Dear sonofgloin,

I asked you again because your reply simply did not explain your claim of knowledge. You made a statement and cannot support it.

David you need not climb to the heights of self importance that I exampled. Have a look at the Milgram experiments. They example how easily we detach from others.

David,
I'm going to jump in here.
One need not interact with the elites in order to evaluate them.
For example, I have never met a member of Al Qaeda, but I'm capable of formulating an opinion about them.
Upon what might I base that opinion,you ask? Well, I answer, on their actions.
Furthermore, I would point to the old axiom, "When actions conflict with words, believe actions."
In applying this line of reasoning to elites, then let's look at their actions.
> The Koch Brothers funding sophisticated disinformation campaigns to prevent action on global warming;
> Gina Rinehart, one of the richest people in the world, being disingenuous in her efforts to prevent a tax which would give Australians a greater share in profits from mineral resources that Australians, via the states, own;
> If we go back a few years, immensely wealthy businessmen hiding the truth about the link between smoking and cancer;
> Immensely wealthy Chinese businessmen refusing to put basic safety features in coal mines leading to thousands of deaths each year, and putting melamine in milk, thus killing babies;
> The German pharmaceutical corporation to this day, hiding information about the link between thalidomide and birth deformities;
> The corrupting of the American political system by corporations through their lobbying efforts;
> an estimated 18 Trillion dollars hidden in offshore schemes with the sole intent of avoiding taxes.
I could go on for pages and pages.
By their actions they shall be judged.
And one does not have to be one of them to evalurate their actions.
Anthony
http://www.observationpoint.com.au

Anty the Greens & the greenies are basically interchangeable. Yes I do mean like China, with just one difference,

They see themselves in control & as the elite, not some scruffy worker type boss billionaire. In fact they would eliminate such people by destroying the industry that generates the wealth, & the well being of the masses.

They can't stand seeing us with nice homes, fuel burning cars, boats, airconditioning & other such luxuries. Given a chance they would re-introduce feudalism. Few if any of us would get far from our birth place, & no higher level of education would be wasted on us. Grass huts with earth floors would be our future with these fools.

I do agree about Chinese management, I guess life is cheap there.

I do worry at those who suggest the asianisation of Oz is not a bad thing. I have never seen any kindness or interest in the welfare of the lower levels of the people in any Asian society. Quite the contrary in fact. Exploitation is extreme of both the work force, & the population in general.

Dear Anthonyve,

Of course one can evaluate their actions. I think we all are doing precisely that. However, sonofgloin claimed more than that. He claimed that one would notice an attitude if one mixed with them. That was a claim of personal experience not evaluation at a distance. His statement also implied their attitudes were similar to each other. Like most other groups of people one member of a group may behave differently from another member of the group.

Warren Buffett and Bill Gates, the two richest men in the US, are giving away most of their fortunes. Buffett has questioned the taxation system which allows the rich to pay a samller persentage of their income in taxes thn the middle class because they can afford the experts to help them exploit the loopholes.

Another way in which Gates and Buffett challenge a stereotype is that both are atheists. I think there is a stereotype that religious people are somehow more charitable that non-religious people.

There is a vast imbalance in assets between the 1% and the rest of us. However, I also think there is a tremendous difference in social attitudes between different members of the 1%. Given that difference it is unfair to speak of them as though they all have the same attitudes.

All the rich are not dirty dogs, and all the poor are not noble souls.

I also think the system is very unfair, but I would not stereotype a person because of their economic status. Rich or poor, it's nice to have money.

David,
Fair enough.
And I have to agree with your last point. To quote I've no idea who, "I've been poor and I've been rich. Rich is better." amen to that.

Hasbeen,
Wow, your writing suggests that you really hate people who care about the environment. I really struggle to understand that.
Where do you plan to live once the environment is screwed? You've obviously had experience in China.
I ran a compny in Shanghai some years ago, so I've seen what damage can be done; rivers that look like the water surface in a washing machine, completely covered with stinking, yellow foam.
Hills, that look like a lunar landscape.
If we don't take stay alert and have some green values, that would be Australia.
And, I would add, it would be Australian business people doing it, just as it's Chinese people doing it to China.
Do you not care about the environment?
Anthony
http://www.observationpoint.com.au