The top 26 billionaires own $1.4 trillion — as much as 3.8 billion other people

Ah, I’m like George Washington Carver, I don’t need money to be happy; grateful for those who know how to make it; and satisfied to live the life I have.

You should appreciate your betters, not envy them and seek their destruction.

 

It’s a start.

 

Good for you, and I agree. Just saying that you can make perfect decisions but the deck is still stacked wildly in their favor - you aren't becoming a billionaire. That's not to say that you can't live a good life.

 

The question was a matter of resources not how to start. Try to keep up please.

 

I did answer your question(s). I don't know you except that you list yourself as a socialist. For your own reasons you fail to accept widely known and accepted facts. I should however modify my answer regarding Cuba. Cuba recognizes itself as a socialist county but with the goal of becoming communist.

The definition of various ideologies, democracy, socialism, and communism have not changed. I note however that there can never be a true pure ideology. Various ideologies may employ slightly different political and economic models and theory but the basics remain the same. Therefore, there can never be a pure democracy or pure communism. If so, both would be the same and would amount to Utopia which of course can never be achieved, not to say that it has not been tried.

 

it doesn't
so tell me what resource does Facebook consume
the great idea of Facebook made Mark Zuckerberg 56 billion dollars
he makes no tangible product and consumes no tangible resources in providing that product
a song writer can make hundreds of thousand writing a song and that song can make an artist millions
so what tangible resource did that song writer consume writing that song other the sheet of paper and a pencil if he didn't use a computer to do it
a painter can make millions off of one painting so what tangible resource did that painter consume other then a sheet of canvass and some paint?
I can keep going on and on

 

Is there a difference between an ideology and a socio-economic system?

 

Generally revolutions don't happen overnight. The American revolution actually took about 150 years to achieve. Granted the world is getting smaller. The technical revolution for example is still quite fluid and evolving. Once the general public notices anything that is truly revolutionary, chances are it took years to develop to the point where it is considered revolutionary. Development of computers, lasers and many thing we now take for granted have gone through many stages of development and improvement.

 

An ideology is what broadly makes up a given political and economic system.

 

Seems to me, they've been pretty much a success all over the world since 1792...

It's not a race, it's a marathon. It doesn't matter who takes the lead at the start only the one that cross the finish line first.

Human nature.

 

No. The element of surprise is lost.

You avoided the question. I'll ask again:
Do you plan to lead the charge or let others do your fighting for you?

Human nature... makes murder committed with the purpose to take other people's stuff acceptable.
You sure you want to go with that?

 

Intellectual Property - an intangible asset that may have considerable value

 

1- Not really, you don't know who's after your head.

2- I'll be in the fray. I may be first for a while or someone else may overtake me, who knows with so many people.

3- Have you ever cracked an history book? Greed is integral to humane nature, even toddlers are greedy, and has been the biggest motivator to invade pillage and enslave peoples. And when people are desperate enough they'll do bad things.

 

correct Marxism is a failed ideology Communism is what manifest trying to implement Marxism

 

Mobs are hard to conceal; after the first few people are lynched, you don't suppose the remainder will take precautions?
And, of course, your idea that the state will step aside is, well, amusing.

Uh huh.

Just remember that when someone comes for your stuff.

 

Most of the referenced 3.8b folks aren't in a materialistic culture where wealth is coveted. Additionally, the global poverty population has been drastically reducing over the last 30 years.

 

To put wealth into perspective, if your family income is $10,000 a year, you are wealthier than 84 percent of the world. If it's $50,000 or more a year, you make more than 99 percent of the world. Even the poorest of Americans are relatively wealthy on the world scale.

 

Indeed. As a Middle-class American, I am the 1%.

 

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/050615/are-you-top-one-percent-world.asp

 

Yup. Top 1%.

 

Didn't work since 1792, quite the contrary. The more you lynch the more who'll take up arms against you. You should really study history instead of attending gun shows.

No, the state will do it upmost to stop them and in turn will create more and more of them. Learn from history!

I'm no hero, but I'll do my part.

What stuff? I'm getting poorer and poorer even though I'm working more and more. I'm not the one the masses will target.

 

In the USA an individuals net worth, a better overall metric, cracking the 1% bracket is somewhat more difficult.

Net Worth of the 10%, 1%, and .1%
Percentile Threshold 10.00% - 1.00% - 0.10%
Net Worth $1,182,390.36 - $10,374,030.10 - $43,090,281.00

https://dqydj.com/who-are-the-one-percent-united-states/

 

If they live on planet earth, they are.
From the lowly chinese peasant to the 1st world workers, all want more of what they have. Food, shelter, medecine and a chance to improve one status by education. Any constraint on those needs are artificially imposed, like the indian caste system.

 

Unsupportable nonsense - none of your assumptions, when applied to today, are sound.

Why don't you have a marketable skillset?

 

Well sure - the richest of the rich is an exclusive club.

Somehow, I'm supposed to feel bad about having more than 99% of the world and should accept the idea that the state should take some of my stuff and give it to others.
Personally, I don't get it.