I can't point to any scientific data to support my theory - but I feel that if the world were to redistribute the wealth of the top 10% most wealthiest individuals and countries - everybody would be at least 1,000% better off than they are now. Even people who now have excessive wealth would be happier and healthier on average.

By redistribution I don't mean via communism or socialism but via democracy. How is that?

Well if we can all agree that nobody needs more than x amount of wealth to live a good life - and we devoted anything in excess of x to the betterment of public institutions which devoted resources to globally beneficial causes such as technological advances, R&D , hospitals, environmental protection etc etc etc there would be an enormous improvement in the quality of life for everyone.

There are institutions such as the United Nations which can act as a catalyst for change and spin-offs from this concept of Uniting for the betterment of all could specialize in specific areas of global management.

I would expect that the balance that could be achieved in the management of such a process would come from the the sum of the many parts - i.e. each country.

That is my simple formula for leveling the playing field and creating a better world for all. Problems of civilization as a whole could be managed much better -

Let us have your comment.

A few things - Obama's team report on the governor's scandel - it was meant to satisfy the media feeding frenzy - but nobody will ever do that!

It was what Obama said it was - nothing.

Make what you will of it - create innuendo, speculate, hypothesize - it was still nothing!

Secondly - listening to talking heads about the economy, bail-outs to smaller banks as opposed to larger etc etc -it suddenly occurred to me on a much broader scale - that what is wrong with this world - which due to our influence is what is wrong with our country - is that everything we do is ultimately based on the average lifespan of an individual - not considering a race or civilization or species - i.e. homo sapient!

We live for ourselves as individuals and make decisions on what is right or wrong based on what is right for us within our lifetime - without regard to what is wrong for mankind!

And that's that!!

The real question is "what's right'!!!

Here's a list of what's wrong:

1. The way we do business - no ethics, greed, no accountability, success not dependent on ability
2. The way we perceive ourselves - we think we are the smartest, the nicest, the most successful, the most generous etc etc etc ad nauseum
3. Our political, legal and accounting systems
4. The media - propaganda and advertisements - a surreal yet effective form of brainwashing by repetition and by default in the absence of any objections

   Our economic, social and political philosophy is that if everyone is spending money and everyone is working than we are doing well and our system is okay -

   If by comparison to others on the planet we are doing better financially - then we feel we are successful.

   As a society we need to collectively look in the mirror and get real.

   Put aside the fact that we've polluted our air and water - and that we've devastated our natural resources and wildlife without any thought to preserve or replenish. Just CONSUME, CONSUME, CONSUME! We have developed a viral economic system which has been exposed - our entire society is one massive ponzi scheme - how else can you explain the majority of the people (who can least afford it) paying most of the taxes which somehow end up bestowing massive benefits upon a minority of the people.

   Kickbacks, back-scratching, bribes, fraud, influence peddling and tens of millions of unlawful acts camouflaged by lawyers and accountants that benefit the perpetrators (their clients) go undetected but are not unknown. Just ignored!

   One needs only to watch, listen or read the news to see it everyday.

   Whether it's dumping chemicals in a river, cheating on taxes, making a mortgage loan or allowing a medicine be put on the market that turns out to be harmful. From the trivial to the enormous - it is most often explained away as ineptitude when in truth someone somewhere in the chain of events knew and benefited financially from that knowledge in some way.

   The longer you live - the more you see it -

   Recently an investor lost $50+ billion of OPM - it was spent, lost, squirreled away in Switzerland etc etc -

   Not unlike our taxes which are an enormous investment in our country - but a disproportionate amount of tax benefit finds its way into the pockets of a few people - while we are faced with a bankrupt social security system and myriad other public problems.

   Never has it been more apparent that our financial system is one giant ponzi scheme - and indirectly our elected representatives are puppets performing according to strings pulled by campaign contributors.

   The people who benefit are the billionaires on down to the millionaires.

   But 90% of the bill for this corrupt society has been footed by the middle class - while the poor remain poor and exist on financial crumbs.

   Anyone who is rich is a symbol of the failure of humanity and very often greedy and corrupt - and nobody should have excessive wealth hoarded on a planet where millions die every year from lack of food, shelter and proper medical care.

   Bill Gates is one person who recognizes the injustice. There are others - but not enough to matter.

Credit card companies are crooks. They encourage people to spend money they don't have - and get them to use their cards at low interest rates in the beginning when their credit standards are lower - and when times get tough they change their standards and increase your rate and then cut your limits and accelerate the billing cycle.

They are criminals. Perhaps not in a legal sense but definitely in a moral sense.

There are many people (with money & good credit) who would disagree because they are not hurt by this scam. But there are many more who are - and unfortunately it's the people who can afford least to pay double digit interest rates up to over 20% !!!

Who allows this to happen?

Our government. And who influences the laws that allow this to happen? The people who benefit from this system.

To get elected politicians depend on campaign contributions from people who they then must cater too. The bulk of citizens can't afford to make any significant campaign contributions - but the crooks can!

Today I was uplifted as most of us are lately - listening and watching Obama with his latest cabinet picks and the inspirational goals they are attached too - Then almost immediately and throughout 90% of the day all the news reporters wanted to discuss were the Anthony story and the Blogoya scandal or whatever his name is - There's nothing wrong with reporting this news but what I find appalling to the point of being frightening is the extreme redundancy and obsession and time that is devoted by the media to this type of news which is unfortunately recurrent - which suggests that we viewers have nothing else on our minds of greater significance to the world at large - All news (or propaganda) is driven by ratings which drives advertising revenues - the importance and significance of real news is overlooked and therefore the fact that 10,000 people may be slaughtered in one part of the world is slipped under the rug while one persons greed is obsessed with in the headlines in another part of the world. The difference in the importance of these 2 events is self-evident - but the fact that news casters ignore it - perpetuates it - thus newscasters are by proxy, murderers if through their actions they neglect to bring to bare moral suasion in an attempt to stop serious crimes against humanity. This is pretty heavy stuff - but it's true. The truth I hope for all of our sakes is that we don't have a choice and deep down would really like some real news to be reported - and yet in the absence of the truth we are drawn into this soap opera of fabricated "what-ifs" and speculations like brain-washed flies to honey - What would the news be like if it reported the most important events instead of emphasizing to an extraordinary degree - these disgusting yet otherwise common events of fraud and murder while genocide goes un-abetted?

Value is not something that can keep us alive. What we need keeps us alive and what we value keeps us happy When what we perceive to be of value equals what we need we are living a pure life. For example we need food, water, clothing and shelter to live. There are many people for whom these necessities have very high value - because they are in short supply. For those of us who have what we need to live - there is what we want beyond the necessities. That is where humanity needs to kick-in. Is it correct that because one individual is smarter or perhaps simply more fortunate that another should be denied what they need to live? The simple answer is no. Yet we live in a world that looks at those in need not as fellow human beings i.e "All men Are Equal" but as uneducated and uncivilized. Yet the world we live in over time has caused humanity to make progress at different rates based on geographic location and local societies. This is due in large part to the lack of humanity on the part of civilized nations as they began to populate the globe in "uncivilized" areas of the planet. I will take a huge jump from this foundational thought - which is a fact and talk about economists and today. Given that value above what we need is perception - when the supply of what we need to live diminishes ultimately value diminishes. What does that have to do with economic theory? Industrialized advanced nations operate on the basis that the more they consume the better it is for the world at large - sought of a trickle down economical theory. Economists believe their theories are correct simply because the conventional wisdom chooses to ignore what is wrong with economic theory. And what is wrong is that economies that spend resources creating items of "perceived value" ultimately redirect those resources from items of "need value" What makes this unjust from a humanitarian standpoint is that the bulk of the resources are supplied directly and indirectly by those with the highest "need" to those with the least "need". And while children starve or die from lack of medical care in one portion of the world there are individuals who drive $40,000 vehicles in another part of the world. These vehicles were created from resources that in theory belong to mankind. What makes this immoral is that when societies create perceived value simply to increase consumption they fail to first consider the humanitarian responsibility to all of mankind on the planet. While there is nothing wrong with a person living in a better or bigger house - there is something wrong when one person has a house to live in and another doesn't. Even more incorrect is when one person has more food then they need yet another dies for lack of food. Sadly enough this even occurs in so-called civilized nations! Economic theory is founded on what we want to believe - and those who need to survive have their own theories - which is that it isn't right.