Quotes About Distribution

Money is just something to be circulated.

Korean films have always been distributed to international audiences as arthouse films.

Labels don't want artists to put out mixtapes because they don't monetize it.

I am totally in line with the fact that I think wealth distribution for carmakers needs to be redimensioned to allow labor to take a piece of that wealth distribution.

From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.

Instead of the greatest happiness for the greatest number, one should demand, more modestly, the least amount of avoidable suffering for all; and further, that unavoidable suffering—such as hunger in times of an unavoidable shortage of food—should be distributed as equally as possible.

We dispute the arbitrary distribution of power and wealth, which is claimed as the natural order, but which is in fact not natural at all but rather artificially created and sustained by ancient privileges.

global greenhouse gas emissions is highly skewed: the top 10 percent of emitters—think of them as the global carbonistas living on every continent—generate around 45 percent of global emissions, while the bottom 50 percent of people contribute only 13 percent.

For the first time, ending human deprivation is becoming as much a question of tackling national distribution as of international redistribution, argues Andy Sumner, the expert who crunched the data on where the world's poorest people now live.

the world has become extraordinarily unequal: as of 2015, the world's richest 1 percent now own more wealth than all the other 99 percent put together.

population matters, distribution matters just as much because extremes of inequality push humanity beyond both sides of the Doughnut's boundaries.

The international regime of intellectual property rights has significantly shaped the control and distribution of knowledge for hundreds of years. It's a story that began innocently enough in the fifteenth century, when Venice started awarding its famed glass-blowers 10-year patents to protect their novel creations from imitators. Show us how you made it, promised the law, and no one is permitted to copy you for a decade.

Such an economy must help to bring everyone above the Doughnut's social foundation. To do so, however, it must alter the distribution not only of income but also of wealth, time and power.

Today's economy is divisive and degenerative by default. Tomorrow's economy must be distributive and regenerative by design.

If population matters, distribution matters just as much because extremes of inequality push humanity beyond both sides of the Doughnut's boundaries. Thanks to the scale of global income inequality, responsibility for global greenhouse gas emissions is highly skewed: the top 10 percent of emitters—think of them as the global carbonistas living on every continent—generate around 45 percent of global emissions, while the bottom 50 percent of people contribute only 13 percent.

All five of these factors—population, distribution, aspiration, technology and governance—will significantly shape humanity's prospects for getting into the Doughnut's safe and just space, which is why they are all at the heart of ongoing policy debates. But they cannot bring about the scale of transformation required unless we also transform the economic thinking that we bring to bear.

a science is said to be useful if its development tends to accentuate the existing inequalities in the distribution of wealth, or more directly promotes the destruction of human life...

The most recent estimate is that a mere 400 individuals in the United States now own more wealth than the bottom 180 million Americans taken together -- a degree of wealth concentration that is accurately, not rhetorically, properly designated medieval.

In a finite world this means that the per capita share of the world's goods must steadily decrease.

Politics is about the control of a limited number of resources by a limited number of people who think that number is too many

In fact, in most cases, the bulls killed in the arena are butchered and the meat is distributed to the poor. The difference between the two situations is that in one situation, the slaughter is not choreographed; in the other, it is. And that is the only difference.

You have 62 people worth the amount the bottom three and a half billion people are worth. Sixty-two people! You could put them all in one bloody bus… then crash it!

The resulting texts always took a narrative term, enigmatic at first but ultimately explicit and often premonitory. The semantic distribution of these basic elements diverted them from their original meaning, thus revealing their real significance. Henceforth, every form of writing will consist of an operation of decoding, of contamination, and of sense perversion. All this because all language is essentially mystification, and everything is fiction.

It's always better for a ruler to determine who eats than it is to have a larger pie from which the people can feed themselves.