RE: The sting of poverty

RE: The sting of poverty (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

kittinSol -> RE: The sting of poverty (4/14/2008 5:45:57 AM)
There's something seriously fucked up when a person has to have two or three jobs in order to bring food to the table, whilst being prey to illness and indigence because health insurance is prohibitive, in one of the richest nations on Earth.

SugarMyChurro -> RE: The sting of poverty (4/14/2008 5:59:52 AM)
Kittinsol, you know the reason of how and why this happens: bread and circuses. People are so mesmerized by the bullshit on TV and happy enough with take and bake pizzas as their primary food source that nothing else even matters. Oh yeah, and there is also pasteurized beer. Everything is very much less than what it should be, but people acclimate to the lower standards.

kittinSol -> RE: The sting of poverty (4/14/2008 6:05:19 AM)
Fancy organising a national "Boycott the television month" with me, Sugar?

charmdpetKeira -> RE: The sting of poverty (4/14/2008 6:22:31 AM)
He did well with understanding why the present system doesn’t work; until he got here. quote: "My argument is that the cause of poverty has been poverty." Poverty is a natural effect of wealth. Makes me almost admire those who say “Fuck you and your wheel”; except, ignoring the wheel, does not make it go away. And since there are so many others willing to run it; those who stop, tend to get dragged under. k

SugarMyChurro -> RE: The sting of poverty (4/14/2008 6:26:44 AM)
I haven't watched TV in months - in some ways that's due to the writer's strike. But my brother and I agreed yesterday that even "House" has surely jumped the shark. So now there isn't a single show I watch. None. I see Hollywood as the advertising industry. All the actors, directors, writers, musicians, etc are there to make you watch commercials and pay attention to product placement spots. Music now has product placement as do novels (I'm looking at you Stephen King!). And of course the degree of self-reference is off the charts, but that's what artists tend to do on some basis - converse with one another through art, or in this case commercials. But it's all fucking commercials now! Did Lord Byron or Shakespeare have product placement? It actually wouldn't surprise me either way but I can't think of any examples right now. Everyone's got to scrape out a living somehow. I guess I'm finding "art" harder to take as I get older.

seeksfemslave -> RE: The sting of poverty (4/14/2008 6:34:50 AM)
I also think MmeGigs made an excellent post and I hope I never gave the impression that I believe that all who are poor are so because of their own fecklessness or indifference. A major difficulty is how to solve the problem. Taxing the super rich till the pips squeak wont help and many of the rich, well off, have earned that status by their own efforts and deserve their success. I dont know the answer, does anybody ? If you suggest things like, say, less military hardware spending then well payed jobs will go up the Swannee. Making saucepans for third world countries wont take up the slack and the middling technology like earth moving equipment etc has been collared by places like Japan and Korea. Are we in the shit ? It seems so to me.

charmdpetKeira -> RE: The sting of poverty (4/14/2008 6:40:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave I dont know the answer, does anybody ? Stop worshipping the pretty toilet paper. k

seeksfemslave -> RE: The sting of poverty (4/14/2008 6:43:30 AM)
I need a translation for that one. If you had said stop looking at the stars, my specs, then I just might have got it.

SugarMyChurro -> RE: The sting of poverty (4/14/2008 6:43:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave Taxing the super rich till the pips squeak wont help and many of the rich, well off, have earned that status by their own efforts and deserve their success. When you really understand how government works, that's the part that is hard to believe. We know people are wealthy because they were favored in the same way the wealthy and various corporations are favored today. And then there is inherited wealth too. Standing on the long-term benefits bestowed by government and inherited wealth doesn't seem very noble to me. I realize there is the occasional self-made man too, and while I do respect that luck is also a factor and a big one. So pardon me if I don't quite drink the kool-aid there. One of my law professors once commented: Law is warfare against the poor.

charmdpetKeira -> RE: The sting of poverty (4/14/2008 6:52:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave I need a translation for that one. I appreciate your asking for clarification. Money, realistically it has no value; and is used by those in power to keep the wheel turning. k

kittinSol -> RE: The sting of poverty (4/14/2008 7:03:24 AM)
Major corporate taxation rethink : the current loopholes allow for businesses to shirt off their tax burden. A simple idea, below: quote: Under [this] proposal, the U.S. tax base for multinational corporations would be calculated based on a fraction of their worldwide income. This fraction would simply be the share of their worldwide sales that are destined for customers in the United States. This system is similar to the current method that U.S. states use to allocate national income. The state system arose due to the widespread belief that it was impractical to account separately for what income is earned in each state when states are highly integrated economically. Similarly, in an increasingly global world economy, it is difficult to assign profits to individual countries, and attempts to do so are fraught with opportunities for tax avoidance. Under our proposed formulary apportionment system, firms would no longer have an artificial tax incentive to shift income to low-tax locations. This would help protect the U.S. tax base while reducing the distortionary features of the current tax system. In addition, the complexity and administrative burden of the system would be reduced. The proposed system would be both better suited to an integrated world economy and more compatible with the tax policy goals of efficiency, equity, and simplicity. Pay decent salaries, a fair wage for a fair amount of work; increase taxation on luxury consumer goods (cars, toys, electronic devices, etcaetera); no income tax on low income levels (to be decided); reduce the military budget; close all tax loopholes, the ones that allow hugely wealthy people to literally evade tax duties on large profits. STOP relying on charities to do the work of government! Institutional charity is a bad thing! Throwing ideas into the pot here, I'm not an economist, but there are so many actions that could be taken to reduce the poverty level... We all know why these things aren't being done: corporate power is lobbying Washington to implement policies that are in its favour. Democracy is a sham, we're being governed by private enterprise. Fuck them! Kill the lobbies.

SugarMyChurro -> RE: The sting of poverty (4/14/2008 7:12:04 AM)
Kittinsol: Agreed.

charmdpetKeira -> RE: The sting of poverty (4/14/2008 7:19:43 AM)
~fr~ A movie I watched a few days ago, gave me some insight as to how the people would need to go about riding themselves of the opposition. It demonstrated the concept; if the strength of your enemy is too great to defeat it; get your enemy to defeat itself, using it’s own strength. I’ve been looking and can only see one thing that keeps them in power. k

Real_Trouble -> RE: The sting of poverty (4/14/2008 7:49:48 AM)
I must say, all the animosity in this thread makes me understand things like gated communities a little bit better. Imagine the following scenario: You are a multi-millionaire. You made it through college (and not with some bullshit degree like art appreciation, either), and then through law school, medical school, or business school, taking on a ton of debt as you did. You came from a middle class or lower family. You've worked your ass off for decades, putting in 100 hour weeks when people constantly decry having to work more than 40 to "make a living wage" so that you can get where you are today. You paid for this all yourself at the start. Now, people want to take your money away and give it to those who had kids when they were young, didn't make the sacrifices you did to go to college, haven't worked as hard, and don't have as much talent. I can understand why people are so adversarial about welfare or assisting the poor; now, I think this is something of a red herring, as the bottom line is that there are many people who are poor not through their own doing, but through circumstances beyond their control. I think the real issue here is simple - we need better education, very early in life, about how to make strong life choices, how to pursue opportunity, and legitimate paths to economic prosperity. In other words, provide strong role models and meaningful life skills in our schools, and the earlier, the better. Then, if people fuck up when they knew better, that's their problem. As an aside, the reason I am so adversarial about welfare is that we do it so poorly it's almost laughable. I can throw money off a bridge and into the ocean to be lost forever far more efficiently than the government, so if I wanted to do that, I'd be doing it on my own already! I'm always against spending money on shit that doesn't work. To the people speaking about the wage and cost of living debate, I have a few key points: - The minimum wage should be indexed to inflation or deflation. Basically, it should track a measure of consumer cost. - The real problem is not low wages, it is high prices; this is driven by debt and a credit expansion, leading to artificial demand and higher prices, and that's now coming back to bite us in the ass. This issue may take care of itself in a few years, at least to a point. - Minimum wages do not always work the way you expect; if you raise it, you may just encourage a company to cut jobs or move production to a country where labor is cheaper. Basically, it sucks to be an unskilled worker in a highly skilled economy. There's just no real way around that. My advice is "don't be unskilled, or move". To the advocacy of a tax system for multi-national corporations: Do you mean a flat tax on US-only revenue for them, or a flat tax on all global revenue? If you advocate a flat tax on global revenue, what you are doing is disincentivizing large corporations in the rest of the world to come to the US, because for a sliver of profit, they pay a huge amount of tax. This will have the net effect of raising prices and lowering quality for Americans, which I am not for; as an example, many car manufacturers would pull out of our market tomorrow, which would drive up prices on American cars (which are of inferior quality) and lower consumer choice. The irony here being that most "American" cars are now built from parts that come from outside of America, as well, so even if you are a buy American type (which I don't understand either, given the interconnectedness of all economies today), you lose. Lastly: quote: When you really understand how government works, that's the part that is hard to believe. We know people are wealthy because they were favored in the same way the wealthy and various corporations are favored today. And then there is inherited wealth too. Standing on the long-term benefits bestowed by government and inherited wealth doesn't seem very noble to me. I realize there is the occasional self-made man too, and while I do respect that luck is also a factor and a big one. Yet our government is not very corrupt at all compared to most others! Just do the things that are favored. Thankfully we are relatively transparent in our dealings, and it is easy to see which way the wind is blowing; hoping for some egalitarian world where humans all play fair is about as sensible as hoping everyone will be made out of gold tomorrow. It's not going to happen! Human nature prevents it. Perhaps I am cynical, but I prefer to learn how to play the game that exists well, rather than wish for another game that will never come about.

kittinSol -> RE: The sting of poverty (4/14/2008 8:00:55 AM)
I see no animosity. Perhaps people are arguing passionately, because it's an emotion stirring subject? Nowhere do I see wealthy people being aggressed here. Rather, I hear a lot of things about poor wealth distribution and the responsibilities we all have to contribute towards a harmonious society. Wealthy people should not be exempt from participating to the society they live in. If people like gated communities, all the more power to them. These ivory towers they choose to live in, however, should not prevent them from being full, active members of the United Corporat... States of America. Are you saying that a Walmart cashier should be punished for being a wage slave? Is the person who provides a service to you in a shop, or a restaurant, or who builds the toilet you sit on, less worthy of respect than someone who lives off their portfolio?

charmdpetKeira -> RE: The sting of poverty (4/14/2008 8:02:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real_Trouble Perhaps I am cynical, but I prefer to learn how to play the game that exists well, rather than wish for another game that will never come about. I prefer to live, then to play the game. Though admittedly, even games have purpose. Do you know why government likes to play games? To distract the people from knowing what is really going on. k

cjan -> RE: The sting of poverty (4/14/2008 8:08:40 AM)
The reality of a large class of people in the U.S. termed the "working poor" should give evreyone pause to consider the causes of such a situation in ,as kitt says, the "richest nation in the world" ( Actually, the U.S. is currently the world's largest debtor nation). As an example of how this situation can be remedied, we need look only to other nations who have succesfully done so. I know, this will inflame those who wish to accumulate great wealth, but, it is the price a just society pays . Look to the Scandinavian coutries. Look to France and Germany and a few others. By "look" I mean do some research and, if possible, physically go there and experience the differences. Yes, the countries I speak of tax citizens at the rate of about 50%. However, their citizens have universal health care, free education, to any level, for everyone who wants it and can pass the exams, benefits such as, subsidized rent /mortgage payments to new single mothers, free trade schools, loans to entrepeneurs and small business startups, etc. You won't find many homeless or starving people there. Nor old folks who have to chose between eating and buying life sustaining medications. You won't find much crime there either, certainly not on the scale we have it in the U.S. In short, you won't find many McMansions to house the "rich", nor will you find a poor class. Yes, for the hair splitters, you will find some of each, but certainly, not on the scale we have in the U.S. . What you will find, instead is a large, stable,secure middle class. I'd gladly pay 50% of my income in taxes to live in such a society. ( And, please, don't tell me to move there. I have and I have my reasons for living in the U.S. for now ). But, I (we) should pay those taxes with the clear understanding between government and the tax payers that that $$ will be spent for domestic programs rather than on foreign military adventures. It can be done. It's been done. It's being done. We need only the will and the energy and committment to bring it to pass in this great country.

Hippiekinkster -> RE: The sting of poverty (4/14/2008 8:11:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave If you suggest things like, say, less military hardware spending then well payed jobs will go up the Swannee. FYI, that would be Suwannee.

Mercnbeth -> RE: The sting of poverty (4/14/2008 8:14:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinsol Fuck them! Kill the lobbies. quote: ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro Kittinsol: Agreed. Ahhh, a fine illustration of intelligent, inclusionary acceptance; not to mention a well thought out plan. Very similar to the Senator Obama campaign. Talk about change, but hope that nobody realizes there is nothing new is being offered. It looks like the status quo, or previously failed attempts. Don't worry about a plan - "KILL" the opposition! Forgetting that if you eliminate those currently paying 84% of the tax bill - how will you replace that money. If there are no corporations, no businesses, and everyone becomes a government employee; there would be no source of source of money to pay those employees. quote: ORIGINAL: bipolarber Rich people aren't evil... they just often have their priorities fucked up. Of course they do - they've taken care of themselves and their families. What assholes! Poor people are just too dumb and incompetent to do that - they should be killed. <---- That's so wrong, and is the most ridiculous statement I could think of and post. Shame the converse isn't similarly considered and instead is a generally acceptable position insulated from challenge because after all, its not fair to blame the poor for their condition.

Real_Trouble -> RE: The sting of poverty (4/14/2008 8:19:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cjan The reality of a large class of people in the U.S. termed the "working poor" should give evreyone pause to consider the causes of such a situation in ,as kitt says, the "richest nation in the world" ( Actually, the U.S. is currently the world's largest debtor nation). As an example of how this situation can be remedied, we need look only to other nations who have succesfully done so. I know, this will inflame those who wish to accumulate great wealth, but, it is the price a just society pays . Look to the Scandinavian coutries. Look to France and Germany and a few others. By "look" I mean do some research and, if possible, physically go there and experience the differences. Yes, the countries I speak of tax citizens at the rate of about 50%. However, their citizens have universal health care, free education, to any level, for everyone who wants it and can pass the exams, benefits such as, subsidized rent /mortgage payments to new single mothers, free trade schools, loans to entrepeneurs and small business startups, etc. You won't find many homeless or starving people there. Nor old folks who have to chose between eating and buying life sustaining medications. You won't find much crime there either, certainly not on the scale we have it in the U.S. In short, you won't find many McMansions to house the "rich", nor will you find a poor class. Yes, for the hair splitters, you will find some of each, but certainly, not on the scale we have in the U.S. . What you will find, instead is a large, stable,secure middle class. I'd gladly pay 50% of my income in taxes to live in such a society. ( And, please, don't tell me to move there. I have and I have my reasons for living in the U.S. for now ). But, I (we) should pay those taxes with the clear understanding between government and the tax payers that that $$ will be spent for domestic programs rather than on foreign military adventures. It can be done. It's been done. It's being done. We need only the will and the energy and committment to bring it to pass in this great country. I suppose now would not be a good time to bring up the fact that wait times for healthcare in many of these countries are far greater than the US, that they experience brain-drain when their most talented professionals move to the UK or the US to pursue economic opportunities, that their corporations are seriously inefficient and their standard of living lower in many ways because of this, that they do not attract anywhere near the kind of investment dollars we do, that there is still a very aristocratic system in place for the upper class in France that offers less social mobility than you have in the US, or about the riots from lack of jobs and lack of opportunities that were occurring in French suburbs as Sarkozy was being elected? How about the Scandinavian banking crises in the 90s brought on by socialist rules, or the fact that Norway's prosperity is actually directly tied to the price of oil, not their social policies? Or should I lay off with that? The grass is not always greener; if you think it is that much better, why don't you already live there? Yes, I've been all over Europe repeatedly, before you ask. Edit for Keira: I don't disagree; I dislike virtually all governments. But let me ask you this: point at one that is, on average, less corrupt, more just, and more effective than ours? This is not to champion our government (it's terrible, but big shock, it's a government), but rather to say that at least we don't live in Zimbabwe. Then again, as governments are composed of people, I do not believe it is possible to have a "good" one because you cannot align the incentives or break down the factional behavior that emerges. Edit Edit: The way the exams manifest in Germany, at least, is that rich people pay for private tutors and education for their kids so that the wealthy pass the exams to get into universities at a disproportionately high level... same shit, different name.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125