YouTube Description:
"Rapid economic growth and more inclusive social policies in Latin America in the last decade have lifted 50 million people into the middle class, which for the first time rivals the poor in number, the World Bank said in a study on Tuesday."Most countries in the region are on their way to becoming middle-class societies; this represents a historic change," World Bank President Jim Yong Kim told reporters.Rising income levels have also created a 'vulnerable' class, which at 38 percent makes up the largest income group. These people hover just above poverty, living on a daily income between $4 and $10 per person." Cenk Uygur analyzes how Latin American countries ruled by extreme leftists could have succeeded in adding 50 million people to the middle class. Was it commodities, a system with more credence than previously believed, statistics mainly focusing on Brazil, or something else? Dave Koller weighs in.
Read more from Anna Yukhananov/ Reuters:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/13/us-worldbank-latam-middle-class-idUSBRE8AC0UH20121113 
9 Comments
Boise_LibAn important story, but TYT should leave the fake on-the-scene reporter thing to The Daily Show.
ReefieI've been thinking for a while that countries would serve themselves better by nationalising infrastructure instead of privatising it. Here in the UK we don't own much anymore, even the NHS is now rapidly becoming privatised. Don't get me started on the fact that a non-UK company is responsible for our nukes...
Take power, transport, water, telecoms, all of these should (imo) be national infrastructure that is used to develop jobs in the public sector, then private companies can be brought in to deliver the actual services over that infrastructure. If you tell someone "This is yours - look after it because you're the one who directly benefits", well I think people in general would take a bit more pride in their work and not cut corners in the same way a business solely motivated by profit might choose to do. That would hopefully lead to more reliable infrastructure and a lot less stress in day-to-day life. Plus it results in a happier populace because many of them will be in jobs that they know makes a positive difference to everyone.
I think that's a reasonable balance capable of preserving a viable long-term economy, and yes I appreciate it's vastly simplified and there are many details to work out but there are good examples out there of where this practice of nationalising infrastructure has resulted in a hugely beneficial outcome.
(Yes I'm an idealist, I probably don't belong in this world!)
shagen454This is great. I have been so sick of all the propaganda about Venezuela because America does not want socialism as a hot topic for the working class and poor. The same people who conduct disinformation on socialism are the ones who have it: the rich and huge corporations.
Boise_Lib@Reefie
W - T- F!!
Who the hell Has control of your Nukes?!?!
Reefie>> ^Boise_Lib:
@Reefie
W - T- F!!
Who the hell Has control of your Nukes?!?!
The UK's nukes are owned and managed by the USA, they're even kept in Georgia and our ships basically go pick up their warheads when required. I believe Lockheed Martin are primarily responsible for them, and we effectively pay for their management services which includes the rental of the warheads. Technically that way Lockheed Martin are responsible for the maintenance but ultimately it means that if the UK ever disagrees with the USA in a big way then we're stuck with our pants around our ankles
Boise_Lib>> ^Reefie:
>> ^Boise_Lib:
@Reefie
W - T- F!!
Who the hell Has control of your Nukes?!?!
The UK's nukes are owned and managed by the USA, they're even kept in Georgia and our ships basically go pick up their warheads when required. I believe Lockheed Martin are primarily responsible for them, and we effectively pay for their management services which includes the rental of the warheads. Technically that way Lockheed Martin are responsible for the maintenance but ultimately it means that if the UK ever disagrees with the USA in a big way then we're stuck with our pants around our ankles
I'm sure you guys will always be on our side (or else).
Seriously, what a fucked up situation.
Wonder what would happen if you tried to get them back?
bmacs27says...>> ^Boise_Lib:
Wonder what would happen if you tried to get them back?
We've got a little resort in Cuba. Have your people meet us there to sort out the specifics.
radxDidn't your MoD also plan to move large parts of your armored motorpool across the Channel into Germany for "storage"? Some 6000 vehicles, if I remember correctly, including a significant number of your Challenger 2 tanks.
Love the vote of confidence, but still, it makes you scratch your head...>> ^Reefie:
Technically that way Lockheed Martin are responsible for the maintenance but ultimately it means that if the UK ever disagrees with the USA in a big way then we're stuck with our pants around our ankles.
nickshawAnyone who believes what Stank Finger has to say needs immediate help!
Just because socialist policies in a few countries has led to slightly better living conditions, for now, does not mean those gains will be sustained.
As Thatcher said, eventually socialists run out of other people's money and this is already happening in Venezuela!
Essentially, this is fairy tale reportage. I live there!
Discuss...
Enable JavaScript to submit a comment.