The global economy must be reordered to ensure it serves ordinary people around the world rather than the “frivolous and destructive demands of the ultra-rich”, according to a leading UN figure.

Olivier De Schutter, the UN special rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, says politicians must stop prioritising “socially and ecologically destructive growth” that only increases the profits – and serves the consumption demands – of the world’s richest individuals and corporations.

Instead, to tackle the interwoven crises of rising inequality, ecological collapse and resurgent far-right politics, a new economic agenda is needed.

“The scarce resources we have should be used to prioritise the basic needs of people in poverty and to create what is of societal value rather than serve the frivolous desires of the ultra-rich.”

    • doben@lemmy.wtf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      5 days ago

      Organize! This does not need to be a dream or a utopia. Systems fall, changes are always possible. Only, the ultra rich with their frivolous desires won‘t give up their privileges and power because we ask nicely.

      • cecilkorik@piefed.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 days ago

        Systems are actually falling right now. It’s going to be chaotic and difficult, but there is also opportunity. Destruction is an opportunity for creation. We need to work together and focus on how we can create something better.

  • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    5 days ago

    Yeah shit like that is why the ultra rich have committed to destroying international organizations like the UN

  • tristan@tarte.nuage-libre.fr
    link
    fedilink
    Français
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 days ago

    Maybe if our system didn’t allow mere individuals to collect a net worth equivalent to small countries…? Hate the game, not the players. Billionaires should not even exist in the first place.

    • Zombie@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      50
      ·
      5 days ago

      I can, and will, hate both the game and the players.

      The players at the top know exactly what they’re doing.

      If me, a fucking nobody who reads while taking a shit, in between working all the time to pay the bills can understand what’s going on. There’s no way the richest in society, with the most leisure time and access to the world’s greatest educators etc, don’t.

      • tristan@tarte.nuage-libre.fr
        link
        fedilink
        Français
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        Don’t get me wrong, billionaires are definitely sociopaths. But our society, instead of giving them the treatment they deserve (institutionalisation and a therapy to develop empathy would be a good start) rewards them instead with power and influence.

        I see many people cluelessly asking why it seems like billionaires are all sociopaths. That’s because society rewards it and selects for it, and that’s what we need to change first and foremost.

        To borrow an image from the Scorpion and the Frog, if you’re a frog and you’re taking scorpions on your back, it’s nonsensical to hate the scorpions for stinging you, that’s in their nature. Instead, we should focus on not taking scorpions on our back, that is, not putting sociopaths in positions of power and authority.

    • fishy@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      5 days ago

      Treat acquiring massive wealth as the mental disorder it is. 5150 all of them.

  • nonentity@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    5 days ago

    The percentage of sociopaths involved with defining a society should never be greater than zero.

    Financial obesity is an existential threat to any society that tolerates it, and needs to cease being celebrated, rewarded, and positioned as an aspirational goal.

    Corporations are the only ‘persons’ which should be subjected to capital punishment, but billionaires should be euthanised through taxation.

  • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 days ago

    Yeah, we can’t. The ultra rich make all the rules. They aren’t going to reform themselves.

  • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    5 days ago

    OK, you’re right, in a purely ethical world.

    But why would the economy change its behavior on a broad scale? What practical incentives would you use to adjust it?

      • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        Punitive measures might feel emotionally satisfying in the moment, but what they actually incentivize is hiding the corruption and exploitation better (avoiding getting caught, rather than avoiding the bad activity in the first place). Also, while an angry mob might have a taste for violence and actually perform it for a little while, it doesn’t last and it’s not a basis for a stable government or economy.

        If you want long-term stability you have to organize a system so that it incentivizes the behaviors that you want, even more than it disincentivizes the behaviors that you don’t want.

        I’m not sure what that looks like in this context, in a practical sense. But ultimately the problem is that everything in our society rewards the hoarding of wealth. This is not just a problem with capitalism - every communist or supposedly socialist society ever established also rewarded hoarding of wealth.

        For things to be different, actually different, a different value system with a fundamentally different reward structure needs to be established, and it needs to be competitive long-term with the current system in order to exist alongside it and/or eventually replace it.

        Like I said I don’t really know what that looks like in practice. The only example I can think of is the “gift economy” described in Kim Stanley Robinson’s Green Mars, in which the participants in every exchange always seek to give more than they get (essentially the reverse of normal behavior).

    • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      The practical incentives are there already, but far too many people are too greedy and shortsighted to recognize them. There are long term negative consequences to prioritizing short term individual gains over long term, sustainable prosperity for all. And achieving that sustainable prosperity does not require people to replace self interest with altruism, it requires that people to adopt a more enlightened, forward looking self interest. It’s getting people to understand that overindulgence and a zero sum mentality today, without thought for the consequences tomorrow is not self interest, it’s self destruction.

      If that can’t work then civilization is fucked.