Ending Poverty in America

[Chip]

Re: Endind Poverty in America

Dog eat dog, is what we want.

When you ask the eaten dogs, which greatly outnumber those feasting on them, I believe you'll get a different answer, if the truth be known.

If democracy ruled, the dogs being eaten might vote against the dogs that are eating them.

Sadly, many dogs are paranoically afraid of a deluded fate worse than being eaten ... so they defend the eaters' rights with misguided blind idealism ... and unto their own self-defeating demise.

Safe protectionist socialism, has horrible results.

Agreed ... about as horrible as capitalism, just in different respects.

One cannot control the Money System.

Whether capitalism, communism, socialism or idiosyncratic concoctions of the three are employed as a monitoring force, the system's intrinsic horrors still break through to bite us.

The right thing to do is to create a new system that addresses and solves all of the problems caused by and/or are unresolved by the present system.

One of the first steps in doing so is to stop worshipping the present system.

No system is worthy of worship.

We are the creators of systems.

Systems should be worshipping us, ...

... All of us, without exception.

 

[PLC1]

Re: Endind Poverty in America

When you ask the eaten dogs, which greatly outnumber those feasting on them, I believe you'll get a different answer, if the truth be known.

If democracy ruled, the dogs being eaten might vote against the dogs that are eating them.

Sadly, many dogs are paranoically afraid of a deluded fate worse than being eaten ... so they defend the eaters' rights with misguided blind idealism ... and unto their own self-defeating demise.



Agreed ... about as horrible as capitalism, just in different respects.

One cannot control the Money System.

Whether capitalism, communism, socialism or idiosyncratic concoctions of the three are employed as a monitoring force, the system's intrinsic horrors still break through to bite us.

The right thing to do is to create a new system that addresses and solves all of the problems caused by and/or are unresolved by the present system.

One of the first steps in doing so is to stop worshipping the present system.

No system is worthy of worship.

We are the creators of systems.

Systems should be worshipping us, ...

... All of us, without exception.

Excellent post.

The system should be worshipping us, not the other way around. We created it. If it doesn't work, we need not be afraid to change it.

The system we need is called pragmatism: Use what works, dump the rest regardless of ideology.

 

[Andy]

Re: Endind Poverty in America

When you ask the eaten dogs, which greatly outnumber those feasting on them, I believe you'll get a different answer, if the truth be known.

Of course. Why do you think so many CEOs and corporate business types vote for socialists? Again, look at Hindustan Motors in India prior to deregulation and economic reform. They didn't have to worry about competition, there wasn't any. They didn't have to worry about foreign competitors, they were prohibited from selling. They didn't have to worry about losing customers, they had no one else to buy from. They didn't have to worry about improving or changing their product, there were not other options. They didn't have to worry about safety standards or innovation, they were protected by government.

It's just like Fannie Mae. Fannie Mae was making reckless ricky loans. But... they were protected by government. So what did they care? The CEO collected massive bonuses, while fudging numbers worse than Enron, and when everything crashed, they collected their looting, left, and government used tax payer money to bail out the charred remains.

This is how socialism works.

If democracy ruled, the dogs being eaten might vote against the dogs that are eating them.

Sadly, many dogs are paranoically afraid of a deluded fate worse than being eaten ... so they defend the eaters' rights with misguided blind idealism ... and unto their own self-defeating demise.

I'm not seeing that. The opposite seems to be the case. The bail out prevented 'eaters' rights, by not allowing failed companies to fail. We should have prevented the eaters rights from being denied, and not had a bail out.

Agreed ... about as horrible as capitalism, just in different respects.

Tell that to the Chinese who are finely able to open their own business, earn many times as much money from their Capitalist system, dropping the poverty rate in China from 66% to about 3%.

One cannot control the Money System.

China did. It was a massive failure.

Whether capitalism, communism, socialism or idiosyncratic concoctions of the three are employed as a monitoring force, the system's intrinsic horrors still break through to bite us.

Capitalism is freedom. That's the whole point of it. It's the individual being able to use his or her capital to their own end. Everyone is a capitalist. For example, a person going to school to get a degree is engaging in Capitalism. He or she, is using their Capital, in the form of time, energy, effort, money, into getting a degree they believe will result in benefits greater than what they put into it.

Think about it. If you believed you would not get a higher paying job to off set the cost of schooling, would you do it? If you believed you would not get a more enjoyable job, than the time and effort into education, would you do it? Of course not. You are engaging in Capitalism. You are investing what you have to get something better than what you are investing. That is Capitalism.

Communism and Socialism, are antithetical to this.

The right thing to do is to create a new system that addresses and solves all of the problems caused by and/or are unresolved by the present system.

One of the first steps in doing so is to stop worshipping the present system.

No system is worthy of worship.

We are the creators of systems.

Systems should be worshipping us, ...

... All of us, without exception.

I don't think anyone worships the current system. I can think of a few dozen things I'd like to do right now that would solve many problems. Eliminate or allow for opt-out of Social Security. End Medicare and Medicaid. Remove the minimum wage laws the terminate jobs. Ban the income tax. Reduce restrictions on industries that prevent us from being self sufficient. Disband GSEs that have caused so many problems. End these bailouts.

 

[Dr.Who]

Re: Endind Poverty in America

So..Ending poverty in America-

I was reading something on another site and it just occurred to me that so far the number one thing that has alleviated poverty in the world has been increasing wealth. I don't mean just that poor people have more money that would be stupidly obvious.

I mean that as a whole nation becomes wealthier, as the standard of living for a whole nation increases that the wealth of the poor increases too. I guess I have known this all along but never put it in my head so simply; when poor people have more money they are not as much in poverty. I have said before that the poor today live better than kings of the past and did not mean it this way. But now I see that the total amount of wealth has increased. The richest today live a lifestyle that could never even have been written about in fairy tales 100 years ago and the poor today are doing great comparitively. I have also heard that a rising tide raises all ships and just kind of dismissed it as a platitude. I have heard that the stock market can lose money and it doesn't go from one guy to another, it just disappears. The same happens when it is created. It doesn't go from one guy to another it just increases.

But now I see that this is exactly what we need to do to. We need to create wealth. We need to raise the standard of living for all purposively and with that as our intent. No doubt most of you were here long before I. Guess I am just slow.

It was this that inspired me:

"The regulations placed on the market by social democracy tend to limit economic efficiency and growth, and impede the creation of wealth that is needed to alleviate global poverty."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democrats

So if we want to alleviate poverty we need to enact policies that allow people and markets to produce as much as they can as efficiently as they can. Then we can actively use this wealth to benefit the poorest among us. There will be plenty of it so no one will be reluctant to share.

A couple of days ago I read some of Marx's work. He advocated that those with much should give to those in need. (He also said that the government should enforce that) But one thing he said that I had never known before what that those with much never could share with those in need until resources were not scarce. Just now, as I was making this post I see that he saw a part of this all along. If there is plenty of wealth then the able can share easily with the needy (duh). He was just misguided as to how to encourage that sharing.

Of course the example in the bible got that right. In one Christian community they all shared as they saw the need, selling land and property for the common good as desired. Some say that this biblical passage was the inspiration for socialism. Yet the community in the bible recognized that every individual still maintained property rights.

We need markets today that are operated fairly and honestly and efficiently. This creates wealth. We need people who love their neighbors and share abundantly. Clearly people can share abundantly when there is plenty, but until then it still makes sense to share generously. I don't see how we can get to the point where are markets are fair and honest and efficient, where wealth is created, and where people share from their abundance unless people also share generously now while we wait. A lack of generosity today will just breed desperation among the poor who will then demand that governments steal from the rich to give tot he poor - and that too will destroy our chances for a society in which markets run fairly, honestly, efficiently, and people share from their abundance.

If the abundance gets large enough would money disappear as chip suggests? Who would need to measure what they produce and share if there is too much to count or no need to care about what one has? But the abundance would need to exist first not last as socialism suggests. And the generosity needs to exist first even before the abundance is real. That would be a sacrifice but perhaps that is why God asks us to love our neighbor as ourselves.

Did our founding fathers see all this when they created a system that respected property rights, respected liberty, encouraged virtue, and limited power?

I am reminded of these:

"Is there no virtue among us? If there be not, we are in a wretched situation. No theoretical checks -- no form of government can render us secure. To suppose liberty or happiness without any virtue in the people, is a chimerical idea.
-- James Madison

"That no free government, or the blessing of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue, and by frequent recurrence to fundamental principles."
-- George Mason

 

[GenSeneca]

Re: Endind Poverty in America

... Capitalism is freedom. That's the whole point of it...

...Communism and Socialism, are antithetical to this...

Now THAT'S an excellent post! Well done Andy!
------------------------------------------------------
I totally reject the notion that Capitalism can be improved upon when mixed with Socialism. Is Capitalism perfect? Of course not.. no system is... However, Capitalism is the least imperfect of all other options and possible combinations.

Our founders understood this, our nation was founded on Capitalist and Republican (Democratic Republic) principles. It was Capitalism that took us from pilgrim settlements, to the worlds most technologically advanced and only super power in just 232 years - far surpassing all other nations of the world who had been in existence, in some cases, for a thousand years or more.

CEO's were mentioned... I want to address this because people of certain abilities are relentlessly attacked as evil, greedy and immoral people; while people with other abilities are lauded and praised by the same individuals.

Do you know who this man is?

Thats Tiger Woods, the number one paid athlete in America, earning through his abilities $128 million this year. Forbes says woods is worth $800 million and on pace to become a billionaire in two years... He's 32.

Does anyone feel that Tiger Woods is evil, greedy or immoral? Does anyone not think Woods has earned such wealth through his efforts and abilities? Now I ask you... What has this man's accomplishments done to improve your life? Athletes perform and entertain, they offer nothing of lasting value to others.

Do you know who this man is?

He's known as the hardest working man in Hollywood, Will Smith, and last year he brought down $80 million. Is Will Smith evil, greedy or immoral? Do you think he has earned that money because of his abilities? I ask again... What has Will Smith given to mankind that's of lasting value?

Both of these previously mentioned men, and people of ability in similar industries, are rightly lauded for their abilities and held as role models by society - they are not derided for their success. Additionally, while people of such ability are entertaining, they do not produce tangible goods or services that fundamentally improve or progress mankind.

Do you know who this man is?

There's a good chance the server software that all of us are interacting with on this forum board was created by him. Larry Ellison is the CEO of the Oracle Corporation and creator of the Oracle software. He was born to a 19 year old single mother in New York City, given up for adoption and raised by Lillian and Louis Ellison - a lower middle class family from Chicago.

Larry did not have success handed to him on a silver platter, he attended two Universities but dropped out, never receiving a diploma, and founded the Oracle company in 1977 - With just $2000 of his own money.

Thirty one years later, this man, from humble beginnings, has amassed an amazing fortune and is listed by Forbes as the 14th richest person in the world. His salary last year was $72 million - 44% less than what Tiger Woods earned. Unlike Woods and Smith, Ellison created Oracle - a product that has improved the lives of countless individuals and his company has employed thousands of individuals.

In 2003 Ellison is reported to have donated $152 million to Charitable Organization...Yet... this man is not held up by society as a role model for others to follow, instead, he is vilified as somehow immoral or greedy for his level of success.


"So what?" you say... "If not him, someone else would have done it."

Is the same not true for Tiger Woods or Will Smith?

Capitalism has given each of these men, who posses extraordinary ability, the opportunity to achieve such success and in with their achievements, in turn, they have provided opportunity for others to succeed in the same system.

Socialism limits opportunity. Socialism limits the ability for individuals to succeed, because too much success, creates a "gap" between the classes... and Socialists are all about "social justice" and "spreading the wealth".

The "healthy mix" that some claim can exist between these two ideologies is comical at best and tragic at worst. Its like trying to find balance between matter and anti-matter... no such balance is possible.

Capitalism really is Freedom... Socialism really is antithetical to the freedoms Capitalism represents.

 

[Chip]

Re: Endind Poverty in America

Anecdotal reference to the microscopic few who were lucky enough to get unfairly paid obscene unjust amounts for trades that are no more intrinsically valuable than any other is both blindly idealistic ... and, irrelevant.

What matters is that the vast majority suffer in anonymity at the hands of a system of socioeconomics that should have been thrown on the scrap heap of history many, many centuries ago.

The system is the problem.

The system needs to be replaced.

 

[BigRob]

Re: Endind Poverty in America

Anecdotal reference to the microscopic few who were lucky enough to get unfairly paid obscene unjust amounts for trades that are no more intrinsically valuable than any other is both blindly idealistic ... and, irrelevant.

What matters is that the vast majority suffer in anonymity at the hands of a system of socioeconomics that should have been thrown on the scrap heap of history many, many centuries ago.

The system is the problem.

The system needs to be replaced.

This system has generated more wealth in this country than the world has ever seen. The poorest of the poor are so much better off than someone in the third world, it is not even close.

Why does that need to be replaced? Because we are in a slow down?

 

[Chip]

Re: Endind Poverty in America

This system has generated more wealth in this country than the world has ever seen. The poorest of the poor are so much better off than someone in the third world, it is not even close.

Why does that need to be replaced? Because we are in a slow down?

No.

Because poverty is an unnecessary misery and pain-causing evil that destroys lives, and poverty is caused by the present system.

There are many other problems that are also intrinsic to and thus caused by the present system, and thus the only solutions will be found in a new system.

Here is a link that presents the case for system replacement:The Foundational Problem

 

[BigRob]

Re: Endind Poverty in America

No.

Because poverty is an unnecessary misery and pain-causing evil that destroys lives, and poverty is caused by the present system.

Poverty is a problem no matter what system you use. Why change the best one, to another one that will not solve poverty?

There are many other problems that are also intrinsic to and thus caused by the present system, and thus the only solutions will be found in a new system.

Here is a link that presents the case for system replacement:The Foundational Problem

Sorry, but your new "system" says it will accomplish its goals by working to create heaven on Earth and spiritual healing... Sounds like wishful thinking to me. It also sounds to me like it is not a real plan.

 

[Chip]

Re: Endind Poverty in America

Poverty is a problem no matter what system you use. Why change the best one, to another one that will not solve poverty?

Sorry, but your new "system" says it will accomplish its goals by working to create heaven on Earth and spiritual healing... Sounds like wishful thinking to me. It also sounds to me like it is not a real plan.

Poverty is solvable -- all problems are solvable ... and without creating other worse problems as a byproduct.

The link I referenced only provides a valid case for replacing the present system, it does not provide a pre-designed system. System design is for all of us to participate in.

Because the present system creates problems that damage the human spirit, it is only logically natural to conclude that when those problems are solved, spiritual healing will occur.

Compared to living in the hell of the present system, the new system will indeed seem like heaven on earth.

 

[GenSeneca]

Re: Endind Poverty in America

Anecdotal reference to the microscopic few who were lucky enough to get unfairly paid obscene unjust amounts for trades that are no more intrinsically valuable than any other is both blindly idealistic ... and, irrelevant.

What matters is that the vast majority suffer in anonymity at the hands of a system of socioeconomics that should have been thrown on the scrap heap of history many, many centuries ago.

I have highlighted the usual anti-capitalist rhetoric.

Lucky: Its Chip's assertion that men of extraordinary ability are nothing more than lucky... they didn't work harder than the next person, they just got lucky. They didn't take risks where others played it safe, they just got lucky.

"I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have." - Thomas Jefferson

Unfair: Life is not fair. All men are created equal, after that, all bets are off. Any attempt to artificially create equality, ends in disaster and stifles the progress of mankind. The needs of the many will always outweigh the ability of the few. Chip, and those like him, do not possess the power to make men equal in ability, anything less is a futile attempt at playing God.

"A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor and bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government." - Thomas Jefferson

Unjust: unjust to whom? Is it unjust that one man is born and nurtures his athletic ability while another does not? I find it unjust that those without ability, those who didn't seize upon the same opportunity of another, feel they are owed something by those who achieve.

"It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others: or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own." - Thomas Jefferson

Not everyone can be a star, so I'll let you have the remark about the vast majority remaining anonymous but.... The vast majority suffer?

The following are facts about persons defined as "poor" by the Census Bureau, taken from various government reports:

* Forty-six percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.
* Seventy-six percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, 30 years ago, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.
* Only 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded. More than two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.
* The average poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)
* Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 30 percent own two or more cars.
* Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.
* Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.
* Seventy-three percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a third have an automatic dishwasher.

For most Americans, the word "poverty" suggests destitution: an inability to provide a family with nutritious food, clothing, and reasonable shelter. But only a small number of the 35 million persons classified as "poor" by the Census Bureau fit that description.

35 million constitutes roughly 10% of the United States population... a far cry from being a majority and even farther from anything that resembles suffering.

And finally... Chip suggests that our system should have been abandoned centuries ago, yet our system is just 232 years old... We should have abandoned Capitalism 32 years after the founding of the nation?

Also worth noting... Chip, who asserts the system is broken and needs replacing, dares not name the system he feels should replace it... Socialism always promises Utopian Equality but delivers its victims to a life of equal misery and despair.

 

[Chip]

Re: Endind Poverty in America

I have highlighted the usual anti-capitalist rhetoric.

Listing of problem symptoms is a rational behavior.

That they happen to be about the Money System, a system you appear to equate with an idealized control form of capitalism, means that you will likely feel threatened by being reminded of the flaws in the system, and that the intensity with which you experience this threat is directly proportional to the zealous fervor with which you worship the system and its capitalistic control form.

I wonder what this worship buys you.

Lucky: Its Chip's assertion that men of extraordinary ability are nothing more than lucky

Your anecdotal reference of extraordinary ability to hit a golf ball or act in a movie or provide corporate direction remains contextually irrelevant.

There is no rational or humane reason, all things considered outside of the Money System, why these people should fear less the possibility of not eating a meal or keeping a home than those with a different skill set.

Your argument comes solely from within your dominant paradigm: the Money System.

Only by stepping outside of the system that controls your thoughts will you likely be able to see the Money System's intrinsic irrationality and inhumanness, the threat it poses to humanity, and come to correctly see why it needs to be replaced.

35 million constitutes roughly 10% of the United States population... a far cry from being a majority and even farther from anything that resembles suffering.

Poverty is needless and not required in a healthy socioeconomic system.

35 million in poverty is 35 million too many.

Who are you to say that those who live in constant justified fear of not being able to obtain their life-sustaining basic needs are not suffering?!

I am so thankful that my empathy is not suppressed by the worship of a system of socioeconomics.

And finally... Chip suggests that our system should have been abandoned centuries ago, yet our system is just 232 years old... We should have abandoned Capitalism 32 years after the founding of the nation?

The system is the Money System, not capitalism.

Capitalism is merely a control form (like socialism, communism, etc.) applied to the Money System to keep it in check, albeit the least aggressive of all control forms.

The Money System is many millennia old.

The Money System itself is the foundational problem.

The Money System needs to be replaced.

Also worth noting... Chip, who asserts the system is broken and needs replacing, dares not name the system he feels should replace it...

That's right, I don't.

That's because construction of the new system to replace the present system has not, to my knowledge, been completed, and thus it does not have a name.

Many, however, are in the process of listing the present system's intrinsic problems, and many are working on system design to create the new system.

In time it will be given a name.

This is a similar process to how the Money System itself was created as the Foundational Problem link I posted early presents.

It is absolutely irrelevant that the system which will eventually replace the Money System is not yet named.

What's relevant is that the present system contains systemic problems that destroy lives and threaten to end our species.

What's relevant is that a new system needs to be designed and implemented to replace the present system ... and soon.

Socialism always promises Utopian Equality but delivers its victims to a life of equal misery and despair.

I agree.

Socialism, a control form of the Money System, like communism and others, merely shifts the type and degree of misery.

To argue which control form (capitalism, socialism, communism, idiosyncratic concoctions of the three) is best is like asking whether one prefers the guillotine, the rope, or the rifle.

It doesn't really matter.

Execution, under the Money System, regardless of method, remains a certainty.

 

[chestnut]

Re: Endind Poverty in America

If our "Money System" is so damn bad, why do so many people want to come to the US. We have had, and continue to have, more people wanting to come to these shores to embrade the "Money System" than any other nation in history. I guess everyone wants to come here and be poor, right?

Name another country that has had as many people trying to get in compared to the US. There is none.

That to me does not sound like a broken system. One that everyone wants to be part of.

It is the current system that brings so many to our shores, with hope and desire they can one day, reach their aspirations. Some fail, some succeed.

In no way should the government play a role in this. They should simply protect our homeland and provide assistance for those who cannot (not the ones who won't) provide for themselves.

Each one of us has different talents and skills and we should all strive to be self sustaining.

Remember Freedom = Equality Equality <> Freedom.

Let each person persue happiness without infringing on anyone else who is pursing their own happiness.

Pursue happines. Don't wait for it to spring on you.

 

[Chip]

Re: Endind Poverty in America

If our "Money System" is so damn bad, why do so many people want to come to the US.

The Money System is worldwide, it is not a "U.S. only" phenomenon.

People who suffer the Money System's impoverishing in one country often imagine life is better elsewhere.

Indeed, where dictators arbitrarily control who benefits from the nation's wealth, many who are such victims hope for better in a less dictatorial country.

But no matter where one goes, the Money System exists, and thus its intrinsic flaws are just as likely to cause suffering one place as another.

That we keep the Money System at bay better for some than others, that the abject poor in Mexico, for example, prefer being less poor in America, is irrelevant.

What's relevant is that the Money System is everywhere and that all forms of control fail to prevent it from unleashing its horrors everywhere.

Though America's attempts to reduce the Money System's virulency are arguably laudable, they are only forestalling the inevitable and are actually presenting a false sense of security that functions to delay the direly needed replacement of the Money System with a new and healthy system of socioeconomics everywhere, one that does not cause poverty.

It is therefore useless to worship America in this manner.

It is useful to work toward designing a new system to replace the Money System everywhere.

 

[BigRob]

Re: Endind Poverty in America

Poverty is solvable -- all problems are solvable ... and without creating other worse problems as a byproduct.

How is poverty solvable? Someone will always have more, and there will always be a gap. It is simply not possible to say everyone will make X amount per year no matter what and X amount will buy you Y no matter what.

The link I referenced only provides a valid case for replacing the present system, it does not provide a pre-designed system. System design is for all of us to participate in.

Your link points out the flaws in the system and that is all. There are flaws in every system, but the one we have is the best.

Because the present system creates problems that damage the human spirit, it is only logically natural to conclude that when those problems are solved, spiritual healing will occur.

Compared to living in the hell of the present system, the new system will indeed seem like heaven on earth.

Damage the human spirit? What does that even mean? The present system allows anyone anywhere to obtain more wealth than they can imagine.