“How advanced can we be if 7 out 10 people on this rock can't read. Close to the same number do not have decent places to live, decent diets, clean water to drink, any type of medical care.”
Where do these numbers come from? I don’t think literacy figures will bear out the 7 out of 10 number. Of course, one can always define literacy such that any given number is illiterate—say 99%. The same definition issues, of course, apply to a “decent place to live?” But where does that number come from?
As for “decent diet,” with worldwide obesity exceeding 20%, I can see where this could have some merit. But isn’t obesity only a symptom of our genetic heritage—coming from a time when food scarcity was a real issue? It’s easy to show that the world is starving by adjusting average required caloric intake to an inaccurate high level, which many “hunger” organizations regularly do.
Close to 7 out of 10 do not have clean water to drink? Another arbitary standard?
“any type of medical care” Any? No, I think one is dealing with an arbitrary standard--or numbers just pulled out of thin air.
“disparity can only go on so long”
We’ve had economic disparity for about 1500 centuries. But for centuries humans have experienced rising life expectancies, increasing caloric consumption per capita, and an increasing level of civil liberties. In other words, people are healthier, wealthier and wiser today than 100,000 years ago, or 10,000, or a thousand, or a hundred, or ten.
And in the last sixty years, in addition to these benefits, we’ve seen caloric consumption increase faster in developing countries than in developed countries, suggesting a relative decline in economic disparity, which, I think, is supported by other measures.
It is so monotonous, this mantra that “Everything is so terrible because humans are so short-sighted, unenlightened, and morally deficient.” Except, of course, for the noble elite. Besides being boring, the mantra is not based on facts.