Ending Poverty in America

[Chip]

Re: Endind Poverty in America

You are the one who claimed your money-less system would result in the end of poverty...

I said that a new and healthy system of socioeconomics needs to replace the present Money System, one that would solve the problem of poverty.

... Only to call me "erroneous" for finding that poverty would also exist in your system.

Yes, you are in error.

Your jump to conclusion is in error.

In your fantasy you jumped to conclusion that someone in the new system who chose not to work would be in poverty.

Your conclusion is false.

Someone who chose not to work would not support himself, would not procure food, therefore would not eat, and thus would die prematurely.

That's not poverty.

That's suicide.

Two different words ... two very different meanings.

Poverty is created by the Money System, not by the people who suffer in it.

Your preconceived ideological worship of the Money System appears to prevent you from grasping this reality and asking relevant questions.

So now I ask you... What is the root of all money?

I didn't say "Money is the root of all evil".

The link I provided said that the LOVE of money is the root of all evil, and that the love of money is codified in the Money System, codified by those in charge throughout history who loved money more than life itself.

Because you erred in your quote, your question "What is the root of all money?" is thus meaningless and irrelevant.

 

[Chip]

... the problem is that so many who choose a life of poverty don't believe that they can achieve.

Your statement contains an error of fact.

The error is that no one chooses poverty -- poverty is compelled upon them by the present system, the Money System.

The system creates poverty by its very nature.

Its method of doing so is powerful, menaical, insidious and discriminatory.

Only a microscopic minority have the strength to overcome the Money System's infliction of poverty when it occurs, and understandably so.

Thus it is ethically wrong to blame people in general who suffer from poverty for not "overcoming" it.

Poverty is not the fault of the sufferer and neither is remaining in poverty.

The Money System and it alone is the cause of both poverty and the vast majority of sufferers' inability to overcome it.

To view a person coping with poverty the best he/she can and erroneously state they are thus "choosing" to live in poverty is an error of observation and conclusion.

 

[Mr. Carpenter]

Your statement contains an error of fact.

The error is that no one chooses poverty -- poverty is compelled upon them by the present system, the Money System.

<snip before I HURL!!!>

To view a person coping with poverty the best he/she can and erroneously state they are thus "choosing" to live in poverty is an error of observation and conclusion.

What a TOTAL LOAD OF CRAP! If you live in poverty, with few exceptions, you're there because you CHOOSE to live in poverty. I have seen entirely too many examples of people who grew up DIRT poor, and who through their own hard work, dedication, and efforts are now doing quite well.

 

[Chip]

What a TOTAL LOAD OF CRAP! If you live in poverty, with few exceptions, you're there because you CHOOSE to live in poverty. I have seen entirely too many examples of people who grew up DIRT poor, and who through their own hard work, dedication, and efforts are now doing quite well.

My guess is that you've seen a tiny handful who were idiosyncratically able to "overcome" poverty.

My guess is also that you've seen many, many, many more who were impoverished and unable to "overcome" it.

My guess is also that you aren't able to differentiate between the two, that you wouldn't admit to yourself the truth of it if you could, and that you merely fantasize what you think you've seen.

And my guess is that your inability in the matter is due to your blinding worship of the Money System.

 

[Mr. Carpenter]

My guess is that you've seen a tiny handful who were idiosyncratically able to "overcome" poverty.

And you would be WRONG! I grew up in a very impoverished part of the South, and the VAST majority of the people I grew up with, and went to school with, from the first grade all the way through the 12th, knuckled down, applied themselves, and are far and away better off than anyone would have thought.

My guess is also that you've seen many, many, many more who were impoverished and unable to "overcome" it.

Wrong again. The same slackers I saw growing up, are the same slackers who have done absolutely nothing with their lives, and who are still sucking off the gov't teat. They had the same opportunities as the rest of us, but they CHOSE to be lazy, good for nothing, sit on their dead lazy butts, smoking their 'weed', getting drunk, and generally being totally worthless, and you know what, they're STILL that way because they CHOSE to be that way.

My guess is also that you aren't able to differentiate between the two, that you wouldn't admit to yourself the truth of it if you could, and that you merely fantasize what you think you've seen.

And my guess is that your inability in the matter is due to your blinding worship of the Money System.

My guess is that you're a college aged "skull full of mush" who doesn't have the first clue in the world what you're talking about, that you've never really worked a day in your life, and that everything you have was handed to you by someone else who worked very hard as a part of the "money system" to get it for you. In other words, you're a totally hypocritical POS.

 

[Andy]

Re: Endind Poverty in America

I said that a new and healthy system of socioeconomics needs to replace the present Money System, one that would solve the problem of poverty.

Impossible. Money is simply a method of trading commodities. In a barter system, people trade pelts or other tangible assets of near universal value. Even before there was an official US currency, people would deposit their mined gold or silver into a safe house with a vault. The owner would give a certificate of deposit that could be redeemed. People would often circulate the certificates as money.

If you were to eliminate US currency, people would simply find another common value item to circulate as money.

In your fantasy you jumped to conclusion that someone in the new system who chose not to work would be in poverty.

Your conclusion is false.

Someone who chose not to work would not support himself, would not procure food, therefore would not eat, and thus would die prematurely.

That's not poverty.
That's suicide.

Two different words ... two very different meanings.

Poverty is created by the Money System, not by the people who suffer in it.

Your preconceived ideological worship of the Money System appears to prevent you from grasping this reality and asking relevant questions.

Huh? In medieval times, there were serfs, peasants, fiefs, vassals, and so on. Many serfs were in poverty.

Now, if you are merely trying to eliminate the poverty status, that's fine, but pointless. We can change poverty to mean anyone earning less than 2 pennies a year, and instantly eliminate the status.

But if you wish to eliminate the situation of not having very much, well... honestly in every single economic system that has existed, does exist, or ever will exist, there will be people who have less. The idea you can eliminate that, is laughable.

 

[Dr.Who]

Re: Endind Poverty in America

Now, if you are merely trying to eliminate the poverty status, that's fine, but pointless. We can change poverty to mean anyone earning less than 2 pennies a year, and instantly eliminate the status.

But if you wish to eliminate the situation of not having very much, well... honestly in every single economic system that has existed, does exist, or ever will exist, there will be people who have less. The idea you can eliminate that, is laughable.

Thank you for sharing your thouhts.

I would add:

That in the US absolute poverty (the state of not having enough basic needs) is virtually non-existent. And when it does exist there are resources available, such as shelters, soup kitchens, and psychiatric hospitals which would provide all needs. there is no reason for a person to be in absolute poverty in the US.

Relative poverty ( the feeling that one does not have enough wants or not enough compared to everyone else) does exist in the US. Those living below the poverty level almost always have the basics. When they don't I have always found that they are refusing the resources they could otherwise have.

The lesson: the creation of wealth that capitalism has allowed has eliminated absolute poverty as much as can possibly be done and even relative poverty has been eliminated as well as anywhere else in the world and certainly more so than in the vast majority of history.

 

[Dr.Who]

Yes, that's true, but the problem is that so many who choose a life of poverty don't believe that they can achieve. The first step to advancement for anyone is believing in yourself.

The real definition of poverty is not believing in oneself enough to try. If you think you're a failure, but don't try, then you can blame your failure on outside influences, and maybe even convince yourself that your failure is someone else's fault.

They are of course deserving of compassion. It is debatable that they are deserving of tax dollars confiscated from others. But any private organization that wants to help in any way they want to should.

I am sure that much of the fault lies in the horrible educational system we have in some parts of this country. I blame the politicking that goes on regarding education and would ask any politician who has engaged in doing anything less than creating an excellent school system for whatever other reason to consider that his actions cause suffering and even death for some. I doubt any would ever convict himself in his own heart and that is sad. If anyone wants to name someone who went into the Chicago public schools with an intent to reform but focused on issues other than education and demonstrated no results whatsoever of improved education - feel free.

 

[PLC1]

Your statement contains an error of fact.

The error is that no one chooses poverty -- poverty is compelled upon them by the present system, the Money System.

The system creates poverty by its very nature.

Its method of doing so is powerful, menaical, insidious and discriminatory.

Only a microscopic minority have the strength to overcome the Money System's infliction of poverty when it occurs, and understandably so.

Thus it is ethically wrong to blame people in general who suffer from poverty for not "overcoming" it.

Poverty is not the fault of the sufferer and neither is remaining in poverty.

The Money System and it alone is the cause of both poverty and the vast majority of sufferers' inability to overcome it.

To view a person coping with poverty the best he/she can and erroneously state they are thus "choosing" to live in poverty is an error of observation and conclusion.

In a place like the Sudan, for example, poverty may be forced on people. In the land of opportunity, people choose poverty. It may not be a conscious choice, as I said, those who choose poverty don't believe that they have the ability to climb out of it. That isn't "blaming" the poor for their poverty, just an observation of reality.

And, the "money system" you are arguing against is to be replaced by what? By a system in which everything is free, and people take what they need? To each according to their needs? That system was tried, and it didn't work.

 

[Chip]

Re: Endind Poverty in America

Impossible. Money is simply a method of trading commodities. In a barter system, people trade pelts or other tangible assets of near universal value. Even before there was an official US currency, people would deposit their mined gold or silver into a safe house with a vault. The owner would give a certificate of deposit that could be redeemed. People would often circulate the certificates as money.

If you were to eliminate US currency, people would simply find another common value item to circulate as money.

If the neanderthal Money System was replaced by a healthy, modern system of socioeconomics that truly fit evolved people who are alive today, it would be governed so that no one would be authorized by law to "simply find another common value item to circulate as money".

Those who broke the law would suffer the consequences.

But no one would want to; there would be no neuropsychologically healthy reason to do so.

A modern healthy system of socioeconomics that eliminated the Money System-caused problems of the past, like poverty, would be cheered by the overwhelming vast majority of the people, and the tiny dwindling minority of Money System worshippers that would still be left would just have to make do the best they could with the new system.

As far as a need for "currency" goes, I submit that you're still thinking within the Money System's capitalist-socialist-communist-etc. control forms box.

Once that paradigm is transcended, thinking is different, more open, more creative.

All that might be required in the new system is a yearly averaged four-hour/day work week ...

... And maybe if we all pulled together on the same team, and if we all supported our team members, if we were as equally concerned about our own welfare and the welfare of all our team mates, this shift, replacing the present state of excess material consumption as an addiction to avoid feeling the reality of our mortality, we'd be able to do the real productive work of four times what our population now does under the Money System, and we'd really be happy with simply having the security of our material needs met and the freedom of a ton more hours/day to pursue our happiness.

And, it might surprise most of you, any new system must be founded on the axiom that the neuropsychologically healthy individual human being, not the collective, is the function and goal of the new system, that individual rights to life, security, and freedom are foundationally paramount, thus making the individual human being the foundational unit of value in the new system, not the collective in any form.

This means that no collective, except in times of legitimate state of real and present life-threatening danger, can compel the individual against his or her free will.

Though some of you will find that laudable, the same lot of you will also likely find yourselves uncomfortable by the thought of it too ... and you may want to ask yourself why.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

I thought this might be the waiting-list for all o' those fine-products from Joe-The-Plumber Inc.

 

[PLC1]

I thought this might be the waiting-list for all o' those fine-products from Joe-The-Plumber Inc.

If his plans come to fruition, then he'll be way above Obama's definition of "wealthy" for sure, won't he?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

If his plans come to fruition, then he'll be way above Obama's definition of "wealthy" for sure, won't he?

That's quite possible. There are a lotta suckers, out there, who'll buy most anything.....if they still have a card that's not maxed-out.....yet!!

 

[GenSeneca]

I said that a new and healthy system of socioeconomics needs to replace the present Money System, one that would solve the problem of poverty.

You need to explain exactly how any system could possibly eliminate poverty.

In your fantasy you jumped to conclusion that someone in the new system who chose not to work would be in poverty.

Yours is the fantasy world of a moneyless utopia.

Your conclusion is false.

Someone who chose not to work would not support himself, would not procure food, therefore would not eat, and thus would die prematurely.

That's not poverty.

That's suicide.

That person currently lives off welfare and resides in poverty. So your solution to end poverty is to let the impoverished die? I didn't realize you were so Progressive in your thinking - Quite the "final solution" to the question of poverty.

Poverty is created by the Money System, not by the people who suffer in it.

You need to do a better job of explaining exactly how our system creates poverty... not just make the assertion.

Your preconceived ideological worship of the Money System appears to prevent you from grasping this reality and asking relevant questions.

Once again, I live in the real world... not some fantasy land of no money. If anyone is being ideologically blind to reality, it is you. You continually fail to explain any relevant details about this fictitious system and when asked, you have continually called such questions irrelevant.

The link I provided said that the LOVE of money is the root of all evil, and that the love of money is codified in the Money System, codified by those in charge throughout history who loved money more than life itself.

As usual, nothing but bare assertions. I suppose you find what you say to be obvious, or common knowledge, but I challenge you to support your assertions with more than additional assertions.

Because you erred in your quote, your question "What is the root of all money?" is thus meaningless and irrelevant.

Conspiracy Theorists also have a real problem answering questions....

• Explain how our current system creates poverty
• Explain in detail how your system would work
• Purely philosophical systems, assertions and unsubstantiated claims are all totally irrelevant