User Tag List

First 2345614 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 190

  1. #31
    Oberon
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    I'm not sure I'd say that's poverty relief or eradication but I know the point you are trying to make.
    Poverty is local inadequacy of resources, right? And everyone tells us that the problem is not a matter of quantity of food/clothing/water/whatever, but rather a matter of uneven distribution. The uneven distribution is the result of selfish, misguided, and/or foolish choices made by individuals in the disposition of resources.

    So if that's the cause of poverty, then obviously poverty could be eradicated by an authoritarian state taking away the individual's freedom to make choices in the disposition of resources.

    Voila... poverty is ended, at least in theory... and at a price I'd be unwilling to pay in any event.

  2. #32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oberon View Post
    Poverty is local inadequacy of resources, right? And everyone tells us that the problem is not a matter of quantity of food/clothing/water/whatever, but rather a matter of uneven distribution. The uneven distribution is the result of selfish, misguided, and/or foolish choices made by individuals in the disposition of resources.

    So if that's the cause of poverty, then obviously poverty could be eradicated by an authoritarian state taking away the individual's freedom to make choices in the disposition of resources.

    Voila... poverty is ended, at least in theory... and at a price I'd be unwilling to pay in any event.
    Yeah, that's pretty much what I'd thought you'd say. I dont agree that its a straight forward trade of poverty vs. freedom as you say.

  3. #33
    Oberon
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    Yeah, that's pretty much what I'd thought you'd say. I dont agree that its a straight forward trade of poverty vs. freedom as you say.
    You think there's only one way to end poverty? I never said that.

    Although I strongly believe that simple redistribution of assets will never get the job done, and here's why: There is an old saying on Wall Street that goes "Money always returns to its rightful owners." Which means that if Peter is rich and Paul is poor, and you take a big wad of Peter's cash and give it to Paul, inevitably after a certain span of time Peter would be rich again and Paul would be poor again.

    The reason for this is because Peter is not rich by chance and neither is Paul poor by chance; their relative wealth is determined by their habits and practices with regard to their resources. Peter will remain rich because he continues to do the things that made him rich. Paul will remain poor because he continues to do the things that made him poor.

    The only way to address this phenomenon is to somehow remove or negate the effects of Paul's choices.

  4. #34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oberon View Post
    You think there's only one way to end poverty? I never said that.

    Although I strongly believe that simple redistribution of assets will never get the job done, and here's why: There is an old saying on Wall Street that goes "Money always returns to its rightful owners." Which means that if Peter is rich and Paul is poor, and you take a big wad of Peter's cash and give it to Paul, inevitably after a certain span of time Peter would be rich again and Paul would be poor again.

    The reason for this is because Peter is not rich by chance and neither is Paul poor by chance; their relative wealth is determined by their habits and practices with regard to their resources. Peter will remain rich because he continues to do the things that made him rich. Paul will remain poor because he continues to do the things that made him poor.

    The only way to address this phenomenon is to somehow remove or negate the effects of Paul's choices.
    No I dont think that, why dont you ask me what I think next time, I didnt say you said that either, I just said that I dont believe the trade of exists which you suggested.

    Its an interesting and complex topic just how class stratification and maldistribution reproduces itself which I dont think can be reduced simply to the habits and culture but it no doubt plays its part.

    It's also a great justification for anyone who would wish to make present or status quo stratification and maldistribution defensible as a reflection of or characterisation of natural society. It's a logical fallacy and has probably been deployed a whole host of times in wildly differing contexts and in entirely different epoches to make each of them defensible from their critics.

  5. #35
    Oberon
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    No I dont think that, why dont you ask me what I think next time, I didnt say you said that either, I just said that I dont believe the trade of exists which you suggested.

    Its an interesting and complex topic just how class stratification and maldistribution reproduces itself which I dont think can be reduced simply to the habits and culture but it no doubt plays its part.

    It's also a great justification for anyone who would wish to make present or status quo stratification and maldistribution defensible as a reflection of or characterisation of natural society. It's a logical fallacy and has probably been deployed a whole host of times in wildly differing contexts and in entirely different epoches to make each of them defensible from their critics.
    It's also a gross generalization, belied by thousands of individual cases of poverty caused by simple bad luck and wealth caused by simple good luck. I wouldn't use an argument like the one I made to defend myself, because I actually have many of the habits of a poor man combined with the good luck of having been blessed with a brain that'll assure me of usually being able to find work. So I'm struggling middle-class, myself.

    What I have attempted to describe is one way (one really rather Draconian way) to end poverty. There are many other ways to address the problem.

    You got any ideas?

  6. #36
    Senior Member durentu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    INTp
    Posts
    413

    Default

    technology cannot solve a social problem. poverty is a symptom of capitalism from the basis of supply and demand. You must always have two parties: one who's got it, and one who doesn't. Buy eliminating poverty, it would eliminate modern economics at its core.

    Poverty is essential to modern economics just as unemployment is essential to the labor force. It cannot be eliminated because it is necessary and mandatory. To eliminate poverty is to eliminate wealth. They are both the same thing.

    There might be a solution within non profit economics which is sort of a anomaly. Trying to determine its minimum and maximum limits as well as who are the property owners and agents in the cash flow etc. My hunch is that the solution to "eliminating poverty" is the combination of non profit economics and ecology. (I'm not talking about socialism at all). But when I think about it, I always have to limit individual freedom in some way. And of course, freedom is indivisible and interdependent. If you limit it in one way, you will limit it in all ways.
    "People often say that this or that person has not yet found himself. But the self is not something one finds; it is something one creates." - Thomas Szasz

  7. #37
    Oberon
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by durentu View Post
    technology cannot solve a social problem. poverty is a symptom of capitalism from the basis of supply and demand. You must always have two parties: one who's got it, and one who doesn't.
    I don't really see how this can be true. If you got two people in a society and one shirt between them, then it's true... one guy can have a shirt and the other one can't.

    But what prevents there from being two shirts?

  8. #38
    Let me count the ways Betty Blue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7W6 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    4,797

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by durentu View Post

    There might be a solution within non profit economics which is sort of a anomaly. Trying to determine its minimum and maximum limits as well as who are the property owners and agents in the cash flow etc. My hunch is that the solution to "eliminating poverty" is the combination of non profit economics and ecology. (I'm not talking about socialism at all). But when I think about it, I always have to limit individual freedom in some way. And of course, freedom is indivisible and interdependent. If you limit it in one way, you will limit it in all ways.
    Haha, the first thing i though when i read this was socialism/marxism. It does lean toward socialist ideals but then socialism has never actually worked in practice...theres always the greedy who take from the needy
    "We knew he was someone who had a tragic flaw, that's where his greatness came from"

  9. #39
    Senior Member InsatiableCuriosity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    699

    Default

    Some more interesting stats on the live Worldometer:

    Worldometers - real time world statistics
    "Study hard what interests you the most in the most undisciplined, irreverent and original manner possible."
    — Richard P. Feynman

    "Never tell a person a thing is impossible. G*d/the Universe may have been waiting all this time for someone ignorant enough of the impossibility to do just that thing."
    author unknown

  10. #40
    Oberon
    Guest

    Default

    I have wondered if there could be a future in non-profit (or not-for-profit) manufacturing... it would look like the old coal-mining operations where there were company towns, company doctors, company stores, and so forth, except it wouldn't be exploitative. The manufacturing operation would exist solely to fund the lives of the workers. You could run it as a 501c3 organization, and distribute any revenue after expenses to the employees.

    This would ensure a poverty-free existence for the company employees and their families... poverty-free in the sense that all involved would have food, shelter, clothing, and medical care at a reasonable standard of living. The relative abundance of pocket money would still be based on the employee's personal choices.

    The management structure of the organization would have to be staffed by salaried management, organization members just like anyone else, and answerable to a board of trustees (preferably also members, if possible).

    It would be like a free-market commune, sustained by commerce but without any shareholders other than the employees themselves.

Similar Threads

  1. The end of innovation?
    By ygolo in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 04-15-2011, 04:39 AM
  2. The end of freedom of speech?
    By Sahara in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 12-29-2009, 03:45 PM
  3. Forget Big Brother: Facebook, Corporations, and the End of Free Speech
    By speculative in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 11-23-2009, 11:40 AM
  4. why is taking semester off the end of the world?
    By prplchknz in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 11-06-2009, 01:53 PM
  5. Man on the Moon: The End of Day (New Kid Cudi Album)
    By metaphours in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-02-2009, 01:59 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO