The world is mean and it isn’t fair

[anon5716216]

@crimby

When I was in grade school there were 3 billion people on the earth, and two thirds of them lived in poverty. We now have roughly six billion people on earth, and one third of them live in poverty. In both cases two billion people lived below the poverty line.

There will always be poverty even in the wealthiest of G7 or G20 countries. To eradicate poverty would mean eradicating human civilization itself since the wealth pyramid illustrates that humanity requires all types of social economic classes to function. Just as Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution states, “Only the strong survive and the weak perish”.

[crimby]

@anon5716216

“Only the strong survive and the weak perish”.

That isn’t as straightforward as many people think. For example, saber tooth tigers had huge fangs so they could bring down large prey. When things were like this those with the largest fangs did the best, but when larger prey disappeared, those with shorter fangs did the best. So, would you say those with large fangs were the strongest? Look at elephants. People would probably say those with the most size were the strongest. But they have to eat more to maintain that large bulk. Also, if there was a particularly rainy season and the ground became mushy, the smaller elephants would do better. I could go on and on. Survival is determined by who has the best traits to meet the circumstances of the time, but those circumstances can change, and those with other traits do better.

[jukebox]

man, crimby I haven’t seen you in a while…glad you’re here man…I love you …fellow Okie brother…one day I am going to talk you into letting me meet you…!!

[77nick77]

@anon5716216

“Only the strong survive and the weak perish”.

The old saying goes, “Survival of the fittest”. There’s a big difference.

[anon5716216]

@77nick77

The old saying goes, “Survival of the fittest ”. There’s a big difference.

The quote, “Survival of the fittest” was stated by Herbert Spencer. “Only the strong survive”, is a phrase that goes along the same line.

[anon5716216]

@crimby

That isn’t as straightforward as many people think. For example, saber tooth tigers had huge fangs so they could bring down large prey. When things were like this those with the largest fangs did the best, but when larger prey disappeared, those with shorter fangs did the best. So, would you say those with large fangs were the strongest? Look at elephants. People would probably say those with the most size were the strongest. But they have to eat more to maintain that large bulk. Also, if there was a particularly rainy season and the ground became mushy, the smaller elephants would do better. I could go on and on. Survival is determined by who has the best traits to meet the circumstances of the time, but those circumstances can change, and those with other traits do better.

I understand that you are trying to prove a point with your examples. But statistically speaking the average of a population sample in a normal distribution with 1 or 2 standard deviations will represent the majority or 95% and not the outliers which would represent the 5%. So your saber tooth tiger & elephant example may have some validity; however, the majority maybe those saber tooth tigers with average fangs and or elephants whom are average sizes will survive the times.

Schizophrenics are known to be the poorest people of society that require government benefits to survive. Schizophrenia is a disease, a mental aberration, an illness that makes people unwell or sick and the fittest people or those that do not get sick. The majority of schizophrenics do not reproduce and survive. Some schizophrenics die at an earlier age.