|
stella41b -> RE: keeping the poor in the poorhouse (4/15/2008 4:31:28 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: popeye1250
Obviously we need new legislation and laws.
True, but first we need a new way of thinking - we need to ditch the idea that making profits is somehow synonymous with success and not having money is synonymous with failure. This is a myth.
Being successful has nothing to do with how much money you make, but has more to do with the quality of life you enjoy.
The problem is most people assume that having money means being successful, and that if you don't have money or are unable to provide your own income you are a failure. What is more conditioning people to be competitive only serves to cause them to differentiate between each other more, and this is how people end up being stigmatized.
Social stigma is the biggest issue on this planet today - it causes prejudices, poverty, crime and has led directly to what is probably going to be one of the most expensive wars in history. People become stigmatized for three reasons (1) the way they look or appear, (2) the way they behave and (3) so called 'tribal' stigma pertaining to a large group of people, for example people of a particular skin colour, nationality or religious beliefs.
Stigmatization is a four stage process (1) differentiation of the victim through an 'us' and 'them' attitude, (2) stereotyping and labelling of the stigmatized person (3) exclusion of the stigmatized person from 'us' or society and (4) denial of equality, discrimination and ostracization.
There are those who claim that poor people are responsible for their own poverty. This is only partially true. Man is a social animal and as such naturally functions in groups - whether it be a family, a community or society. Acceptance from others is a key issue, and what happens during the process of stigmatization is that through reinforcement from other people the stigmatized person also stigmatizes themselves. Therefore it is more accurate to say that poor people are responsible for their own poverty only because they have been conditioned to be responsible for their own poverty by others.
It would appear that the world is running out of resources, and what appears to be more threatening, is that we are also running out of money to be able to exploit those resources.
Another problem is that we have got to start facing facts. One fact that we all have to face is that in 1946 we were all lied to by Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin. The Second World War didn't end in 1945. We are still fighting the Second World War today. Before we can hope to find any solution we need to stop fighting the Second World War.
This might be a rather revolutionary and new concept for many people reading this - but please - stop and think about it for a minute. What was the reason for the Second World War in the first place? Was it not Hitler's fear of Stalin's Bolshevikism? Was it not a conflict between the politicial ideology of the right versus the political ideology of the left? Okay, so now you're sitting in front of a computer, go check your history, examine the facts, all the way through from the Potsdam Conference right through until today. And what do you see?
I'm not going to tell you here.. you go check your history and facts and see what you make of it.
We also need to stop talking about 'wealth redistribution' - it puts people on the defensive. I'd like to see you go to any CEO and persuade them to stop making profits. They'll probably just laugh at you. Besides you need to leave the CEOs alone, these are the people who pay the welfare checks.
In fact forget about 'wealth' all together. It's not important. What is important is tackling poverty and crime. Giving people welfare for doing nothing isn't working.. You're doing nothing but paying them to stay out of society. The thing is when you pay healthy, able-bodied, fit people welfare to keep them out of society they tend to get bored, you also deprive them of legal opportunities of getting ahead so quite a few of them take illegal opportunities. Some don't, some become so miserable with their failure and isolation that they take to drink and drugs - social stigma is pretty high on the list of reasons why people take to drink and drugs. Most struggle.
Ah but you see this is where we have another problem - when we equate success with making money and profits because success isn't a lasting experience but requires repetition you get into a cycle of wanting to increase your profits, increase efficiency and productivity and be more competitive. As a result more people lose out, the social stigma increases and as profits get bigger so too do the social problems - poverty, unemployment, welfare dependency, crime, and so on.
It's 2008. You do realise that in 12 years time the number of elderly people is going to exceed the working population. This is not to mention all the other people claiming welfare through unemployment, sickness, disability, and as a result of... social stigma.
We need to stop seeing each other as resources and ditch completely the concept of 'human resources' - we need to stop seeing people as productive and unproductive, as profitable and unprofitable. We need to start seeing people - just people - and bringing as many of those people back into society as possible.
The only way forward as I see it is eliminating social stigma. We need to get all those people marginalized and excluded from society back into society by way of some sort of meaningful occupation.
This is what I'm doing here in London, through theatre which is also a charity to fight social stigma. It's not a physical theatre, but a concept in theatre. My thesis is.. that if people can't find jobs then they can find their own meaningful activities and the way forward is through culture, entertainment, the arts and sport. The good thing about English language culture is that it comes out of poverty, struggle, social transformation.. Fringe theatre was created out of the bombed ruins of London after the Second World War.. Hollywood was born out of the Depression.,. another example is music. Take four states in the American South - Mississippi, Tennessee, Louisiana, and any other you can think of, take away one state in the North - Michigan, and take away all the red brick cities in the UK - Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool, Glasgow - let's assume these places never existed and neither did any of the bands and musicians coming from these places - what would we now be listening to?
I see no future in the current state of affairs. I really don't. It's useless talking about solving world poverty until you are able to solve poverty in your own country. To solve poverty in your own country you need to first stop creating it or spreading it. I'm sorry but having 25% of society working to keep the remaining 75% on welfare strikes me as being pretty stupid.
Another way of solving the problem is through welfare reform. I would reform welfare thus.. I would increase welfare for sick people, the disabled and the elderly. I would create two ways of making contributions towards welfare - through financial contributions, as already exists, but also additionally through labor. If you haven't paid enough contributions then you should have the opportunity of contributing through working in community service. I would revise welfare for unemployment, by paying next to nothing for those who choose to sit at home and do nothing, but I would pay more welfare for those who do community service or voluntary or charity work. This would resolve a labor shortage in areas such as providing care, support and other such services in different sectors of society. I would also pay more welfare for people going into education or vocational training, or development of cultural, artistic or sporting initiatives.
I would also reform taxation, and offer tax incentives for employers and companies who pay decent wages to their staff and ensure them a decent quality of living. There would be no tax relief or incentives for those paying minimum wages.
It's important to remember that success is a product of failure, development and opportunity. Achieving success is a bit like having an orgasm, it's never guaranteed, the failure, disappointment and effort are all necessary to achieve it, and it's usually more satisfying when it is achieved with the involvement of someone else.
|
|
|
|
