Originally Posted by Ayn Rand

"Socialism is the doctrine that man has no right to exist for his own sake, that his life and his work do not belong to him, but belong to society, that the only justification of his existence is his service to society, and that society may dispose of him in any way it pleases for the sake of whatever it deems to be its own tribal, collective good."

Originally Posted by tito

"
If we improve their economy, then the global economy goes up as well - but not only do we benefit from the global economic boost but so do they, as they now have an economy capable of utilising the benefits. We become slightly more privileged and they are considerably less hungry."

You intend to force economic development abroad how? Theft, perhaps?

Originally Posted by Akria

Heh. I think I'll declare myself Official Nuisance.
You still haven't replied to that PM - and I requested a read receipt when I sent it again, which came back in the positive. :-/
Buggy vBulletin?

Originally Posted by SilverFalcon

Why is a 16 year old know it all come world soul and self appointed vizier of the clatf*rt shop allowed to chase away a 22 year old realist?

Originally Posted by ranter

Welcome TannyD

Originally Posted by Akria

The best thing for humanity as a whole is, ultimately, the best thing for yourself - regardless of which nation you happen to live in.

Let us take a situation where Britain can improve its own economy or the economy of a less developed nation.
If we improve our own economy, we are improving the lives of a people who live a Western lifestyle - we are the privileged humans who are largely in no struggle to survive; we struggle for luxuries such as television, Internet access and the cinema, perhaps, but not food, shelter or water.
The global economy goes up slightly and we have improved our own, already privileged lives.
The less developed nation benefits relatively little from the global economic boost because it doesn't have an existing economy capable of utilising the benefits. Their people remain hungry.

If we improve their economy, then the global economy goes up as well - but not only do we benefit from the global economic boost but so do they, as they now have an economy capable of utilising the benefits. We become slightly more privileged and they are considerably less hungry.

Patriotism would normally forego the second option because there is no direct benefit for our nation - but rational and moral thought would support it because there is an indirect benefit for all, in addition to a direct benefit for the less developed nation.

The second option also benefits trade both for ourselves and others, reduces migration (a good thing if your system needs time to improve its management of resources), would likely reduce any tensions in the region and at home (the former due to less bickering over resources with other nations, the latter between the State and pressure groups) and could also conceivably improve the humanitarian position of the other nation.

Sorry about the less than welcoming welcome. I'll try it again.
Welcome to the forum. Hope you have a good time.