Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't base my own happiness on what other people have. I don't see how someone else being rich is something I need to be concerned about. If I need to earn more money then it's me and my earning power I need to address, not someone else's wealth.
When voting for the next President, Income Inequality is not only NOT in my Top 10 Issues list, I don't even think it's a real issue. I do feel sorry for other people who think they'll be better off in life if someone else would only have less anything.
I triple like this post! I also wish that people will put their energies in doing whatever it is that they need to do to have a better life rather than trying to make everybody poor. I really dislike so much the socialistic/communistic view of life. I think this viewpoint was in the fringes of this society 5-10 yrs ago. I'm even amazed that this viewpoint is being entertained today. This is so unAmerican!
I am very conservative and have not been concerned about income inequality, but have recently begun to be. And my concern is inequality of law administrative government law enforcement and how THAT creates income inequality. As I expand my farm, I have come across a few dozen examples in my industry but I will use this one general example that applies to poultry processing.
USDA has inspectors, they have set an acceptable bacterial count for processed birds, right now today, if a mom and pop poultry farm exceeds 1/10th that limit they are shut down and fined, subsequent violations can result in asset seizure. If Tyson or Perdue test at 20x the allowable limit they are given 60 days to correct, fine is probably suspended.
In Georgia a few years back there was large level of small poultry processing. A few million in campaign contributions by Tyson later, you now had to have an inspector on site at $700/day unless you took your birds to centralized processing station, at first this was cost prohibitive. Then the market responded by building privately owned mobile small scale facilities that came with an inspector to come to your farm and kill the chickens safely for a small cost per bird. A few more million from Tyson and those were outlawed. Then the mobile stations set up across the state line. A few more million by Tyson and now it was unlawful to take your live birds out of state to kill.
Now days, mom and pop poultry is dead in GA, because in the name of food safety, the only legal loophole still open is to take your birds to a special USDA owned facility in Nashville.
My point ultimately is, as a conservative I would want, as a first step, to eliminate instances wherein GOVERMENT is active in aiding and abetting income inequality via inequal enforcement of the law. We all want safe food, but the major corps can buy dispensation from safe food, that those starting up cannot. For those who wish a government solution, remember that today, the government's hand are just as bloody. If you really want income equality, start at the ballot box, the choice is clear for who will champion governmental change to facilitate income equality in 2016.
I am very conservative and have not been concerned about income inequality, but have recently begun to be. And my concern is inequality of law administrative government law enforcement and how THAT creates income inequality. As I expand my farm, I have come across a few dozen examples in my industry but I will use this one general example that applies to poultry processing.
USDA has inspectors, they have set an acceptable bacterial count for processed birds, right now today, if a mom and pop poultry farm exceeds 1/10th that limit they are shut down and fined, subsequent violations can result in asset seizure. If Tyson or Perdue test at 20x the allowable limit they are given 60 days to correct, fine is probably suspended.
In Georgia a few years back there was large level of small poultry processing. A few million in campaign contributions by Tyson later, you now had to have an inspector on site at $700/day unless you took your birds to centralized processing station, at first this was cost prohibitive. Then the market responded by building privately owned mobile small scale facilities that came with an inspector to come to your farm and kill the chickens safely for a small cost per bird. A few more million from Tyson and those were outlawed. Then the mobile stations set up across the state line. A few more million by Tyson and now it was unlawful to take your live birds out of state to kill.
Now days, mom and pop poultry is dead in GA, because in the name of food safety, the only legal loophole still open is to take your birds to a special USDA owned facility in Nashville.
My point ultimately is, as a conservative I would want, as a first step, to eliminate instances wherein GOVERMENT is active in aiding and abetting income inequality via inequal enforcement of the law. We all want safe food, but the major corps can buy dispensation from safe food, that those starting up cannot. For those who wish a government solution, remember that today, the government's hand are just as bloody. If you really want income equality, start at the ballot box, the choice is clear for who will champion governmental change to facilitate income equality in 2016.
NOBODY.
Yes....there are many industries where the government picks winners and losers.
I am very conservative and have not been concerned about income inequality, but have recently begun to be. And my concern is inequality of law administrative government law enforcement and how THAT creates income inequality. As I expand my farm, I have come across a few dozen examples in my industry but I will use this one general example that applies to poultry processing.
USDA has inspectors, they have set an acceptable bacterial count for processed birds, right now today, if a mom and pop poultry farm exceeds 1/10th that limit they are shut down and fined, subsequent violations can result in asset seizure. If Tyson or Perdue test at 20x the allowable limit they are given 60 days to correct, fine is probably suspended.
In Georgia a few years back there was large level of small poultry processing. A few million in campaign contributions by Tyson later, you now had to have an inspector on site at $700/day unless you took your birds to centralized processing station, at first this was cost prohibitive. Then the market responded by building privately owned mobile small scale facilities that came with an inspector to come to your farm and kill the chickens safely for a small cost per bird. A few more million from Tyson and those were outlawed. Then the mobile stations set up across the state line. A few more million by Tyson and now it was unlawful to take your live birds out of state to kill.
Now days, mom and pop poultry is dead in GA, because in the name of food safety, the only legal loophole still open is to take your birds to a special USDA owned facility in Nashville.
My point ultimately is, as a conservative I would want, as a first step, to eliminate instances wherein GOVERMENT is active in aiding and abetting income inequality via inequal enforcement of the law. We all want safe food, but the major corps can buy dispensation from safe food, that those starting up cannot. For those who wish a government solution, remember that today, the government's hand are just as bloody. If you really want income equality, start at the ballot box, the choice is clear for who will champion governmental change to facilitate income equality in 2016.
NOBODY.
Brilliant post from start to finish. Unfortunately, your experience just scratches the surface of what's to come.
Yes....there are many industries where the government picks winners and losers.
This does need to be looked at.
Who picks the winners and losers in elections? The leaders of those industries where government picks the winners and losers. This is one of the many reasons that wealth inequality is so destructive.
Who picks the winners and losers in elections? The leaders of those industries where government picks the winners and losers. This is one of the many reasons that wealth inequality is so destructive.
Not that I'd call myself a Conservative but I don't vote for Dems or Leftists. The best path to reduce poverty is education, ethics, reduction of drug use, teaching economic responsibility, the value of delayed gratification, teaching positive attitudes and optimism, encourage investment in self and businesses.
Agreed ^^
The problem I see is the increasing # of Billionaires(Who can buy the system), the ever increasing # of welfare recipients, and the shrinking Middle class(Possible future Millionairess). People being able to grow from the bottom to the middle class, through hard work, education, and ingenuity is what keeps us growing.
What's interesting is the # of Billionaires has doubled since the financial crisis while the number of Millionaires only rose 15%. "He who owns the gold makes the rules"
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
