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.
If someone wants to be a slacker, that's fine by me. Just don't ask society to pay the bill.
Let's try again for the third time. You have still not addressed my comment. If you want to live in Bangladesh or Congo, that's fine by me. But in America and other civilized nations that have sufficient resources, people take care of the destitute, as a matter of public policy, and see to it that people do not die in the streets.. Not even the slackers, no matter how ardently one argues that they deserve it.
If money really cured poverty, let us give everyone 22 billion billion quatloos, making them “Set for life,” with more than they can ever spend. What happens if no one bothers to go to work, labor, manufacture, transport, and trade? Civilization collapses.
When no one "needs money," why would anyone trade labor or property for more?
Even the starving children are wealthy!
The madness of money keeps people from achieving prosperity, because wealth is not prosperity.
Prosperity is the production, trade, and enjoyment of surplus usable goods and services. The sum total of all goods and services is dependent upon population (growing, too!), labor multiplication by tooling, and technological advances.
There is no way that any finite money token under the control of governments and banksters can be used to “hold value” for such a dynamic system.
Money is the real reason for poverty. The skim scam artists siphon off a fabulous fortune without ever offering equitable trade in kind. And those in control of it will not relinquish money power to the people.
If money really cured poverty, let us give everyone 22 billion billion quatloos, making them “Set for life,” with more than they can ever spend. What happens if no one bothers to go to work, labor, manufacture, transport, and trade? Civilization collapses.
When no one "needs money," why would anyone trade labor or property for more?
Even the starving children are wealthy!
You're constructing a silly example that completely changes the value of money in order to support your claim that money cannot resolve poverty.
The most common measure of poverty is income, which is of course money. If a family in poverty had one earner making 20k per year and that earner got a new job making 75k per year, congrats they are no longer considered poverty. Money resolved poverty, through a higher paying job.
Nearly every adult raised in the human community has wherewithal to use money to arrange the necessities of life to support himself and his family. So a cash flow generally works to keep someone from slipping under. Sometimes it doesn't, and another social management strategy is necessary to help him. But money usually works, and it doesn't really take a lot of money to ensure the well-being and dignity of the community's lowest members.
You do not measure the quality of your social order by the well-being of those with the most, but those with the least.
Another thing I didn't mention: Of all the benefits that are paid to the marginalized in our country, how much of it stolen right back again by unscrupulous businesses who rent them furniture at double the price, put junk food on the eye-level shelves, and loan them money at 600% interest because legitimate banks won;t lend to them at all, and sell them phones so they can check their Facebook while in the supermarket line.
We could cut in half our entitlement payments, if we could stop our entrepreneurial heroes from stealing it from them
You want words of wisdom, here are the words of wisdom. If you don't want to live in a country where you need to step over beggars in the streets, you ensure that everyone has the resources for a life of dignity without needing to beg for it.
I'd recommend any Western person who wants to see this in reality travel to Egypt. I was shocked... I've spent a lot of time in Mexico, but Egypt makes Mexico look like one of the "haves." Technically it is going by the comparative stats.
If someone wants to be a slacker, that's fine by me. Just don't ask society to pay the bill.
What if they can't work? Are we really to say that quadriplegics and children should just die because they can't get jobs? Maybe that isn't what you meant, but could you at least clarify how you draw the line between slackers and legitimately needy people?
I am sincerely curious, I am not trying to attack. Whenever people make this argument, I wonder if they are trying to say that the line has been drawn in the wrong place, or is it that there should be no line? And if it is the former, then instead of simply saying you don't like the current criteria for benefits, why don't you tell us what you think the criteria ought to be?
The key to freedom and prosperity is education. That could also be education for a career or to learn a marketable skill. Many skills and starts in higher education degrees can be obtained cheaply at Community Colleges where low income people can get tuition and books paid for by Pell Grants. If your skill becomes obsolete learn a new one.
To those holding up Scandinavia as a wonderful socialist example--- Recently in Sweden due to a huge influx of 163,000 unskilled persons now on welfare from the Middle East and Africa. Scandinavia is having a huge problem with unemployed roving rapist gangs and violent crime https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...-sweden-finds/
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.