Quote from: Vod on August 03, 2025, 06:36:29 PM

Quote from: caroasi on August 02, 2025, 12:00:26 PM

Quote from: Vod on August 01, 2025, 07:41:29 PM

All these three problems, as well as most future problems come from corrupt distribution of resources.

Corrupt distribution of resources only can solve up to half of the equation: the economics of society. It does not solve most social problems including drug addition, depression, and personal bullying.
...
Thanks for bringing up this point, I appreciate that greatly and will be mulling this over for a while!

It's nice when the forum bullies are cowering in fear and we can have constructive conversations.

Most of the social problems are caused by the corrupt distribution of resources. If mom and child are forced to live in a shelter because a corrupt administrator wants a bathroom remodel, that mom is forced to cope with the stress. That stress leads to the problems in society. Child grows up feeling less valuable, leading to more social problems.

Money gives you choice. If someone corrupt takes away your money, you have as much choice as a slave did in medieval times. No choice leads to depression.

While I'd agree many economic problems are caused by social problems, I wouldn't go as far to say more than half of social problems are caused by economic problems. Some people want to use violence to solve economic problems at every opportunity, twist, and turn, yet want many social freedoms. These people are considered communists and socialists for the most part. Other people want to solve social problems at every opportunity, twist, and turn, yet want many economic freedoms. These people are considered fascists and theocrats.

Perhaps some people can live happily under a theocracy or an economically libertarian version of fascism with strict social controls. Actually this more or less does exist or has existed: Singapore. And perhaps that is evidence of your point to some degree because Singapore people generally consider them selves happy and well. And while they do rank high in happiness, there are about 30 countries that rank higher. They have heavy handed oppression for people who exercise their property rights to own banned items including those for self defense and spiritual growth. Singapore had low corruption of distribution of resources at least at points in time, perhaps as recently as the late 2010's, though that seems to have changed recently as corruption has taken root in every single place on planet Earth, leaving seemingly no place to hide. I privately predicted Singapore would be doing worse as it adopted large government policies which definitely involved redistribution of resources in questionable ways including the accumulation of debt, and indeed it has been doing worse than before. But of course that starts to veer into your point.

Some people have gone too far into another direction and claimed almost all societies problems are caused by religion. Well, there are some problems that are caused by specific religions and religious conflicts. One example of that would be the tensions of Israel and Palestine. This is also done by non-religious people against religious people like the Chinese Muslim population being oppressed by the CCP. So, atheists certainly don't have clean hands in that regard either, and that brings me to my main point that cultural friction does happen regardless of economic policies or virtuous and ethical distribution of resources.

There are a fraction of sociopathic, psychopathic, and otherwise maladjusted people in society that are not that way because of their economic situations, and those people will continue to cause social problems regardless of the way in which resources are distributed. There are also people who seek social control over others by theocracy (Saudi Arabia for example), secular authoritarianism (Singapore for example), and other ways. And these problems are not solved primarily by economic means.

About half of people around the world want the other half put in prison for verbal insults, and that is a big problem that has nothing to do with economics.