I received a suggestion to see this video and the conclusion seems to me very powerful without any doubt. Observing what's going on in my country nowadays (Chile, oct/nov 2019), I only can say the inequality really harms the societies. Thank you for publishing this material.
Take graph at 1:33. It makes it looks like the richest have 6 times the life expectancy than the poorest when the difference is only about 71.5 to 79.1 or so. Most of his graphs just say 'higher' or 'lower' or 'better' or 'worse' without giving numbers and there are a lot of nations that are one one graph but not on the other. Russia and India for instance are the two highest nations with wealth difference and they weren't on any of them. If this is true however I don't see a wealth problem so much as a coveting problem that you value yourself by how rich you are compared to your neighbor.
Engineer here with a heavy statistical background in data analysis. If income inequality is positively correlated all that means is that the data is not normally distributed and that the average is a terrible measure of it. For example, say there are 100 people and 20 are making 100,000/year, but 80 are making 10,000/year. Your average is 28,000. But most of your people are only earning 10,000/year. All his presentation tells us is what we already know: the poorer you are the lower your quality of life. I'd like to see all his graphs against the median income for each country. That would provide much more useful information. But even that would be skewed since $100,000 in LA buys you a lot less than $100,000 in Ohio. Data can always, always be manipulated to fit your story. After working in a research lab for years doing data analysis I don't trust it at all.
I hear what you are saying about data manipulation. All politicians or anyone with a special interest do that. But this paints a picture of the truth: that the income inequality in the USA is so bad that we the people need to open our eyes and do something about it because it affects us all. I do have a question: how would you present this data to show the truth (whatever it really is)?
@Nikita Petersen lol, he just gave you specific examples of how his data is skewed and your reply is " ya but the organizations hes getting his data from are really respected"... I wish I could put status and Feeling over logic and think its legitimate like you just did
@@kennysallee2727 In the United States all people have equality of opportunity. Outcome depends on many factors like genetics, how you were raised and what your work ethic is. I kind of wish that the Constitution had read, "All men have equal opportunity." as opposed to "All men are created equal." In short, you get what you earn.
@@bradwilliams4921 In theory, all people have equality of opportunity. But that's not necessarily reality. If you are white, and have a middle to upper class family, yea it's closer to reality. Try walking in the shoes of a poor 'minority'. And , the constitution should say "All people 'should' have equal opportunity...". vs all 'Men'. I do think in the USA more folks have opportunity then other places - but that doesn't mean we cannot be better and continue working on it.
7:03 Hmmm... not sure if I trust Japan on that. One major thing here is stigma. Rates of mental illness (disclosure and whether people come forward) are HEAVILY impacted by stigma. From what I know of Japan, mental illness is heavily stigmatized. This could greatly impact the reported rates of mental illness. I suspect the rates are much higher, and I find it unlikely that particular country is one of the lowest on the list. (But, rates for all of the countries are likely much higher! I just think, due to Japan's social context, there might be more unreported cases there)
The faulty economics of Income Inequality The distinction between rich and poor is not just a matter of perceived contrast, but demonstrable need. And the often-dire needs of others are relatively easy to meet. About 1% of the population has 99% of the world’s assets, or so the argument goes. So it is a simple matter of redistributing wealth, with everyone’s needs can be met without the slightest encumbrance to the wealthy. However, provisioning assets to meet someone’s need is not the same as provisioning the incentive for that person to meet that need. Or in other words, to give a person a fish does not teach him to fish, or necessarily give him the opportunity to fish or even market his fish. These are all dependent upon incentive systems that are independent of the charity of others, and are built into the social, economic, and political institutions that govern the motivations of peoples and the wealth of nations. In the past, European empires provisioned rudimentary incentive systems (English common law, religious conversion) that were imposed through conquest. Now if a foreign expeditionary force took over some impoverished state and imposed the social democracy of say, the prosperous state of Singapore, this would be the height of rudeness, racism, and injustice. Indeed, intervention in the legal, religious, social, and familial institutions of other countries and cultures is nowadays not worth the trouble for intervention, but worth merely the palliative of charity. But this changes nothing, as no one proverbially learns how to fish (or for that matter raise and educate a family or have a democratic politic), with the result that social problems fester and worsen, and in the increasing debilitation and impoverishment of the race. Ultimately, the issue is not income inequality, but incentive inequality, with the former having current intellectual precedence due to the false assumption that individual volition is unmoored to incentives both subtle and real, but would follow some golden mean if one merely had the resources but not the guidance, while ignoring the fact that it is the guidance of incentives that provides for resources, or a world of abundant fish. From p. 82 of ‘A Mouse’s Tale’ Incentive motivation theory for a lay audience from the perspective of modern affective neuroscience www.scribd.com/document/495438436/A-Mouse-s-Tale-a-practical-explanation-and-handbook-of-motivation-from-the-perspective-of-a-humble-creature
I think he talked about it but to me its either we know and can relate even with a stranger because we instinctly know we share more than what differs, or the difference makes us live not in different realities but even on different planets altogether, So we are not strangers anymore but altogether aliens to one another. And that makes trust harder to experience in a reflex like manner. It constantly has to be proven and it is constantly something we are alert to. I could go on but I leave it at that.
When we talk about equality, generally what we're actually addressing is offering women and minorities their right to equal opportunities and outcome as those who already hold those rights. Japan is not considered an egalitarian country. And if you look at who holds the most leadership positions and is socially encouraged and welcomed to take those positions, you'll find that it's men. This is an objective fact. I think it's important that we get this distinction if we are to successfully find what the causation is in this context. With that out of the way, I propose that it's only reasonable to then look at what happens when women have access to and hold positions of leadership and power. Interestingly, those countries he mentioned when showcasing the positive benefits of economic equality, are also the countries with a significant percentage of women in the government and holders of leadership positions. And we already have a decent amount of data on this. For example, countries led by women to a significant degree, have had a 6th of the total cases of COVID-19 than countries led by men. This can still be considered correlation, yet if you factor in the differences that emerge directly proportional to the amount of female leadership, I propose we can safely suggest that women have a direct impact on those differences. Countries led by women to a significant degree also score high in quality of life, quality of education system, healthcare system, even corruption. There's an interesting study done on female leadership and quality of government. doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12300 In conclusion, female leadership reduces corruption in those countries. If you factor in studies done on women's increased emotional intelligence scores, heightened ability to empathize, better ability to assert risk, their predisposition to act just partly caused by their motherly tendency to instill good values in their children, as well as the lower tolerance to transgressions for women than for men in societies, topped with women's tendency to adopt an interpersonal and democratic style of leadership, as opposed to men's tendency towards task related and autocratic methods of leadership, I would argue these are all characteristics that define positive leadership. These are some of the factors that could contribute to the positive effect of equality on everyone, since equality policies tend to focus and help women specifically since they are the ones negatively affected by inequality regardless of race. Which in turn give women better opportunities to help their countries.
People are born with massive inequality, inequality of talent, inequality of skill, inequality of ambition, etc. Why are we dismayed that this results in inequality of productivity (income)?
Clare Because the other inequalities doesn’t affect our possibilities to act out our interests. Society is built on how much capital you have, not on how good you are at iceskating or soccer. Without capital all the rest of your “inequalities” doesn’t matter because you most likely won’t be able to use it. Economic inequality means (as he said) less social mobility and if social mobility stops then we are back to Feudalism.
in economy class we tore this book apart.. no causality explained. how is obesity or teenage pregnancy related to inequality ? to being poor maybe? but income inequality?
Then sociology, psychology, philosophy and even anthropology may help, because then it is a study of humans and society rather than simply a study of economics. Knowledge of different societies, cultures and peoples, and empathy, the ability to really get inside of peoples head and feelings is also very useful. Much more so than a professor or authors theories, however credible and convincing they are. And I fully support the findings of this data driven study of correlating factors and the causality associated, at least in part.
The charts should show Countries that have a Conservative Party and how inequality exist in them more because their beliefs have been proven ineffectual. Also, Americans have already fallen for the Republican Party's unregulated Capitalism and it terrible effects. From 1865-1929, Republicans pushed unregulated Capitalism and the inequality it created. Capitalism failed in 1929, the Great Depression was the result of Republican Party's economic beliefs. The Republican party and the Robber Barons fought FDR for 20 years , they threw out the same lies that they push to uneducated people today. FDR was finally able to pass the New Deal policies and regulation of Capitalism. America was founded on allowing the potential of each citizen to exist without oppression from a King or Corporation. FDR took the same idea and added that each citizen will keep more of the money generated from their labor. Combining potential with money, allowed for unimaginable growth as each free citizen expressed their wealth freedom in small businesses, better education and pursued the American Dream. FDR created the worlds first Middle Class, the first Super Power nation and regulated capitalism created Wealth beyond the Robber Barons dreams. The Robber Barons and Republicans failed to see that the Middle Class created Wealth not attainable in an unregulated Capitalist system with inequality creating Kings and Peasants. Republican economics has already been proven a failure and Progressive Economics created everything great about America. As with all Kings and Peasants economies, enough people will finally be effected and non-violent or violent revolution will occur.
@@dianaburn2474 Hi NOPE! There’s tons of inequality between me and Bill Gazte and Warren Buffet but my wife and I are doing fine everything we have is payed for and I have no right to their money anymore than them or anybody else has the right to my wife’s and my money! People are just jealous. Get out there and work for your own money instead of looking for hand outs from people who have made it in this world! I do believe we need to help the people who are down and out through no fault of there own and really do need help! Thanks for listening!
@@jaketutu It helps if you get out of US and start living in another country. Video: Where to Invade Next 2015 on lookmovie ag in FullHD for free th-cam.com/video/sKJWwhDsui8/w-d-xo.html Video: People in Denmark Are Much Happier Than People in the United States. Here’s Why. th-cam.com/video/YKuRiigagkU/w-d-xo.html
Ohh! How dare you questioning lefties baseless "no border" and equality fantasies... After muslims successfully has developed their inequality ghetto's all over Europe we have lots of improvement of our societies! Right...
svein gerald hansen he doesn’t really suggest that. In the end it does suggest more corporate democracy. Other than that it’s still capitalism with just more redistribution through welfare state and harsher on tax havens and tax frauds.
@@OmmerSyssel No, we are living in a State Capitalism , with a big social welfare. Just like Bernie wanted to introduce to US, he had Denmark as his favoritt. And we are almost the same. With very good benefits paid by tax. Health Care, Education , College or if you want to be a Doctor etc 1 year Paid Maternity Leave and 5-8 weeks Paid Vacation etc th-cam.com/video/YKuRiigagkU/w-d-xo.html
Socialism killed hundreds and hundreds of millions in the 20th century alone, and oppressed many more. Centralized leviathans, wether openly socialist or thinly disguised as big government crony-capitalists, will always fail.
Your argument is demagogy. None one is advocating going all the way to extreme socialism "communism" like the Soviet Union. Is just about keeping economic inequality in balance.
If socialism in it's truest form actually exists this just is not true. It is openly known that a reduction in income inequality allows for greater social mobility in addition to stopping people being bogged down in low paid, low skilled jobs. If social mobility is increased through socialism there is an increased incentive to aim for high skilled fulfilling jobs in turn improving education and innovation inevitably improving the trend rate of economic growth in the long run.
Islam promotes welfare distribution Quran (Koran) Surah Al-Hashr, Verse 7: ِ كَيْ لَا يَكُونَ دُولَةً بَيْنَ الْأَغْنِيَاءِ مِنكُمْ , so that it may not be a thing taken by turns among the rich of you,
Pls shut up praising islam as anything useful! Nobody has so many havy issues meeting modern life as you medieval idiots! No one are ongoing incapable creating peace and EQUALITY as the entire muslim world! Only brainwashed idiots are capable of ignoring these basic FACTS 🙈
I received a suggestion to see this video and the conclusion seems to me very powerful without any doubt. Observing what's going on in my country nowadays (Chile, oct/nov 2019), I only can say the inequality really harms the societies. Thank you for publishing this material.
Take graph at 1:33. It makes it looks like the richest have 6 times the life expectancy than the poorest when the difference is only about 71.5 to 79.1 or so.
Most of his graphs just say 'higher' or 'lower' or 'better' or 'worse' without giving numbers and there are a lot of nations that are one one graph but not on the other. Russia and India for instance are the two highest nations with wealth difference and they weren't on any of them.
If this is true however I don't see a wealth problem so much as a coveting problem that you value yourself by how rich you are compared to your neighbor.
As soon as i saw that graph i looked for this comment
Engineer here with a heavy statistical background in data analysis.
If income inequality is positively correlated all that means is that the data is not normally distributed and that the average is a terrible measure of it. For example, say there are 100 people and 20 are making 100,000/year, but 80 are making 10,000/year. Your average is 28,000. But most of your people are only earning 10,000/year. All his presentation tells us is what we already know: the poorer you are the lower your quality of life.
I'd like to see all his graphs against the median income for each country. That would provide much more useful information. But even that would be skewed since $100,000 in LA buys you a lot less than $100,000 in Ohio.
Data can always, always be manipulated to fit your story. After working in a research lab for years doing data analysis I don't trust it at all.
I hear what you are saying about data manipulation. All politicians or anyone with a special interest do that. But this paints a picture of the truth: that the income inequality in the USA is so bad that we the people need to open our eyes and do something about it because it affects us all. I do have a question: how would you present this data to show the truth (whatever it really is)?
Denmark is not a socialist country - we are wealthy, competitive, quite equal (yet) and happy.
@Nikita Petersen lol, he just gave you specific examples of how his data is skewed and your reply is " ya but the organizations hes getting his data from are really respected"... I wish I could put status and Feeling over logic and think its legitimate like you just did
@@kennysallee2727 In the United States all people have equality of opportunity. Outcome depends on many factors like genetics, how you were raised and what your work ethic is. I kind of wish that the Constitution had read, "All men have equal opportunity." as opposed to "All men are created equal."
In short, you get what you earn.
@@bradwilliams4921 In theory, all people have equality of opportunity. But that's not necessarily reality. If you are white, and have a middle to upper class family, yea it's closer to reality. Try walking in the shoes of a poor 'minority'. And , the constitution should say "All people 'should' have equal opportunity...". vs all 'Men'. I do think in the USA more folks have opportunity then other places - but that doesn't mean we cannot be better and continue working on it.
interesting but i wish he showed more info on the causality. He only briefly touched on it but it is pretty important
Thanks for the speech Harrison Ford 👍
7:03 Hmmm... not sure if I trust Japan on that. One major thing here is stigma. Rates of mental illness (disclosure and whether people come forward) are HEAVILY impacted by stigma. From what I know of Japan, mental illness is heavily stigmatized. This could greatly impact the reported rates of mental illness. I suspect the rates are much higher, and I find it unlikely that particular country is one of the lowest on the list. (But, rates for all of the countries are likely much higher! I just think, due to Japan's social context, there might be more unreported cases there)
i had to listen to this for sociology and i feel brain dead
Same, friend.
SAME
its fascinating tho init?
Blond influenced..?
same
The faulty economics of Income Inequality
The distinction between rich and poor is not just a matter of perceived contrast, but demonstrable need. And the often-dire needs of others are relatively easy to meet. About 1% of the population has 99% of the world’s assets, or so the argument goes. So it is a simple matter of redistributing wealth, with everyone’s needs can be met without the slightest encumbrance to the wealthy. However, provisioning assets to meet someone’s need is not the same as provisioning the incentive for that person to meet that need. Or in other words, to give a person a fish does not teach him to fish, or necessarily give him the opportunity to fish or even market his fish. These are all dependent upon incentive systems that are independent of the charity of others, and are built into the social, economic, and political institutions that govern the motivations of peoples and the wealth of nations.
In the past, European empires provisioned rudimentary incentive systems (English common law, religious conversion) that were imposed through conquest. Now if a foreign expeditionary force took over some impoverished state and imposed the social democracy of say, the prosperous state of Singapore, this would be the height of rudeness, racism, and injustice. Indeed, intervention in the legal, religious, social, and familial institutions of other countries and cultures is nowadays not worth the trouble for intervention, but worth merely the palliative of charity. But this changes nothing, as no one proverbially learns how to fish (or for that matter raise and educate a family or have a democratic politic), with the result that social problems fester and worsen, and in the increasing debilitation and impoverishment of the race.
Ultimately, the issue is not income inequality, but incentive inequality, with the former having current intellectual precedence due to the false assumption that individual volition is unmoored to incentives both subtle and real, but would follow some golden mean if one merely had the resources but not the guidance, while ignoring the fact that it is the guidance of incentives that provides for resources, or a world of abundant fish.
From p. 82 of ‘A Mouse’s Tale’ Incentive motivation theory for a lay audience from the perspective of modern affective neuroscience www.scribd.com/document/495438436/A-Mouse-s-Tale-a-practical-explanation-and-handbook-of-motivation-from-the-perspective-of-a-humble-creature
Great video.... This video gave me all the information I needed for my module 8 journal
What is the relationship between the level of trust that people have for one another and the social inequality in a society?
I think he talked about it but to me its either we know and can relate even with a stranger because we instinctly know we share more than what differs, or the difference makes us live not in different realities but even on different planets altogether, So we are not strangers anymore but altogether aliens to one another. And that makes trust harder to experience in a reflex like manner. It constantly has to be proven and it is constantly something we are alert to. I could go on but I leave it at that.
If I ever need to sleep and have a hard time, I know who to listen to.
This data is pretty fascinating.
When we talk about equality, generally what we're actually addressing is offering women and minorities their right to equal opportunities and outcome as those who already hold those rights.
Japan is not considered an egalitarian country. And if you look at who holds the most leadership positions and is socially encouraged and welcomed to take those positions, you'll find that it's men. This is an objective fact.
I think it's important that we get this distinction if we are to successfully find what the causation is in this context.
With that out of the way, I propose that it's only reasonable to then look at what happens when women have access to and hold positions of leadership and power. Interestingly, those countries he mentioned when showcasing the positive benefits of economic equality, are also the countries with a significant percentage of women in the government and holders of leadership positions.
And we already have a decent amount of data on this. For example, countries led by women to a significant degree, have had a 6th of the total cases of COVID-19 than countries led by men. This can still be considered correlation, yet if you factor in the differences that emerge directly proportional to the amount of female leadership, I propose we can safely suggest that women have a direct impact on those differences.
Countries led by women to a significant degree also score high in quality of life, quality of education system, healthcare system, even corruption.
There's an interesting study done on female leadership and quality of government. doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12300 In conclusion, female leadership reduces corruption in those countries.
If you factor in studies done on women's increased emotional intelligence scores, heightened ability to empathize, better ability to assert risk, their predisposition to act just partly caused by their motherly tendency to instill good values in their children, as well as the lower tolerance to transgressions for women than for men in societies, topped with women's tendency to adopt an interpersonal and democratic style of leadership, as opposed to men's tendency towards task related and autocratic methods of leadership, I would argue these are all characteristics that define positive leadership.
These are some of the factors that could contribute to the positive effect of equality on everyone, since equality policies tend to focus and help women specifically since they are the ones negatively affected by inequality regardless of race. Which in turn give women better opportunities to help their countries.
Provocative question:
The graphs show correlation. What's to say inequality is caused by the other factors instead of the other way round?
People are born with massive inequality, inequality of talent, inequality of skill, inequality of ambition, etc. Why are we dismayed that this results in inequality of productivity (income)?
Clare Because the other inequalities doesn’t affect our possibilities to act out our interests. Society is built on how much capital you have, not on how good you are at iceskating or soccer. Without capital all the rest of your “inequalities” doesn’t matter because you most likely won’t be able to use it. Economic inequality means (as he said) less social mobility and if social mobility stops then we are back to Feudalism.
in economy class we tore this book apart.. no causality explained. how is obesity or teenage pregnancy related to inequality ? to being poor maybe? but income inequality?
Then sociology, psychology, philosophy and even anthropology may help, because then it is a study of humans and society rather than simply a study of economics. Knowledge of different societies, cultures and peoples, and empathy, the ability to really get inside of peoples head and feelings is also very useful. Much more so than a professor or authors theories, however credible and convincing they are. And I fully support the findings of this data driven study of correlating factors and the causality associated, at least in part.
Yeah, all we U.S. Citizens are sooo fortunate to have been born in the "Greatest Country on Earth", right?
Saw this once, good to refresh and see it again :)
wait a ted talk that has data???????? OMG, respect
The charts should show Countries that have a Conservative Party and how inequality exist in them more because their beliefs have been proven ineffectual. Also, Americans have already fallen for the Republican Party's unregulated Capitalism and it terrible effects. From 1865-1929, Republicans pushed unregulated Capitalism and the inequality it created. Capitalism failed in 1929, the Great Depression was the result of Republican Party's economic beliefs. The Republican party and the Robber Barons fought FDR for 20 years , they threw out the same lies that they push to uneducated people today.
FDR was finally able to pass the New Deal policies and regulation of Capitalism. America was founded on allowing the potential of each citizen to exist without oppression from a King or Corporation. FDR took the same idea and added that each citizen will keep more of the money generated from their labor. Combining potential with money, allowed for unimaginable growth as each free citizen expressed their wealth freedom in small businesses, better education and pursued the American Dream. FDR created the worlds first Middle Class, the first Super Power nation and regulated capitalism created Wealth beyond the Robber Barons dreams. The Robber Barons and Republicans failed to see that the Middle Class created Wealth not attainable in an unregulated Capitalist system with inequality creating Kings and Peasants.
Republican economics has already been proven a failure and Progressive Economics created everything great about America. As with all Kings and Peasants economies, enough people will finally be effected and non-violent or violent revolution will occur.
Today in 2023 in USA that gap is now over 30 times instead of 10 times 😀😀😀😀😀😀😀😀
12:59 your forgot a )
Hi
Income and equality is a good thing. It makes you work harder to get what you want!
Thanks for listening!
Ya missed the point.
@@dianaburn2474
Hi
NOPE!
There’s tons of inequality between me and Bill Gazte and Warren Buffet but my wife and I are doing fine everything we have is payed for and I have no right to their money anymore than them or anybody else has the right to my wife’s and my money!
People are just jealous. Get out there and work for your own money instead of looking for hand outs from people who have made it in this world! I do believe we need to help the people who are down and out through no fault of there own and really do need help!
Thanks for listening!
@5:11
Sure did have a hard time explaining the CAUSALITY portion!!! Kind of important!
Denmark is not a socialist country - we are wealthy, competitive, quite equal (yet) and happy.
Jon Bach why are you repeating the same response?
Living the American dream in Denmark? Yes. Denmarks homogeneity is its strength.
Utter nonsense
@@billlygoat No it helps if you get out of US
@@sveingeraldhansen7275 helps who?
@@jaketutu
It helps if you get out of US and start living
in another country.
Video:
Where to Invade Next 2015 on lookmovie ag in FullHD for free
th-cam.com/video/sKJWwhDsui8/w-d-xo.html
Video:
People in Denmark Are Much Happier Than People in the United States. Here’s Why.
th-cam.com/video/YKuRiigagkU/w-d-xo.html
Ohh! How dare you questioning lefties baseless "no border" and equality fantasies...
After muslims successfully has developed their inequality ghetto's all over Europe we have lots of improvement of our societies!
Right...
So a socialist society would give every one a better life.
svein gerald hansen he doesn’t really suggest that. In the end it does suggest more corporate democracy. Other than that it’s still capitalism with just more redistribution through welfare state and harsher on tax havens and tax frauds.
@@eriksolfors
Sorry Erik, but I don`t remember what the
talk was about. I have had 2 Brain bleeds
so the memory is not what it was.
@@sveingeraldhansen7275 Well, be happy you're not living in a socialist controlled country!
@@OmmerSyssel
No, we are living in a State Capitalism ,
with a big social welfare.
Just like Bernie wanted to introduce to US,
he had Denmark as his favoritt.
And we are almost the same.
With very good benefits paid by tax.
Health Care,
Education , College or if you want to be a Doctor etc
1 year Paid Maternity Leave
and 5-8 weeks Paid Vacation etc
th-cam.com/video/YKuRiigagkU/w-d-xo.html
Yes, pretty much.
Socialism has harmed way more.
ironcityblue This video shares a significant amount of data that proves you are wrong. You appear to have a bad case of cognitive dissonance.
Socialism killed hundreds and hundreds of millions in the 20th century alone, and oppressed many more. Centralized leviathans, wether openly socialist or thinly disguised as big government crony-capitalists, will always fail.
Your argument is demagogy. None one is advocating going all the way to extreme socialism "communism" like the Soviet Union. Is just about keeping economic inequality in balance.
Meaningless
If socialism in it's truest form actually exists this just is not true. It is openly known that a reduction in income inequality allows for greater social mobility in addition to stopping people being bogged down in low paid, low skilled jobs. If social mobility is increased through socialism there is an increased incentive to aim for high skilled fulfilling jobs in turn improving education and innovation inevitably improving the trend rate of economic growth in the long run.
Islam promotes welfare distribution
Quran (Koran) Surah Al-Hashr, Verse 7:
ِ كَيْ لَا يَكُونَ دُولَةً بَيْنَ الْأَغْنِيَاءِ مِنكُمْ
, so that it may not be a thing taken by turns among the rich of you,
Pls shut up praising islam as anything useful!
Nobody has so many havy issues meeting modern life as you medieval idiots!
No one are ongoing incapable creating peace and EQUALITY as the entire muslim world!
Only brainwashed idiots are capable of ignoring these basic FACTS 🙈
Denmark? definitely not.
Denmark is not a socialist country - we are wealthy, competitive, quite equal (yet) and happy.