice. And they die very young too. So your last post didn't include them at all, you see?

sorry,did i not make it clear that was an example?
and as it happens thats precisely part of the point i was trying to make without having to go into specifics and include the sweeping aray of ills covering all aspects of various habitats and stadnards of living.

but,hey why not ive got 2mins to kill here.
poersonal circumstances reflect on every ones standards of living.whether you live in the west,the east or the island of yap where im told their currency is stones.
so lets say i know joe bloggs who lives in Russia.
hes on a decent wage,no kids blah blah blah.
in Russia,hes counted as being quite well off.
now then, we take Joe bloggs out of Russia,but maintain the same wage(converted into say $$)lets resettle him in the usa.
now,joe Bloggs suddenly finds hes not quite as flush as the next man who in fact is considered by us standards to be quite flush.
its vague,i know but the essence is still the same.
its relative maybe if you use something like that(and you choose to believe someone elses model for rating wealth)within one country,but take that same one and start comparing it as equal in another country doesnt work.
i dont think that there are starving thousands all over thwe world is the issue here at all,nor is it questioned either.
its not black and white,or a case of you have three meals a day and the other man doesnt therefore your rich and hes not.
as i mentioned in the earlier post how do you rate wealth exactly?
how much you earn,or how much you earn after tax,the cost of enabling yourself to earn in the first place?
is it comparable that one country has no free access to health care and thus is considered more affluent than anothers who may not.
i dont think its that simple at all.
who decided the way in which wealth is quantified exactly?

i have a very close friend who recives a certain token amount from the government as and when though he's in effect on the streets.
he has problems with malnutrition,cant find a permanent home(doesnt get enough ££ to save for bond in order to rent somewhere),and has a very hard time with some relatively minor ills which would be easily cured but for the cost of the over the counter stuff.
now take him and the amount he gets to live on,pass his meager "income" over to another country and convert it to its currency(so take your pick of the poorer countries you were hinting at here) and give it to one fo their citizens and maybe theyre suddenly rich beyond their wildest dreams(but only in the context of that same amount of money within that one country).

in my opinion thats why that distribution of wealth monitor thing doesnt give a true picture of the various situations found all over the world.

if you asked my friend whether he thought he was a wealthy as that monitor seemed to make him out to be,i dont think he would agree he was wealthy at all.
someone who lives on one bowl of rice a day,well maybe the cost of that one bowl of rice per day takes a week in another country for the equivalent to be earned but maybe the cost of a bowl of rice in that other country is one hundreth of the same cost in the first country.
or maybe its not,maybe its way more.
whose to say really eh?
and because we cant really say either way,because i know im not an expert on the cultures of the entire world,how can we form a truely informed judgement of whose rich and who is poor?

just how i see that tho one opinion in a million other views.

I ended up on the left end.. Poorest person.. Have no job....

look,
the question was is that graph thing a correct gauge for the distribution of the worldsd wealth wasnt it?
well its not.its a tool to make good hearted genuine people feel guilty because they arent begging on the streets like so many of the citizens of the world.
its a con and a hard sell and just because its done under the guise of charity doesnt make it any more credible for that(to me its worse).

im all for better distribution of wealth,pass some along my way please too since im not in any way well off or what i would consider comfortable either.

that thing would have you believe that a single man with the same annual income as i lets say is as "wealthy" as i am.
what it doesnt take into acount is that i have three other mouths to feed to his one.so my distribution of wealth is quite a bit more distributed than his(or at least more probable to be).so in fact although according to the graph we are the same,its just not a fair or accurate description at all.

but it does the job very well for what its been designed for though.

no offence intended