Certainly poverty isn't helped when 2% of the global population owns half of the world's wealth.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6211250.stm

Take a leaf out of the 'Greek Book of Really Ace Politics'

Ancient Greece was considered to be one of the best examples of Democracy. Wait most people fail to tell you was that it was a democracy built upon slavery. If you were a slave, you didn't get paid and didn't vote. You did however have a decent 'welfare' system; you got fed, watered and sheltered and a job for life.

Personally, I think it's a great idea, get all those lazy good-for-nothings off their backsides and get cleaning the streets and doing the crappy jobs that no-one wants to do.

As for me, I'm poor. So how can I have my opinion whilst being one of the poor? Easy. I was in the Military and made the Penultimate Sacrifice. I'm not dead, but I'm no longer able to work due to injury etc... etc... They treat us living/disabled War Veterans like dirt here in the UK, but at least I've got a house, a car, the beautiful countryside of the English/Scottish border, a great village pub and enough money to get by on etc...

heheh, I've done my bit for Queen and Country (well, Tony B.Liar anyway), so I can now sit here and preach to everyone else  

I see there's still no definition here of what poverty is so we all know we're talking about the same thing. I think its pretty safe to say though, that if you have food, water and a place to live, you are not in poverty.

well, we've had a few. my point of view about definitions and words in general is that their meaning comes from their use, especially when you're talking about defining a concept for the sake of answering a question.

what is the goal behind defining poverty? to answer or better answer the question, are the poor of our developed and post-industrial societies receiving enough social support? do they deserve such support, and from whom should they get it if they do? what about the poor of other societies?



if you have and are likely to continue having...

oh I have seen poverty here but from what I see its cause of uncaring adults. Once of my best friends had to sell drugs for his brothers and sisters to eat. Why? His mother was a drug addict and didn t care at the time. He later started a business and takes care of his neices and nephews cause their parents are drug addicts. He has spent almost 100k to help is family. Ya I have seen poverty in America it sucks but its cause by peoples choices.

Unforutnately we have too many moochers to help everyone, and even then some would still fall through cracks.

Yeah 12 peeps cramed into an apartment is illegal and they should be evicted.



I do vote and it does count thank you sir! I m sorry you can t seem to see that.

nope I don t live lavishly but I want to! One of these days I will most likely get there. Ahhh America! Its a land where I don t have to make lots of money to have lots of money!

That might work for you to discribe me. But "pagan" might work better and not one of those cute pagans either. I am a decentant head hunters! Nor do I think the practice is wrong.   Even if I wouldn t want to try to make it legal again!


But I wouldn't call myself a throw back no. A throw back prolly would be too violent to survive modern society. I do much better than survive.

That's basically true in any country... probably even more so in China atm since the economy there is exploding.

[quote]yes, it is like a game: it's composed of skill and chance. you're not "playing" a lotto because the probability aspect of it happened before you were born. now you're just doing what you need to do to collect your winnings. you might work hard for what you have, but if you take a 1,000-person cross section of people who're all working equally as hard (especially if you include people outside of industrialized countries), most of them won't have nearly as much to show for their work.[quote]

though what I am talking about American oppertunaty here. Is it harder for someone to gain wealth if they come from a bad family? Yes... but ultimately a person here can get out of that state if they make an effort. Here most of the problem is about parents keeping their kids down.... not the state.



I d rather do Micro loans than welfare. This way people would learn more about the system and would be more able to use it better. Should we have safty nets? Yeah I think so, but I also believe when people think that you owe it to them, it hurts their ablity to get out of the situation. I d rather give safty nets to people who took a chance rather then give free health care to a heroin addict.

Would it be perfect? No, but I dont look for perfection.

But to answer your question I don t think you are saying I don t deserve what I have.
But I think that more welfare isn t what we need. I think it should not come from tax dollars, except in emergancies of a large scale.



yeah I like a good arguement and usually will just walk away before it gets to heated.




yeah the moochers are a small minorty but the studies that show that also don t show how much the moochers cost. Drug addicts cost tons of cash and they have a lot of programs. I.V. drug users can qualify for free health coverage that most people cant. If someone wanted to help them out of their pocket more power to 'em. But I d just let them die.



yeah I perfer to use what I experience more than studies when it comes to social issues.

My mother came from one of the bad families, my bio grand father was bi-polar and drank heavily. Did she get out of it... yes not because of chance but because of HER choices.

I myself have mild Cerebal-palsy yet I can work circles around most people. ( I make money in a labor intensive way).

In the USA its your choices that make you poor when you are an adult.

This is idiotic.

Rights exist for those with the power to claim and enforce those rights. No power, no rights. That is all. You don't have power, you don't know how to get power? TFB.

Fairness? What do the poor do in exchange for the value of the health care and other benefits they believe they are entitled to? Doctors need to eat too, and their drugs and medical equipment don't manufacture themselves. Fairness would require an equal exchange - so if you only earn a pittance, and put a portion of that pittance toward health care, then you can expect pitiful health care.

The rich do not get rich by "exploiting the poor" - they get rich by identifying and exploiting NEEDS and WANTS. The poor just have a harder time meeting their needs and wants than richer folks, but the specific products they cost the same for rich or poor. You want more stuff? Make more money. If you can't do it in this lifetime, raise your kids well so that they can make it in theirs. If you don't make it, and you sacrifice everything and they still don't make it, you fail. TFB.

There is the illusion that civilization has made it possible for us all to live together happily and prosperously. The reality is the same as before civilization: survival is paramount, and every human being is in a life-or-death competition with every other human being for resources. You can survive without being aware of your stepping on others, but if you look hard enough you'll see that your very survival depends on exploitation, or at the least exclusion, of others.

well, thanks for introducing yourself so warmly.



there are plenty of people out there doing a whole lot more than survival. and energy conservation is just as important an aspect of survival as resource aquisition, so tell me, all those rich folk out there are just working so hard for their survival? where did you say the illusions in society are?



so what do you think those of us preaching progress are trying to do? aquire the power. duh. if you think that's idiotic, then your chains must be pretty nicely padded.

there are plenty of people out there doing a whole lot more than survival. and energy conservation is just as important an aspect of survival as resource aquisition, so tell me, all those rich folk out there are just working so hard for their survival? where did you say the illusions in society are?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Energy is a resource. You can conserve and compete at the same time, that's fine and an important aspect.

The rich - every penny they make that they don't spend right off - where do you think it goes? Probably to the bank, or a trust fund, for the time it's there to be lent out to others, and in time be inherited by their descendants, so they won't have to be poor and a drain on society. It's a smart, forward-looking move, I think.

The illusion is that we're fundamentally different or better than our pre-civilized ancestors. I say we're the same - products and responders to scarcity. It's real nice to have a lot of $$$ as padding between oneself and starvtion.

One more thing though, I think that the primary responsibility for ending poverty lies with the poor, but that society as a whole would greatly benefit by assisting people in getting out of poverty. More high-wage-earners means more tax income, and a more fair distribution of the tax burden. One big problem the rich have with the system is that they are supposed to pay a huge amount in taxes, when they don't really need most of the services government provides, other than the military. Why should they have to be saints? But if they and society as a whole helped everyone to succeed, there'd be less to complain about.

The key I think would be to fund people's efforts to improve themselves, with education and training, and "bridge" employment - not just their mere survival, which doesn't benefit society.