The world would be more fair if the homeless ruled rather than rich politicians

originally posted by: MsSmith

originally posted by: [post=18084788]arpgme

Interesting


Most politicians were never homeless and endured humiliation and starvation. Maybe if the homeless were in charge they will not turn out the same way because they actually had these experiences rather than philosophizing about it.

Precisely. One would hope someone coming from such a humble background would be more apt to lead the masses. That was part of President Obama's appeal, after all!

originally posted by: FreedomEntered
Most homeless are either alchoholics , ex convicts, mentally ill or drug addicts. So no it wouldn't be a better place if they ruled over others. Most wouldn't even be able to speak sense to others. And probably don't have that much real life experience. Real life experience isn't life on the streets. It would be a complete horror. Hence why they are stuck in the cycle and no one will give them a chance. They need to sort their own issues first and get a place to live.

Some do just this!

Such a narrow minded view. Especially after the last decade, we've seen how easy it truly is to end up homeless and with nothing through no fault of your own. Typecasting every homeless person as an addict, ex-con, or mentally ill is only fueling the notion that they don't deserve even the basic of human rights and perpetuating the myth that they don't deserve our help.

Not a narrow view and not a myth I see them constantly out of their head rambling to themselves on the street. Nothing admirable about that . They should rule over nothing other than their own lives first.

Those who weren't in that position that way. They still don't deserve to rule because they are only humans, Yes humans fall on hard times that doesn't make them potentially better rulers. They may become corrupt as many politicians do.

They are no better than anyone else.

a reply to: arpgme

The key is finding those who are Compassionate and sane

That should have been the title of your thread.

Look at statistics in the western world most people are homeless due to broken relationships, addiction, alchoholism, ex convict, mental illness. Its no laughing matter they need help! But they don't deserve huge responsibility. Until they are fit and well.

And yes I have known homeless people personally and they were totally deranged and messed up from their poor fortune. Years of therapy will sort it. Not privilege. They are capable of being bad as anyone else is and are no angels.

The homeless people that I know personally are that way because they are too lazy to work or can't take time from their drug habits long enough to get a job. They are not "kind" people, they will steal, lie and cheat every time the opportunity arises. Of course, none of their problems are their own fault---someone else made them the way they are---useless in any sense to society beyond serving as an example of How Not To Treat Others.
If you are a kind, gentle, understanding, hard-working person, you won't be homeless because someone out there will give you a place to live. I know a lot of folks who don't have "homes" of their own---as in they don't rent or own their place---but because they contribute to a household, they live with friends or relatives.
This idea of the "noble" homeless is sheer fantasy. I spent 15 years working with Habit for Humanity. I've heard all the stories...and grew to be able to parse them pretty well.

I read threads like this and realize that in fact, there is little hope for the human race.

The "can't we all just get along" crowd fails to realize that, in fact, there must be some "doers" and the entire society can't be "takers".

Once we reach past a tipping point, there won't be enough money to sustain the "takers" and society as we know it will collapse.

Not to nitpick, but politicians represent (or should); they don't rule. Then again oligarchs do rule (or think they should) and do appear to run the politicians, so you may be right. Politicians rule by proxy. So yeah, the real problem is that those elected to office don't really represent all their constituents or their real constituents, just the rich who line their pockets. And that's really got to stop.

a reply to: arpgme

I believe that although the spirit of your thinking on this subject is arrow true, the reality of the situation is more complex.

As a person who has been on the street through no fault of his own, I entirely empathise with your position. However, a generalisation favouring the homeless, is as invalid as the prevailing generalisation, that the best people to elect are monied, soft handed, work shy desk jockeys with six figures or more in the bank. The truth lies somewhere between the two.

In my opinion, ManFromEurope has the right of it here. Although I would say that it would be preferable if the people that run the country are representative of its majority population, in terms of their work history and social status, I also believe that the worst person to lead a nation, is the person who desires to do so. No one who covets such power should ever be allowed to have it, so it follows that only someone who would desire to avoid being in the position of doing that job, should ever be elected to do it.

a reply to: arpgme

they are more likely to be fair and compassionate to others after all of the humiliation, discrimination, and starvation.

Not so

I was very close to being homeless, but for a quirk of fate,some lateral thinking, and some serious life changes I'd be on the streets right now.

Having been so close I got to know many of the homeless around here. Out of necessity, they were greedy, ruthless, openly discriminated against each other, and showed no compassion to each other, never mind the rest of us. Oh sure turn on the sorry face for the public, but behind closed cardboard boxes it's a dog eat dog world.

It's a question of survival, again would I want these people ruling my life after learning that ? I don't think so.

Cody

originally posted by: matadoor
I read threads like this and realize that in fact, there is little hope for the human race.

The "can't we all just get along" crowd fails to realize that, in fact, there must be some "doers" and the entire society can't be "takers".

Once we reach past a tipping point, there won't be enough money to sustain the "takers" and society as we know it will collapse.

If everyone were rich, money would be nothing but a piece of paper or gold and food would have to be rationed just as if everyone were poor.

Something for everyone to think about.

a reply to: TrueBrit

No one who covets such power should ever be allowed to have it, so it follows that only someone who would desire to avoid being in the position of doing that job, should ever be elected to do it.

I entirely, 100% agree with the first part, but the second part makes for quite a conundrum.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: arpgme

"No one who covets such power should ever be allowed to have it, so it follows that only someone who would desire to avoid being in the position of doing that job, should ever be elected to do it. "

Pretty damn smart, how could anyone with a mind this sharp end up on the streets? The way to fix the problem is take the financial incentive out of the equation. Here in the US anyway, I don't know how it is in the UK. We no longer serve in this country as politicians the benefits are incredible. I find it remarkable when they complain they don't make enough money. There was a day when it was an honor to serve your country, and do it for free. Today it's all about money, favors, and power.

a reply to: arpgme

No, if everyone were rich, everyone would be happy.

What you don't realize is, the "value" of anything monetary is based on the good faith of the country that has issued the "currency" being discussed.

If everyone had a Million US Dollars, everyone would have the same buying power, because everyone would "value" the currency based on their expectations and experiences.

But, what about the people who have gone above and beyond to produce something so amazing that everyone buys one? Like maybe IPADS?

Should we punish Apple because everyone loves their product? Should we take all of that money away, because for some perverse reason, they don't "deserve" it? Didn't they invent something so profound that company after company keeps trying to make a better one?

This whole "I didn't get my slice of the pie" garbage is BS, invent something that everyone wants, and trust me, your attitude will change faster than Barack Obama changes his mind.

The only difference between a panhandler and a politician or government type is that if you give the panhandler money it is your choice.It isn't the type of people who rule a country so much as the type of monetary/trade system that tends to influence how fairly wealth is distributed.

It only makes sense that if units of trade are easily to hoard, that they would be hoarded.

Things changed in the past which enable greed, consider hoarding perishable food without refrigeration, kind of a dumb thing to hoard if your hoarding only results in it rotting away....

Technology has a lot to do with the unfair distribution of wealth and resources, and was sold to us as beneficial for the entire human race when in reality it enriches very few at the expense of rest.

a reply to: MyHappyDogShiner

"Technology has a lot to do with the unfair distribution of wealth and resources, and was sold to us as beneficial for the entire human race when in reality it enriches very few at the expense of rest. "

Unfair because you don't have as much? If you had as much, would it then be considered "fair"?

Of course it would.

I get the biggest kick out of people who think that it's their "right" to have all of the wealth evenly distributed so that they can make money and not have to actually work for it.

Get out and invent something so profound that everyone NEEDS one, and your attitude will DRASTICALLY change, no matter what you might say otherwise.

The world would be more fair if the homeless ruled rather than rich politicians

That's a nice soundbite and all ... but it's a broad brush stroke that is inaccurate. Sorry but most homeless folks can't manage their own affairs/finances and a lot have mental health issues. They don't have the education or experience necessary to help run (NOT RULE - NO ONE RULES) the country. And nothing says they wouldn't be corrupt just like the current batch of politicians are.

The fact is that no matter who you put in office, there is a danger of corruption. Always has been. Always will be.

a reply to: arpgme

Homeless people have very very high rates of serious mental health problems and drug abuse. They can't even run their own lives, and you think they should run the world?

a reply to: matadoor

I take your point however nobody needs any of the techno crap that has been pedalled to us over the last few decades.
--------------
For some reason people think they need it - but none of us do.

If you are buying overpriced 'fashionable' stuff then don't complain about those making money from it.

If you don't buy it 'they' don't get rich do they?

No invention ever ,has been 'needed' sure a small number of inventions have helped us but most i would argue most have contributed to the decay of society into what we see today where everybody (who has all these labour saving devices) has no time for friends, family and nature or any of the things that matter most - based on death bed regrets.

To anybody fed up with the current situation stop supporting it daily with your hard earned money.

As an example don't buy the hugely overpriced tickets for any event - guess what - they'll drop the prices if nobody buys them and all the ticket touts would loose money too

a reply to: johnb

Yeah, little inventions like:

The wheel.

The light bulb. Telephones. Computers, like as in how you are able to read and respond to this thread. Power, again, so that you can even communicate on this thread.

How do we feed the world? Fertilizers, without these there wouldn't be enough food to feed the entire human race.

Clothes. You know these might be optional for some, but MANDATORY for others.

Not all "inventions" are technology based, some are as simple as a frisbee or the hola-hoop, both of which made the inventors quite rich and "happy".

a reply to: arpgme

In general . . . you make a good point . . .

Particularly if the abject psychotic were weeded out somehow. LOL.

Humility has a LOT going for it.

Good lord... What a disappointing comments got posted here.

A politician probably received some kind of education, but basically what gets him in office is the about how much money he gets to spend on campaigning to get elected. This isn't the ideal scenario, as the one with the most money gets elected, and that hardly ever is the right man for the job.
It's also stupid to think that a rich individual, has got anymore life experience then any homeless individual.
Living in wealth all of their lives actually might have had them denied many life teachings, leaving them unable to understand what it means, what the poor people, and homeless folks have gone through.

Being homeless in the US must be terrible. However it's often a choice to be homeless, as it's the ultimate freedom, living outside of society.
Another group of people that got homeless, because financial issues, like the banking crisis that left them without a home to stay. These people come from a class of successful citizens, who got victimized by the excessive behavior banks used, to sign up as much loans and mortgages possible, as they enjoy a bonus so much. Even then you should think first, and get a second opinion before you sign up. That signature is your responsibility.

The we've got the addicted homeless, those that aren't capable to manage their lives and don't have any other option. They won't be the ones that you want to be in office. Maybe some day if they solved their issues...
This last group should also be supported by local or federal government, so they can get some help to be treated for mental issues, and get in rehab for example, so they can have a chance to become part of society again.
Many of these people are good people, that ended up with a bad start in life, leaving them unable to manage anything they never learned growing up. Then everybody could fall victim of a live where you only lived making bad choices...
Why ? Because everyone can screw up, but with some help they can get up again, a second chance is as humane and civil it gets, and it's just making me sick that a lot of people don't give a damn... Anyway...
Getting homeless of the streets is something all people think is great. That a reintegration project, will get them to take part of society again, paying taxes, and making money, will benefit them, you, and the country.


Live experience is something you get from facing new challenges, fail and fall down, so you can get back up again stronger, and maybe wiser. Living a homeless life will definitely increase personal experience. Everybody should no what it is to live in poverty for a while, it will most likely make one humble.

For the position in politics...
Come one ? what are you thinking ? A homeless or a politician won't do... Find the best man for the job.

And good luck with all the crap coming your way, when you find out the homeless guy actually is a great guy, and he starts to implement his vision in the region. One that's probably opposite of your an most other Americans ideas.
Or when the politician is actually a heartless dick, that told lies to get more votes, and does the exact opposite of what is said he would do.

Interesting question you got here by the way. I hope my perspective offers another view on the matter.

Peace. Sint