Who Benefits from a possible Global Depression?

[fascisthunter]

The system as of now is unsustainable, if it does benefit some, who will they be? Will this too only benefit a few at the expense of a World we live in? Why would we want to allow such a thing... why not forgive ALL debt?

Is this what some at the top do not want, so to make the rest of the World suffer so they can benefit, taking all that is left from the many, while we let them? That's nuts! I say only mad men and women would suggest such a path, but as you see today, nobody wants to even admit a Great Global Depression and will actually accuse you of being the nutty ones for even suggesting the alternative. Why? It would work as far as I see it... it would help mankind avoid catastrophe.

So the choice will be, a continued slide into hell or will we forgive all debt to start over... it appears there really will only be two choices. Hopefully we choose to save the majority while the few are forced to suck-it-up...

[DCBob]

1. Doesnt benefit anyone.

We all suffer.. some more than others but we all lose in that scenario.

[socialist_n_TN]

2. Wrong. It benefits the ones who have enough left over

to buy out all the rest at pennies to the dollar values. And who has enough left over? Why the 1% of course. Sure they lose some, but everybody else loses EVERYTHING. Which allows the 1% to further consolidate their "private" property.

That's the way capitalism works. The booms and busts inherent in the system are there for a reason. The consolidation of wealth into fewer and fewer hands.

[DCBob]

4. Yes, thats true but they also lose at the same time.

Everyones wealth will deteriorate and might never recover.. in our lifetimes anyway.

[Vincardog]

10. If the .0001% lose .5% of their paper wealth but buy up our and our children's future for 1Cent on

the dollar: are they any worse off? The Koch brothers could lose 1/2 of their wealth and still have 25 BILLION $ left.
Do you believe they would suffer?

[unblock]

13. "suffering" is not in the cards, of course.

but the ultra-rich do lose vastly more than 0.5% of their paper wealth in a downturn.
bill gates loses more than that on any reasonable down day for microsoft.

if your point is that they can lose billions and it doesn't remotely affect their lifestyle, you're right. it only affects the "game" they play, and once you have so much money, the "game" is all you have left to live for.

[ZenaD]

17. The Koch bros are some sick sadistic fucks

I bet they'd give up 9/10 of their fortune if it meant reducing everyone else to destitution.

[unblock]

11. you're both right; it's a question of when and how much.

in the comparatively short run, the super-rich lose out along with the rest of us. in fact, they lose bigtime because they could have made a mint in a growing economy and instead the lose a ton.

but in the aftermath, they're the only ones in a position to take advantage of everyone else's misery. their mountain of wealth is smaller than it was, but everyone else is reduced to just surviving and getting their own house in order. at that point they're in a position to scoop up hard hit businesses at a bargain and grow their empires.

so, they lose big in the downturn, but when the eventual upturn comes, they're stronger.

[ZenaD]

15. Apparently a lot of rich people feel they'll enjoy their wealth more if the masses are in squalor

Not all rich people feel this way, obviously, but a substantial number do.

[bvar22]

18. Wrong.

The Elites (Top 1%) live like royalty during a Depression.
It is so much more fun to be RICH when everyone else is struggling.
The RICH actually get to walk on poor people in the mud when times are really hard.

If everyone had access to:

*Decent paying jobs

*Healthy Food

*HealthCare

*Education

*Comfortable Houses

*Recreation

*Comfortable retirement

....then it wouldn't be any FUN to be RICH!



You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[bemildred]

3. The very wealthy of course. nt

[WillyT]

5. Well... If History Is A Guide... Initially... It Helps The Fascists...

In the end... not so much.



:shrug:

[newspeak]

24. well, who did it favor in the last great depression?

How many of the robber barons from this country aided mussolini and hitler? And some did not do it just for profit, but believed in the ideology. Unfortunately, many people do not learn from history. Instead of voting for people who will actually aid the people, they'll turn to the fascists who will tell them who to hate and blame for their predicament. And, I guarantee you, it won't be the massive global corporations or the billionaires.

[ThomWV]

6. The answer is obvious

When just about everyone has nothing then the very few who have nearly everything get to buy all that is left at what are usually called fire-sale prices.

[JDPriestly]

19. But, ThomWV, let's say that you start with 100 marbles

and a gameboard five feet by five feet. You play the game and you win 98 marbles and own five feet by four feet and ten inches of the gameboard.

What happens to the game?

And what do you do with your 98 marbles and five feet by four feet and ten inches of the gameboard?

You can't get any more marbles. There you sit with your gameboard and your marbles and no one to play with.

You can make the other players into your slaves. But they could gang up on you at any time and just grab your marbles and the gameboard and start their own game.

(I write this as one who used to win and win at Monopoly. In fact, I don't think I ever lost at it when I was a kid. It gets boring after a while. And in the end your friends don't want to play Monopoly with you any more.)

That is why the Ayn Rand idea of the lone superhero just doesn't work out for anyone, not even the hero.

We humans are social animals. We have to share and live together or else nobody does well.

I love my neighbors, my neighborhood and my family and everybody in it. Most of us feel the same way. Winning marbles has an appeal as long as you are winning in a social context. But when that sense of winning in a social context ends, then it is no fun.

So I think that we will see a move toward more sharing. It won't be due to a lot of violent conflict. It will simply be due to the boredom of the rich in our society when they realize that their "assets" are not worth much really because the number of people who can pay for them is too small to make the "assets" liquid.

Imagine being stuck with a lot of apartment buildings that have to be maintained but can't be rented for enough income to maintain them. Imagine owning a lot of land with lots of animals on it, lots of animals that you can't sell because no one can afford to buy them.

Capitalism is about buying and selling. If only very few have any money to buy anything, capitalists can't make money. It doesn't work.

We may end up with some sort of feudalism, but even then the rich have to share what they have or else they too end up with nothing.

[fascisthunter]

22. it is how war lords, tin-pot dictators and criminal bosses gain power

[dkf]

7. Only short sellers benefit. Everyone else gets hit.

[Octafish]

8. Capitalism's Invisible Army

And the wealthy so-and-sos for whom they toil.

[WinkyDink]

9. Slave-owners-to-be.

[elleng]

12. No one, actually,

but things, power etc., are so out of control, and relatively diffuse, those with power didn't understand/recognize the consequences of their behavior, and don't know what they might do to change things.

[ThomWV]

16. I think you've got half of it

I think you got the second half right, that the nature of our universe has been so hidden from us that we wouldn't know how to change things if we had to. But on the first half, that things are so out of control, well there I disagree. I think that 'things' are so tightly controlled just so we can't see how to make our own lives better.

[rhett o rick]

14. I am afraid you dont see the real picture (like I do. How's that for audacity?).

First of all those in the upper class have a condition I call class-sociopathy. They dont want the poor of the world to die but see it as inevitable.

Bad Analogy Time: If you open a candy store and let 10 kids in and tell them they can have all the candy they want but to remember that there are hundreds of kids that need a share. How many of the kids would take only a fair share? Who would be the first not to grab as much as they can?

In our capitalistic society it's literally every person for themselves. Material is power and power is security. This is more prevalent the higher on the financial ladder you get.

I know I am making a shambles out of my point, but if someone in the upper class does happen to see the light and drop out of the race to the top, they wont be missed.

I can just see the top 10 wealthiest sitting together and one saying, "Maybe we should give up some of our wealth (power) to keep the masses from revolting". ANd the response, "Sure you go ahead."

Unless the 1% can collectively decide to mutually give up some of their wealth, none will.

[fascisthunter]

20. Oh, I think you misunderstood me... I am not expecting anything from the top 1%

I am asking as to why we would allow them to dictate our future.... and I agree with all you have said. My question in regards to who benefits is more rhetorical than anything, however in the end I do not believe it will benefit them as well, the way they think it will.

[fascisthunter]

21. Everybody thanks for the comments... so the answer needs to be:

we need to absolve all debt if we want to avoid a global depression. From there we can change the system, as I truly believe the sociopaths up top want to do, but for their own benefit.

[redqueen]

23. Those at the top. There are great bargains to be found when economies crash,

they can buy up lots of stuff and then get even further ahead as the economy rebounds.

I think we've seen this show before.

[blindpig]

25. The capitalists who survive it.

It ain't so much what anybody wants, it's how capitalism works. Some capitalists will not survive it but when the dust settles those left will have great investment opportunities.