The Real Reason Poverty Exists

a reply to: gosseyn

Big corporations have hijacked governments, pushing for certain laws, so yes it is robbery and they are forcing people to function the way they want. Your vision of those matters is very short.

For example?

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

How private banks have hijacked money creation for example.

a reply to: Puppylove
So what's your solution then, communism?
I'm self employed and worked damn hard to get where I am today, does your utopian world reward hard work?
So yeah instead of whining tell us your solution please.
Would we still have a token of currency?
How would I be paid by others for my work, potatoes?

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Examples:

EBT cards are accepted in far more places than in the past.
The Federal Reserve and fractional reserve banking practices.
Obamacare in which insurance companies had a minimum payout regardless if anyone bought a policy on the exchanges.

originally posted by: Ahabstar
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Examples:

EBT cards are accepted in far more places than in the past.
The Federal Reserve and fractional reserve banking practices.
Obamacare in which insurance companies had a minimum payout regardless if anyone bought a policy on the exchanges.

Those are socioeconomic interventionist policies which openly and unapologetically sabotage the operation of the free market.

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: Ahabstar
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Examples:

EBT cards are accepted in far more places than in the past.
The Federal Reserve and fractional reserve banking practices.
Obamacare in which insurance companies had a minimum payout regardless if anyone bought a policy on the exchanges.

Those are socioeconomic interventionist policies which openly and unapologetically sabotage the operation of the free market.

In a free market the government is just another commodity to buy, just another asset to secure.

a reply to: Puppylove

Poverty exists because of greed (materialism). You should quit your job and head into the back country tomorrow, I imagine you can scavenge for all that you need.

originally posted by: mikegrouchy
What is the purpose of a financial penalty.
I suggest that it is to teach a lesson.

What are we learning, then, in these economic times?

• That the money masters have to keep us poor, or military enlistment dries up.
• That we are 1000 times more productive per person than the 20's, but can't afford to buy a house without a loan.
• That all scarcity in the modern world is by design, to keep demand high.

Poverty is proof of corruption in high places

Mike Grouchy

What? A 1000x's? Lol

originally posted by: gosseyn

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: Ahabstar
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Examples:

EBT cards are accepted in far more places than in the past.
The Federal Reserve and fractional reserve banking practices.
Obamacare in which insurance companies had a minimum payout regardless if anyone bought a policy on the exchanges.

Those are socioeconomic interventionist policies which openly and unapologetically sabotage the operation of the free market.

In a free market the government is just another commodity to buy, just another asset to secure.

I think we are making progress here.

Government is indeed always the most susceptible institution to corruption irrespective of economic system.

The only way to restrain its ill effects is to constrain its authority.

Take a good look at what you think poverty is. A visit to a 3rd world country will really open your eyes. Barely any food, no clean water, dirt floors, living in shacks, no healthcare to speak of, no education.... that's poverty. Americans living in their HUD homes/apts with HDTV's and iPhones and hundreds of dollars in food stamps, free education, transportation to that education, and free breakfast/lunch at said education... it's hard to convince me that's poverty.

Poverty is a relative term. Here in the US, our poor have color TVs and air conditioning. They are given food stamps, health care and housing. Our welfare system has become a way of life for many and recipients learn to game the system from the time they're born. And yes, there are those who genuinely deserve help like the mentally ill and drug dependant.

Back 40 years ago, I was going to school and working as a janitor. My wife was going to school full time and working as a waitress to make the ends meet. We were paying tuition and living on a very tight budget. We ate beans and hot dogs until they ran out of our ears. We never expected any help or assistance from anyone.

Poverty is the lack of ambition and expectation of someone else working for my living. It is not taking the responsibility for myself.

Another reason is economics. Why should a welfare recipient work for minimum wage and give up $60K in benefits and food stamps. It is a true recipient class created by the government.

a reply to: grainofsand

Basic food, Basic shelter, healthcare, basic communications, basic clothes and basic transportation need to be universal, everything else is a luxury, and that's what working should be for. Get rid of college and degrees. Make education to do a job part of the job. If corporations want specialists, they should pick from their pool of workers a gogetter and pay for them to be apprenticed to learn those skills.

Laboratories and libraries should be public access, with schools and programs that teach sciences to those who are interested.

We don't need everyone working 40+ hours plus a week, it's simply unnecessary these days and becoming more unnecessary everyday. We keep trying to force old methodologies to work when the truth is we don't have the infrastructure to support those old ways. If people had the basic necessities supplied, but needed to work to get apps beyond basic communications, to get luxury foods (basic nutritional foods is what would be provided free), a luxury vehicle, a bed better than a basic mattress, television, luxury clothes, video games, jewelry, etc, believe me people would still work.

Difference they'd be working for things they want, not need. As such, you'd have a world of part timers, and a few that really need ALL the toys still working full time. We'd have the proper size work force, and remove debt from unnecessary schooling in the process. People interesting in advancing science, or trying to find the next big luxury could work part time and still afford to pursue the advancement of society.

originally posted by: jjkenobi
Take a good look at what you think poverty is. A visit to a 3rd world country will really open your eyes. Barely any food, no clean water, dirt floors, living in shacks, no healthcare to speak of, no education.... that's poverty. Americans living in their HUD homes/apts with HDTV's and iPhones and hundreds of dollars in food stamps, free education, transportation to that education, and free breakfast/lunch at said education... it's hard to convince me that's poverty.

It is all relative. I've been to third world countries and seen true poverty. It is an eye opening experience. No one who has been to a favela, etc can say America has a poverty problem with a straight face.

Poor in America live better than many of the middle and upper classes did a generation ago.

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: gosseyn

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: Ahabstar
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Examples:

EBT cards are accepted in far more places than in the past.
The Federal Reserve and fractional reserve banking practices.
Obamacare in which insurance companies had a minimum payout regardless if anyone bought a policy on the exchanges.

Those are socioeconomic interventionist policies which openly and unapologetically sabotage the operation of the free market.

In a free market the government is just another commodity to buy, just another asset to secure.

I think we are making progress here.

Government is indeed always the most susceptible institution to corruption irrespective of economic system.

The only way to restrain its ill effects is to constrain its authority.

There is this definition of government formulated by Ibn Kaldun centuries ago : "a government is an institution which prevents injustice other than such as it commits itself". If I had to choose, I would choose a world ran by governments rather than by corporations obsessed by making profits. But my ideal world is a world ran by neither of them.

a reply to: Edumakated

You and others like you are under the delusion that such places aren't included when poverty is mentioned. We have in this world the resources and workforce necessary to provide basics for everyone while still incentivizing enough people to work to keep this maintained.

Can the "bootstrappers" just give it up, I'll recap AGAIN:

The "Owners of Capital" want wage slaves DEAD before turning 60. Best case scenario for them, is for someone to work 60+ hour work weeks from ages 16-60, put all of their money into a 401K, cars & home mortgage, neglecting to go to the doctor for decades and then suddenly drop dead of a heart attack; all before they can drain their 401K's and start using earned social security & medicare benefits.

Due to the way our current economic system works, we CLEARLY have too many people being born and not enough desire on the behalf of the "owners of capital" to employ them for the sake of having a stable and safe civilization. In the United States, for example, its clear that the "owners of capital" have chosen NOT to employ people on a large scale, preferring "tent cities" and "jailing the homeless", INSTEAD of providing more "make-work employment" arrangements.

Up to the 1940 a person could get just about any job with an 8th grade education, but today you need a BA or Masters for entry level. Why?

Because the government & big business figured out a long time ago that populations would certainly increase over time, but due to technology advancements, the availability of jobs would not expand to meet that population growth. There is a DEFINITE reason they don’t want people dropping out of high school and then at the same time, encourage those same high school graduates to attend junior college, then a 4 year university and finally a Masters degree or PhD. Government strong-arms this concept because it DECREASES the amount of people looking for full-time employment at the SAME TIME, chasing after jobs in a market that CANNOT provide employment for everyone whom is looking, able to perform, qualified for and willing to work.

Look at it this way, when people could get a job with an 8th grade education, they went out and did it as soon as possible (opportunity cost). Then jobs got scarcer and the minimum requirement became a high school diploma, adding 4 more years of people NOT Looking for jobs within their cohort. Then jobs got even scarcer and the minimum became a 2 or 4 year college degree, adding an additional 2-4 years of people NOT looking for jobs within their cohort. Now jobs are really scarce and may require a Masters or PHD, adding an additional 2-7 years of people NOT looking for jobs within their cohort. Basically due to the way the economy has been structured TODAY, we are looking at young people within their cohort whom are NOT looking for full-time, career type, employment for 4-15 YEARS, beyond K-12, all while they finish more school!

This has been done ON PURPOSE, to keep the number people seeking employment lower. In 1920 after 8th grade everyone who was able, went out to look for work and typically found it. That’s simply NOT possible today under any circumstances. Easily accessed welfare will soon add another 1-3 years of people within a cohort, to those “not seeking employment”. Note this will NOT be to the specific detriment of society, but as a means to continue to mask the illusion that jobs and upward mobility are still available. So, if someone gets a graduate degree and collects 1-3 years of welfare on top of than, that’s ONE less person competing for scarce jobs. The extra years of welfare are then acting in the same way to the larger economy, as the previously increased minimum education levels for employment. The real goal is decreasing the number of able-bodied applicants out on the job market at the same time, but also not decreasing the supply of "potential workers" who's mere existence drive wages down for EVERYBODY. Keep in mind this cohort of people "not pursuing full-time employment" also includes those in Prison, Government pensioners/SSI and the disabled on government assistance. The reality is if everyone needed to go out and “get a job” or “start their own business” TODAY, as many “capitalists” and "entrepreneurs" suggest these days, we would ALL be making 0.25 cents a day. THIS RACE TO THE BOTTOM EFFECTS THE SELF EMPLOYED WAGES AS WELL.

The “owners of capital” have already decided, FOR US REGULAR PEOPLE, that there are going to be LESS jobs available in the NEAR future, due to increased automation and modern corporate labor, cost-cutting, strategies. These measures eventually will affect and include ALL contract work, ALL self-employment opportunities and ALL small businesses, NOT JUST payroll laborers. Its easier to “pay less” or “nothing at all” to contracted or indentured “labor” when there is another willing laborer/slave, waiting in the wings, to do the work for less or nothing at all. In the past when there wasn’t enough money to go around to pay both wages & PROFITS, the “owners of capital” simply brought in more indentured servant immigrants (Irish, Italians, Chinese, etc) or flat out used slave labor (Blacks, Native Americans, domestic prisoners, POW’s, etc). The only difference between now and then is the “owners of capital” can’t LEGALLY have slaves or indentured servants. The mechanisms today that replaces slaves and indentured servants are the following: longer than needed formal education for basic employment, off-shoring of labor, forced retirement, prisoners and welfare

The largest “recorded” wage increase to happen in history, for non-land owing, wage-laborers, post the introduction of fiat currency, was after the black death pandemic, in the 14th century, especially in post-pandemic England

But, how was that possible?

Because “the owners of capital”, post the black-death-pandemic, still needed wage-laborers, but there was a HUGE shortage of able bodied people. So, in order for ANY work to get done, they had to pay the peasants and other undesirables, more money, SIGNIFICANTLY MORE. This principle is still at work today, when you take the time to recognize that sizable portions of the population are actively discouraged from participating in the full-time labor market. This is easily done, by throwing people in prison, forcing them to attend formal school longer and allowing more people to claim themselves as disabled or collect long/short term welfare

After the Black Death ran its course, in the 14th century, a Peasants Revolt was triggered by the "Statute of Labourers 1351". By 1381, the sustained wage growth for non-land owing, wage-laborers was rising so quickly that the English parliament, a few decades post the Black-Death, under King Edward III, introduced the "Statute of Labourers 1351". This statute was used by the "Owners of Capital", as an artificial means to drive down the wages of non-land owning peasants. Despite market conditions signalling the need for increased wages

The Statute of Laborers; 1351 ("Statutes of the Realm," vol. i. p. 307.)

Think about that for a minute, the MARKET signaled that wages should have been higher, due to actual labor shortages caused by the Black Death, but the “owners of capital” still didn't want to pay it, so they wrote a law saying why they didn't have to conform to demands of the market. That's where we are today, a form of Neo-feudalism, driven by Fascist ideology and practices. Remember the USA a former "slave owning nation", that fought "tooth & nail" to maintain the legal right to own slaves; even turning indentured servants, whom by contract, were set to be released in 7 years, into indefinite slaves through legal loopholes

Our society cannot function smoothly without the working classes. Which means we are going to have to raise the minimum wage to sustain and support families.

Don't worry greedy people. They will still be poor, but they will be able to pay the monthly bills and take the kids for movies and pizza once in a while, and have a car that doesn't break down once a month. They can't do that now.

Kind of irks some of you doesn't it?

RAISE THE MINIMUM WAGE

a reply to: boohoo
Interesting, so I ask you the same as I ask the OP, what's your suggested solution?

originally posted by: gosseyn

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: gosseyn

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: Ahabstar
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Examples:

EBT cards are accepted in far more places than in the past.
The Federal Reserve and fractional reserve banking practices.
Obamacare in which insurance companies had a minimum payout regardless if anyone bought a policy on the exchanges.

Those are socioeconomic interventionist policies which openly and unapologetically sabotage the operation of the free market.

In a free market the government is just another commodity to buy, just another asset to secure.

I think we are making progress here.

Government is indeed always the most susceptible institution to corruption irrespective of economic system.

The only way to restrain its ill effects is to constrain its authority.

There is this definition of government formulated by Ibn Kaldun centuries ago : "a government is an institution which prevents injustice other than such as it commits itself". If I had to choose, I would choose a world ran by governments rather than by corporations obsessed by making profits. But my ideal world is a world ran by neither of them.

I like that quote. It reflects both the confidence we must have in some government and a warning against awarding it any measure of faith.

If corporations ran the world, they would be governments.

originally posted by: raypsi13

originally posted by: mobiusmale
And just how is it that people would get themselves into a financial position whereby they could elect to work, or not work?

.

Try getting a job when the Chinese put you out of business.
Or when the Saudi's crash the price of Oil and put you out of work in the oil fields.

So, just elect Donald Trump...problem solved.