Old_Trapper70
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2014
- Messages
- 2,383
Yes I know. Kind of like your not understanding the meaning of most things like kudoes.
-
Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum
Apocalypse now?' What Europe's media thought of the Trump speech
- Thread starter PLC1
- Start date
Yes I know. Kind of like your not understanding the meaning of most things like kudoes.
Werbung:
With our population, we are doing well..Please notice I didn't say great..
We have to look up to see doing dismal. But it's finally starting to improve.
No lets don't ignore the rest of the world.. lets look at it from another angle, it is the poor we are talking about indirectly , Right?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/timwor...an-most-of-the-rest-of-humanity/#7d399e2e54ef
That's from The Economist, their own calculations working off an OECD set of measurements.
This isn't the traditional GDP numbers, nor purely economic numbers in fact. Things like quality of life, civic engagement are included.
And there's nothing really all that surprising about the US numbers. We know very well that the US has both the highest living standards for the rich and also the largest inequality among the large, advanced, nations.
However, look at it a little more closely in relation to other countries. We're often told that to be poor in the US is much worse than being poor in the social democracies of Europe. And the bottom 10% in the US are indeed worse off than the bottom 10% in Sweden. But they're better off than the bottom 10% in Germany or France: places where we are told that there is indeed that social democracy. And we accomplish this with a 350 million population.
Maybe there's something for this capitalism red in tooth and claw then: given that it does seem to improve the lives of the poor.
Take another look as well: we know that Russia is where bloated plutocrats loot everything from the country: and yet the bottom 10% in the US have, by this measure at least, better lives than the top 10% in Russia. I think we really might have to do some thinking about what is indeed the best system for the poor. Maybe it really is to let rip with capitalism, allow the inequality to grow but make the poor richer at the same time? I don't Know..
Let capitalism flourish by removing barriers of all kinds. Not all of them screw the wealthy, some protect them.No lets don't ignore the rest of the world.. lets look at it from another angle, it is the poor we are talking about indirectly , Right?
That's from The Economist, their own calculations working off an OECD set of measurements.
This isn't the traditional GDP numbers, nor purely economic numbers in fact. Things like quality of life, civic engagement are included.
And there's nothing really all that surprising about the US numbers. We know very well that the US has both the highest living standards for the rich and also the largest inequality among the large, advanced, nations.
However, look at it a little more closely in relation to other countries. We're often told that to be poor in the US is much worse than being poor in the social democracies of Europe. And the bottom 10% in the US are indeed worse off than the bottom 10% in Sweden. But they're better off than the bottom 10% in Germany or France: places where we are told that there is indeed that social democracy. And we accomplish this with a 350 million population.
Maybe there's something for this capitalism red in tooth and claw then: given that it does seem to improve the lives of the poor.
Take another look as well: we know that Russia is where bloated plutocrats loot everything from the country: and yet the bottom 10% in the US have, by this measure at least, better lives than the top 10% in Russia. I think we really might have to do some thinking about what is indeed the best system for the poor. Maybe it really is to let rip with capitalism, allow the inequality to grow but make the poor richer at the same time? I don't Know..
Old_Trapper70
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2014
- Messages
- 2,383
Forbes won't let me read the article since I have an ad blocker on. But to the point, the only reason that the poor in this country fare better then in other countries is due to the anti-poverty programs we have, the ones right wingers cry about all the time, and want to remove. The idea that capitalism is the reason why such occurred is pure BS. We have the fortunate circumstance to be the wealthiest country in the world, and yet the numbers of those who control the wealth seems to remain pretty much constant, while their control increases (the growing plutocracy you say is "looting" Russia http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-brenner/plutocracy-in-america_b_2992965.html ) yet you seem to feel it is not doing so to America. If one was to take an honest view of what is happening here though one would see that the living conditions are getting worse in spite of the claims made by the right wing. And it has long been known that unfettered capitalism soon evolves into the Plutocracy, Oligarchy, or Corptocracy, that only leads to more poverty.
However, perhaps the greatest illness that our society faces is that of greed which no one seems to want to address. The wealthy are called "hard working" in spite of the fact that very few even work at any form of a job. They use their wealth to have any form of physical labor done by others, and then pay them a wage that requires the worker to look to other sources to "supplement" their living. And while this welfare may have been at one time a point of shame, it has now become an acceptable way of survival because of the very necessity of it. Of course poorer countries, those we call "developing", cannot afford to provide for their people as the US can. Then too, even the poorest of countries seems to have the finances to provide quite well for the leaders of that country. China, No. Korea, India, most of the African Continent, Brazil, and numerous others, come to mind in that regard.
Homelessness in the US is not being addressed by either the government, or the millionaire/billionaire class. In fact, homelessness, as well as poverty as a whole, is being created by government, and the upper class of the population. Homelessness is being addressed by such groups as Habitats for Humanity, or non-profits such as Mobile Loaves and Fishes in Austin Texas. Then there is Unity Village in Portland, Oregon. So, while you give kudoes to the wealthy, and pay homage to them, they are the same ones that are destroying the very basis of what this country stands for, or did. And the right wing hates it, and is constantly trying to stop it. The right wing even hates it when solar power is provided to outlying areas in India, or Africa, to villages that have never had even an electric light bulb ( http://www.scidev.net/global/energy/feature/solar-power-for-the-poor-facts-and-figures-1.html )
Anyway, I digress. To even attempt to compare the poverty in the US to that of the rest of the world is a fallacy in itself. As Adam Smith wrote in regards to capitalism:
"How selfish soever man may be supposed, there are evidently some principles in his nature, which interest him in the fortunes of others, and render their happiness necessary to him, though he derives nothing from it, except the pleasure of seeing it. Of this kind is pity or compassion, the emotion we feel for the misery of others, when we either see it, or are made to conceive it in a very lively manner. That we often derive sorrow from the sorrows of others, is a matter of fact too obvious to require any instances to prove it; for this sentiment, like all the other original passions of human nature, is by no means confined to the virtuous or the humane, though they perhaps may feel it with the most exquisite sensibility. The greatest ruffian, the most hardened violator of the laws of society, is not altogether without it.”
Nope.
Been in Mexico. Don't need to ever go back.
Old_Trapper70
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2014
- Messages
- 2,383
The Scotsman
Well-Known Member
Ever been to Turkey? Spent many happy months working in Istanbul which for me was one of the most fascinating cities on earth.
The Scotsman
Well-Known Member
what's your point mate? I should imagine that most of the issues in those shitholes revolves around gangs, drugs and generally the f**ked-up social issues principally because of gangs, guns and drugs. The tribalism of gangs and gang-subculture in the inner-cities is that what perpetuates "poverty" and “hopelessness” in these so ghettos? Is that the spreading cancer infecting the American psyche, lack of instant material gratification, the lack of social cohesion or the lack of the cahoonas to do something about it?
Old_Trapper70
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2014
- Messages
- 2,383
Ghettoes were created to keep the poor, and undesirables, out of sight. The gangs, drugs, and social issues, followed.
http://www.npr.org/sections/codeswi...-from-its-history-how-ghetto-lost-its-meaning
http://www.jbuff.com/c032307.htm
The Scotsman
Well-Known Member
yeah but.....I guess as you mentioned in your post above it's just a bit to much effort for all the rich turds to do anything about it or even give a shit. Much easier to round them all up and keep them there, can't have these nasty little wretches grubbing around for handouts from my stash! What would they same down at the golf club if they knew these irksome proles we're living within a thousand miles of us, polluting the air with their fried food and smelly SUV's. Gosh how frightful.
Well shit I guess middle America is now the new ghetto so let's just fill it with lots of lovely guns and drugs and more guns and more drugs and let the bastards slug it out and maybe if enough get greased then the problem goes away. The social set can open their wallets and swan off down to the Gulfsteam or Westport open days with rosey cheeks and a clean conscience.
We had some rich bastard Peter Green who acquired $100s of millions from his workers pension fund - all legit mind you so the company went under and the workers were screwed.
I believe it was won, but in the end human nature screws things up...
In the end, Reagan and Gorbachev needed each other. Gorbachev needed to move swiftly if his reforms were to take hold. Reagan exerted the pressure that forced him to move swiftly and offered the rewards that made his foes and skeptics in the Politburo think the cutbacks might be worth it.
Gorbachev wasn't the only decisive presence. If Reagan hadn't been president—if Jimmy Carter or Walter Mondale had defeated him or if Reagan had died and George H.W. Bush taken his place—Gorbachev almost certainly would not have received the push or reinforcement that he needed. Those other politicians would have been too traditional, too cautious, to push such radical proposals (zero nukes and SDI) or to take Gorbachev's radicalism at face value. (There's no need to speculate on this point. When Bush Sr. succeeded Reagan in 1989, U.S.-Soviet relations took a huge step backward; it took nearly a year for Bush and his advisers to realize that Gorby was for real.)
The end of the Cold War may be the most oddball chapter in the history of the 20th century. How fitting, then, that the two most oddball leaders, Gorbachev and Reagan, made it come to pass. I think we have another oddball in office today..
Werbung:
Openmind
Well-Known Member
Unfortunately, today's oddball is stark crazy and VERY dangerous. . .Putin, the other "oddball" is on the contrary, very sane, very evil, and very dangerous also. . .he can dominate our crazy 45 and get him to do almost anything he chooses.
One exemple: That will that Trump has to "deal with each country separately" is NOT about a "keen business sense," it is about destroying the unity of the European Union. . .It is about separating the countries, pushing the against each other in competition, so that they can be more easily overcome (economically, for Trump. . .but politically and maybe even militarily for Putin).
Remember that old saying: "united we stand, divided we fall?" Putin (thanks to Trump) has already succeeded in dividing the US from its closest allies. . .the European Union!
And now, Trump (inspired by Putin), is working on dividing the European Union by playing one country against another (i.e., Germany, France, against England; Turkey against the Nederland; Ukraine against Crimea).
And you are falling for it! But one thing you are not considering is this: The unwanted consequence of Trump's evil policies is the increasing divide WITHIN AMERICA!
Similar threads
