The move is inspired partly by studies
of wealthy societies that show when a country grows through a certain level of basic prosperity more money does not make people more content.
He was the fifth of six children
of wealthy society doctor and financier Robert Darwin and Susannah Darwin (née Wedgwood).
Not exact matches
Rather than hoarding their money or creating family dynasties as many
of their predecessors did, a growing number
of wealthy Americans are pledging their fortunes to benefit
society.
Like any
of number
of fictional futures, from Metropolis to Altered Carbon, it is a
society where the
wealthy in live in glistening towers in the clouds, surrounded by technologies
of luxury and convenience, looking down on an underclass that can not afford basic necessities.
The idea
of order was made more difficult by
wealthy families asserting their economic interests at the expense
of society at large.
Now it seems that the upper echelons
of Latin American
society have taken note as many
wealthy families are now diving enthusiastically into Bitcoin.
The Giving Pledge is an effort to help address
society's most pressing problems by inviting the world's
wealthiest individuals and families to commit to giving more than half
of their wealth to philanthropy or charitable causes either during their lives or after their deaths.
The abnormalities
of atheistic beliefs are in today's timelines littering profusely many cherished religious
societies whose fundamentalisms have been a social consistency for many good years... Even though I am distasteful
of today's religions in that they are usurping the least
wealthy, I see their mismanaging
of financial dexterities due each religion's hierarchies needing more money for themselves than for their communal poor folks...
In the former, euergesia (to do good) was a practice
of the
wealthy, who contributed to the well - being
of society.
Economists sometimes argue that when a
society becomes sufficiently
wealthy the benefits
of increased wealth will trickle down to those who are now poor, but in the countries they cite as success stories, the improvement
of the lot
of the poor was greatly benefited by governmental action and labor unions, neither
of which are viewed favorably from the point
of view
of the theory.
And then there was a different form
of poverty: the «spiritual poverty
of our time»; that poverty is most evident in
wealthier societies and manifests itself in what Benedict XVI often called the «dictatorship
of relativism»» the worship
of the false god
of me, myself, and I, imposed by state power, often in the name
of a misguided and coercive concept
of tolerance.
There are numerous examples in our
society of people who were once poor becoming
wealthy through creativity and hard work.
Historically the Churches have generally been rather on the side
of the
wealthy and powerful due to the common interests
of the Churches and
of the affluent in
society.
Dr. Cobb examines wealth and how the
wealthy gain control not only
of the economy but also
of society and government.
«Most
wealthy congregations are only thinking
of themselves and give little money to missions; meanwhile, international mission
societies are curtailing their budgets for Japan.»
(Hat tip: Notes on the Culture Wars and LES FEMMES - THE TRUTH) When it comes to secret
societies of the
wealthy and powerful elites bent on one - world government, I prefer The Pentavirate: So I Married An Axe Murderer (Colonel Sanders scene)....
The landowner knew very well that they were in that situation because the powerful in
society, the
wealthy and the influential, even the educated and the religious, had created this terrible situation where millions
of people had no work.
I am not calling for cuts to government programs as
of now — they are necessary for so many people's basic survival — but Mr. Beck does have a pertinent point: voting to tax someone else (typically
wealthier than us) to provide assistance does not necessarily demonstrate a
society that «cares» — much more caring is a
society that willingly donates those funds to charities they have taken the time to research, and more caring still if the members
of that
society take the time to volunteer to administer that aid.
Even if everybody in America enjoyed excellent health care, decent housing, educational opportunities, and lots
of consumer goodies, but the
wealthy and powerful lived in gated communities and held the rest
of us in disdain, we'd think our
society sick rather than healthy.
A stratified
society, with
wealthy landowners at the top and slaves at the bottom and, in between, a mass
of poor folk skirting precariously the edge
of servitude for debt and in times
of depression forced into it or compelled to sell sons or daughters to redeem the family's fortunes — such a picture is revealed by a careful reading
of the records.
Coontz misstates the historical record to give the impression that marriage has typically not been a province
of law and only became such in an effort to preserve the narrow interests
of certain powerful sects
of society:
wealthy parents in requiring parental consent, Catholic authoritarians in proscribing divorce, and Southern racists in preventing miscegenation.
Free
societies have an excellent system to compensate for a lack
of charity on the part
of their
wealthy citizens — it is called TAXATION.
While Reno is correct that it is «unhealthy for our
society when cultural power becomes too concentrated in just a few very
wealthy institutions,» using the state's tax power to attack «institutional giganticism» in the name
of «philanthropic subsidiarity» as he proposes would only open the way for government to control, and even destroy, such institutions.
The backlash against the private sector is hardly surprising: when financial institutions broke down following the collapse
of Lehman Brothers in 2007, the costs fell not on
wealthy financiers but
society as a whole in an era when middle income households were suffering an unprecedented squeeze.
So at the level
of public space the polity as an «imaginary institution» (to misuse Castoriadis) more or less disappeared, leaving «
society» as a sort
of pre-biotic soup in which all that really mattered was the number
of wealthy good Samaritans per head
of population, or something
of that sort.
Another problem with high levels
of economic inequality is that lots
of resources have to be devoted to gatekeeping and guarding the wealth
of the
wealthy from those denied wealth, which isn't necessary to nearly the same degree in more egalitarian
societies.
After all, they have been the winners
of the Tories» relentless support for the
wealthiest people in
society.
The problems in rich
societies such as most
of those in Europe is not, heretical as this is to say, caused by these
societies somehow not being
wealthy enough (and therefore requiring more GDP growth, and the associated promotion and veneration
of «wealth creators» and establishing ideological divisions within
society between «shirkers and strivers» etc.).
You emphasise the way that Machiavelli thought that the
wealthy of his time, primarily the nobility, were the greatest threat to a free
society.
Surely, this analysis must purport to show how, contrary to all the evidence I've seen, equalising capital gains, equalising tax relief on pensions, closing various other loopholes and introducing a mansions tax will actually have a minimal impact on the incomes
of the
wealthiest on
society?
«We are a
wealthy society in Britain and if we're going to live within the limits
of our planet then some people are going to have to get more and some people at the top are going to have to get less and that means that the economics and the environment go together.
It's important to note that the very
wealthiest groups in
society are much less likely to take part in surveys and so their wealth is under - reported and alternative sources
of data need to be analysed, such as HMRC personal wealth statistics.
These are the markers
of a civilised
society, but they are under relentless attack from corporations and
wealthy elites.
So presumably, the less
wealthy, after being told what to spend their money on by «
society» for all their working years, reach pensionable age fully moulded by a paternalistic government into financially responsible citizens who will commit a significant amount
of their time to research where they want to invest their pensions, and subsequently enjoy «regular updates on how their pension fund was growing» — because
of course, like house prices, pension funds can only rise in value.
He advised the
wealthy in the
society to make it mandatory upon themselves to always assist the poor and the needy in order to cushion the effect
of the recession in their social and economic lives.
Asked whether very
wealthy and mobile people would just take their money away, she said: «You have to be part
of the
society in which you live.
Asked whether very
wealthy mobile people would just take their money away, she said: «You have to be part
of the
society in which you live.
The WFP shares my view
of a
society and an economy that works for everyone, not just the
wealthy and well - connected.»
«The cultural lens through which the fishermen viewed this issue was
of struggle in a post-slavery
society,
of the rich, predominantly white expatriates making a law that oppressed the poorest
of the poor locals to benefit the
wealthy.»
«Even if people think objectively and follow rules
of statistical inference, richer and poorer people may be led, by the information available to them, to very different conclusions about how
wealthy their fellow citizens are, on average, and how wealth is distributed across
society.»
Social inequality refers to disparities in the distribution
of economic assets and income as well as between the overall quality and luxury
of each person's existence within a
society, while economic inequality is caused by the unequal accumulation
of wealth; social inequality exists because the lack
of wealth in certain areas prohibits these people from obtaining the same housing, health care, etc. as the
wealthy, in
societies where access to these social goods depends on wealth.
In the past, it was associated with rich, developed countries or with
wealthier sectors
of society.
If only a few
wealthy companies control how Americans communicate with each other, it will be harder for people to talk among ourselves about the kind
of society we want to build.
- The class
of society the website is made for: There are a few websites that specifically target older women that are
wealthy.
They appreciate expensive gifts, exotic trips and meeting
wealthy people regularly and establishing themselves in the upper class
of society.The sugar baby is an individual who wants mentor - ship, help with financial expenses or general companionship with people in the upper echelon
of the
society.
This site is proud to be one
of the pioneering dating sites for
wealthy and known singles in the
society.
However, for the
wealthy and millionaires, mingling with the common opposite sexes do not come naturally because
of their placement in the
society and the places they frequent.
A gifted musician, Garfield rises from the slums to the upper echelons
of society, thanks to the patronage
of wealthy, alcoholic Crawford.
During this period, she often put her country - girl characterization on the back burner to portray elegant
society dowagers, alternately browbeating their
wealthy husbands or enjoying the high - priced attentions
of oily gigolos.
That being said, they do justice to Mr. Sorkin's fine writing and directing as the film examines this almost hidden part
of society that caters to the whims, addictions and games
of extraordinarily
wealthy and successful men.