What type of people own high-high-end gear?

[Joe]

Well true, I have met some pretty well educated people to whom it had not occurred that despite with what they considered to be their modest salary and home were actually amongst the top 1% or possibly top 0.1% of the wealthiest people in the world.

You show them the stats and you can see from their faces and body language what a surprise this is to them and also that it clearly makes them feel uncomfortable. No-one wants to think they are actually part of the wealthy elite causing all the world suffering that they wring their hands over.

It doesn't bother me much, but then I don't wring my hands over all the suffering. I'm just a heartless bastard.

[Pharos]

My request to Rothwell Audio in his post 111, was for him to clarify criticism of;

"...admittedly it applies to consumerism in which we are encouraged to buy loads of crap, rather than the greater tyrannies of the politics of history".

which I assume was from a previous post of mine.

[RothwellAudio]

To get back on topic, I think the best people to answer the question are the people who sell the stuff. A mate of mine sells some pretty expensive hi-fi and tells me that the people who buy it are usually not super-rich footballers or investment bankers, they're just blokes with pretty ordinary jobs who save up to buy the hi-fi they desire. The super-rich are generally just as oblivious to high-end hi-fi as the rest of the population is.

[Macca]

According to this, mid last year, to be in the top 1% globally you're on an income of just shy of 30k euros a year and/or sit on around 700k euros of assets (including house, investments, car etc)

http://www.investopedia.com/articles...cent-world.asp

)

Hmm so I'm not in the top 1 percent according to that. Right then, to the barricades, comrades!

[RothwellAudio]

My request to Rothwell Audio in his post 111, was for him to clarify criticism of;

"...admittedly it applies to consumerism in which we are encouraged to buy loads of crap, rather than the greater tyrannies of the politics of history".

which I assume was from a previous post of mine.

I wasn't criticising the statement, just saying that I didn't understand it. Best I can make of it is that consumers are encouraged to buy loads of crap instead of buying the greater tyrannies of the politics of history. That still doesn't make sense to me.
If everyone else understands it and I'm the only numpty who doesn't get it, please help me out by explaining what it means in simple terms which I might understand.

[Pharos]

I understand your last point Rothwell Audio, and apologise, I missed out a word because I am as sore as hell and resultantly tired, after training. I have just corrected it by adding the missing word, and perhaps I also missed a step which was obvious to me.

I make errors, but usually not for reasons of lack of inherent ability

We obviously do not 'buy the greater tyrannies of the politics of history', and surely you didn't think that I was suggesting that we did.

I had thought your criticism was invalid because I was merely stating, perhaps too abbreviatedly, that the human tendency to greed was now exploited by empire building capitalists who encouraged that trait for their own profit gain, and that the old days of pillage and plunder which facilitated its expression, are no longer a dominant feature of the globe.

[Infinitely Baffled]

All it takes is a full stop and a capital letter and the whole thing is changed. Sorry if it sounds like I'm being pedantic but I'm just asking to people consider the benefits of writing sentences that make sense. After all, we're on a forum and the written word is our only form of communication (apart from pictures and links to videos and diagrams etc., etc. )

Hallelujah!

[Pharos]

Infinitely Baffled I think you have a portal leak;

"Sorry if it sounds like I'm being pedantic but I'm just asking to people consider the benefits of writing sentences that make sense"

"I'm just asking to people"?.

We can all make mistakes, and it takes care and effort to avoid them.

Have you noticed just how many are made on forums? I reckon it is pace of life and anxiety about the world situation, which are impacting our self possession.

[Infinitely Baffled]

Oh, don't mind me! I'm just a seething mass of niggles and phobias when it comes to the way folks write and speak. You would think I would have better things to do with my time, wouldn't you? Sadly not. Plurals made with apostrophes, rubbish punctuation and that favourite of modern times, the use of "myself" when what is meant is "me", get me going every time. Yes, you are right, it's very easy to make mistakes (embarrassingly, I see that I spelled "hallelujah" wrong in my earlier post!). But I'm not sure it's down to pressure of life - I think people simply don't value accurate written communication as they used to. Blame texts and Twitter maybe.

What is a "portal leak", by the way?
IB

[Infinitely Baffled]

Originally Posted by Macca:
They see themselves as underdogs, fighting against the uneven distribution of wealth and the tyranny of the rich when the fact is that without the existing system of tyranny and wealth distribution their lives would be massively worse.

Please explain why you consider that so. I'm referring specifically to the bit in bold. I'm intrigued to know why, according to you, my life would be worse for it.

I think the point he is making is that it is the same global system that keeps the poor down as keeps the likes of us up. We may not have designed or participated in the building of that global system, but we certainly benefit from it. Do we abhor it? Yes, most likely we do. But are we prepared to give up a big chunk of our comfort and relative affluence to improve things? Well, that's an altogether trickier question. Most of us salve our consciences with periodic charitable gifts, and inwardly I suspect we are grateful that as individuals there is not a lot more we can practically do.
IB