U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-05-2011, 10:49 AM
 
29,779 posts, read 34,867,277 times
Reputation: 11705

Advertisements

New Words-Ineptocracy | Points and Figures

Quote:
1. Ineptocracy
*_Ineptocracy_****(in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) – a system of government where the least

capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the

members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded

with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number

of producers*
The above is a new word making its way into thinking and commentary on our current society. It has application to how we plan our retirement and how government allows us the freedom to plan and succeed as individuals. Will the fruits of individual efforts be tasted by that individual or does it take a system of food distribution voted on by all regardless of how much they grew? Can a society of decreasing producers continue without rethinking its approach. This is meant to be harsh but changing demographics are forcing us to think about much we currently do and can be found in discussions about many topics including retirement. Can we continue on a path where those who produce the most retirement wealth are asked to give more of it away and those who produce less are making the decisions about the distribution? Food for thought!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-05-2011, 11:33 AM
 
Location: WA
5,395 posts, read 21,395,985 times
Reputation: 5893
Good word describing the system rapidly evolving that will bring large undesirable changes to society.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2011, 12:13 PM
 
Location: SW MO
23,605 posts, read 31,482,868 times
Reputation: 29071
“The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.”

~ Margaret Thatcher
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2011, 12:30 PM
 
Location: Near a river
16,042 posts, read 18,975,704 times
Reputation: 15649
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
New Words-Ineptocracy | Points and Figures
Can we continue on a path where those who produce the most retirement wealth are asked to give more of it away and those who produce less are making the decisions about the distribution? Food for thought!
Hate to bring up old wounds (to some), but the 1% are not giving anything away.

There are many in the upper levels of wealth who are included in those who are concerned about (and also doing something about) the health and well-being of all individuals no matter what their status, and this includes food. I don't get why there is such resentment from those who feel they are being taken advantage of. I am of a much lower income than most on these retirement forums and yet I always find the money to sent to Oxfam and another such in the U.S. I fully understand the global political power issues that keep so many starving on our planet.

Last edited by RiverBird; 11-05-2011 at 01:08 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2011, 12:55 PM
 
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ
16,133 posts, read 20,824,289 times
Reputation: 8293
What a bunch of nonsense. Most industrialized countries have government Health Care and government pensions. That relieves the employer of those3 responsibilities and doesn't leave you with nothing when your employer leaves you unemployed a few years before you would have retired.
If that is socialism, so be it. I would rather have that than have the elderly starving by the roadsides. There is a price for living in our society and I, for one, am happy to pay my share
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2011, 01:12 PM
 
Location: Lexington, SC
4,281 posts, read 10,737,425 times
Reputation: 3716
If that is socialism, so be it. I would rather have that than have the elderly starving by the roadsides. There is a price for living in our society and I, for one, am happy to pay my share

I agree.

Our systems (government/private) need some tweaking but they are far from broken.

Look up Keynesian theory/economics which advocates a mixed economics. Predominantly private sector, but with a significant role of government and public sector.

I am amazed at how many forget their roots and the methods they used to get where they are. They soon want to throw the baby out with the bath water.

An aside. There are only two developed countries in the world that do not have National Health Insurance for their people. The United States and South Africa.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2011, 02:04 PM
 
Location: We_tside PNW (Columbia Gorge) / CO / SA TX / Thailand
22,569 posts, read 39,952,759 times
Reputation: 23704
Quote:
Ineptocracy
Might also apply to USA promoting / advising on policy (as it feebly attempted to do @ G20) or TRYING to bring Democracy ??? to countries who have no concept or desire for such. Been warring for centuries, not 'children' to history, as is USA.

Quote:
...the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing
This is telling... and a trigger button of mine as we approach yet another election... I feel incumbents should not advertise / promote themselves. They have a record, let it speak to their leadership and minimize campaign rhetoric and expense. Unfortunately we have a lessor and lessor educated electorate who, like sheep.... absorb very little content and vote 'via popularity' and bogus (often paid) endorsements from celebrities / media.

Quote:
Hate to bring up old wounds (to some), but the 1% are not giving anything away.
Actually, It has been my experience that MANY are giving MUCH away and have brought US (USA and World). OODLES of healthcare, business investment, benevolence, technology, education, civic aid ... In general I have found (and appreciate) genuinely concerned 1%'rs who are selfless in giving. It is not at all my expectation that ALL 1% (or top 10 or top 90%) WILL or should GIVE to others. (It is in my genes, but not everyone). I will also note that the impoverished tend to 'appear' more giving / sharing on a subsistence level, but THEY have lived it / experienced the benefit DAILY, so needs are more aware to them AND they are dependent on receiving it themselves. (that tends to give you an attitude adjustment REAL FAST) You may need to be the recipient TOMORROW of what is more needed by someone else TODAY. It is called sharing, and as you well remember, (Kindergarten) not all are sharers by nature (actually very few).

Quote:
Can we continue on a path where those who produce the most retirement wealth are asked to give more of it away and those who produce less are making the decisions about the distribution? Food for thought!
This particular thought has dramatically increased ammunition sales (especially amongst folks I know who are Mormon) specifically to protect their FOOD. (literal food)

Yes, I think we will ALL be making adjustments (including protecting our earning / food access channels). I am currently quite involved in helping a few groups 'build' local 'economies' conducive to prolonging retirement / family; quality of life. We have very active and well educated groups doing food / health / business / employment / housing / transportation planning ALL outside, but within view and collaboration of local / regional government. Making great strides with small wins.

I trust you are doing the same and we can learn from each other.

There is quite a new chapter coming in ALL of our lives. IMHO (and not a 'survivalist', just a 'realist'...i.e. I have not more clue than You )
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2011, 02:08 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,078 posts, read 17,664,473 times
Reputation: 7720
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
New Words-Ineptocracy | Points and Figures



The above is a new word making its way into thinking and commentary on our current society. It has application to how we plan our retirement and how government allows us the freedom to plan and succeed as individuals. Will the fruits of individual efforts be tasted by that individual or does it take a system of food distribution voted on by all regardless of how much they grew? Can a society of decreasing producers continue without rethinking its approach. This is meant to be harsh but changing demographics are forcing us to think about much we currently do and can be found in discussions about many topics including retirement. Can we continue on a path where those who produce the most retirement wealth are asked to give more of it away and those who produce less are making the decisions about the distribution? Food for thought!

Does that word describe the election of Republican, corporate toadies put into office by the donations of wealthy "conservatives" who inherited Daddy's money or made their billions off the sweat and labor of their under-paid drones?

Is this unfair "system" you speak of the one which cheats people out of their retirement (see: Wisconsin state employees), would deny them healthcare in the name of a "balanced" budget," seeks to end all kinds of public assistance, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, while giving the super-rich a hefty tax break? Are these people who have never "produced" a single thing other than their own profit the ones you're talking about? Are they the same ones who promote the lie of "trickle down" economics as a panacea for what ails us all, who suggest that tax breaks would give them an incentive to produce more widgets they can't sell because their workers don't have any disposable income, rather than buy a bigger yacht?

Are those who "produce less" and are making the decisions the same people we call VOTERS in a democracy?

What's YOUR solution for this "problem?" Just allow the wealthy to vote? Or, should we just put shoot all the poor people?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2011, 02:16 PM
 
29,779 posts, read 34,867,277 times
Reputation: 11705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boompa View Post
What a bunch of nonsense. Most industrialized countries have government Health Care and government pensions. That relieves the employer of those3 responsibilities and doesn't leave you with nothing when your employer leaves you unemployed a few years before you would have retired.
If that is socialism, so be it. I would rather have that than have the elderly starving by the roadsides. There is a price for living in our society and I, for one, am happy to pay my share
I understand your post but I am to consumed by the Euro zone Debt crisis to respond beyond this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2011, 02:20 PM
 
29,779 posts, read 34,867,277 times
Reputation: 11705
Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit View Post
Does that word describe the election of Republican, corporate toadies put into office by the donations of wealthy "conservatives" who inherited Daddy's money or made their billions off the sweat and labor of their under-paid drones?

Is this unfair "system" you speak of the one which cheats people out of their retirement (see: Wisconsin state employees), would deny them healthcare in the name of a "balanced" budget," seeks to end all kinds of public assistance, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, while giving the super-rich a hefty tax break? Are these people who have never "produced" a single thing other than their own profit the ones you're talking about? Are they the same ones who promote the lie of "trickle down" economics as a panacea for what ails us all, who suggest that tax breaks would give them an incentive to produce more widgets they can't sell because their workers don't have any disposable income, rather than buy a bigger yacht?

Are those who "produce less" and are making the decisions the same people we call VOTERS in a democracy?

What's YOUR solution for this "problem?" Just allow the wealthy to vote? Or, should we just put shoot all the poor people?
Agghhh when you have a society where the number of producers is declining and the number of those who consume beyond their contributions increasing, solutions can be elusive. In the case of Wisconsin you are lumping together the public employees who are producing services etc with those on public assistance who are consuming with minimal production. This drain on public coffers by non producers is putting a strain on the benefits of public service workers who are producing. It is far more than the top one percent who are producers in our society. So at the state and local level which shall it be?

A. Increase taxes on all producers
B. Cut benefits and salaries for public employees to redistribute those funds to those on public assistance
C. Reduce public assistance so it grows at a rate that is sustainable without doing A or B.
D. Keep increasing taxes on the top 25% of producers? That includes a lot of public employees. Especially two earner families.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top