It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why Can't American Socialists Come up with a Plan to End Poverty

page: 6
27
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 05:10 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok Although your right in principle that they should have been left to fail if they had been left to fail. We would still be suffering a worse crisis than the Great Depression. Millions of people would have lost savings and their homes, governments did what had to be done to avert a worse crisis




posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 06:50 AM
link   
xuen, I have just read through your entire thread here.

I, like others, am pleasantly surprised, and your plan is an excellent starting point.
I admit I didn't "trust" your offer to take the other side -- saw it as some kind of smug trap. My apologies for expecting that you were just trying to set up people.

I won't repeat all of the points and data - I've distributed my stars to those who have already stated and pointed out my responses.

I'm wary, but impressed by what seems to be a genuine attempt to reach across the aisle. Want to thank you.
It's a beginning!



Oh - one other thing, not sure if you mentioned it, but - there should be a cap on wealth, with any overages contributing to the pool of money that is distributed in this 25k guarantee.... and off-shoring funds for purposes of tax evasion should become a felony punishable with charges of treason, overseen by interpol. I would add that in to my first draft addendum to your plan.



Another idea that has flitted between my ears is a clean start for debtors. Erase all debt. They used to do this, you know. Jubilee years - everyone's debts were forgiven and everyone got another chance to begin again.


edit on 1/16/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 09:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
a reply to: crazyewok Although your right in principle that they should have been left to fail if they had been left to fail. We would still be suffering a worse crisis than the Great Depression. Millions of people would have lost savings and their homes, governments did what had to be done to avert a worse crisis


But now the bankers have learned that they are untouchable and that they can gamble without consequences.

Some times the best way to learn is through pain.

I would have just let it all fail. But forbid that debts can be brought or transferred. That way millions may have lost savings with banks going bang but million more would have seen debts and mortgages disappear.

Basically started a fresh slate.



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 09:41 AM
link   
Capitalism is not why people are poor.

It is lazy people with 0 work ethic.. families absent fathers... moral decline.

It has everything to do with the individual, with a touch of corruption at the highest levels.



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 09:47 AM
link   
a reply to: LeoStarchild


Capitalism is not why people are poor.

It is lazy people with 0 work ethic.. families absent fathers... moral decline.

It has everything to do with the individual, with a touch of corruption at the highest levels.


Wow. Yeah - I see. Sorry you see things that way.



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 09:48 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

To begin with, the fact that government and people are only considered in this plan, I suppose business and the financial industry would have a problem with it.

Business and the financial industry are the butt of the problem as they are in the wealth harvesting business and produce nothing of any real and actual substance other than profit.

Living space needs to be addressed also, and some of the deprivatory aspects the of ownership of some other things by legal fictions, non-living entities (legal constructs, theoretical entities) passing themselves off as being entitled to rights and consideration over real people.

Another missed detail is that companies may not participate without the potential for more than a certain amount of profit, like the whiny rich #s in Atlas Shrugged. Just have a required term of national service for EVERYONE without exceptions or waivers for anyone unless they are completely unable to work doing anything,which would put people to work procuring resources like gas and raw materials instead of send them to war.

Somehow the work has to get done by somebody and people probably wouldn't have too much of a problem working a part time or even seasonal job toward the greater good in exchange for something more semblant of security and predictability without the stock markets and other casino bank type institutions storing what everyone needs in warehouses while they wait for the price to come up before they sell it.

This is all ours.
edit on 16-1-2016 by MyHappyDogShiner because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-1-2016 by MyHappyDogShiner because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 09:50 AM
link   
a reply to: woodwardjnr

What a lot of people don't know is that there was an equally deep stock market crash just decades earlier, prior to the Depression. Government at that time decided that it was not their place to intervene despite all the chaos created, including lots jobs, etc., and lo and behold, the fortunes of the economy and almost all of those impacted had pretty much rebounded within 18 months.

In fact, the crash of '29 was showing signs of reversing itself in the economy too, but then the government passed Smoot Hawley and after that the bottom really fell out. It was interventionism that really screwed us more than anything.



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 09:50 AM
link   
Their plan has always been to kill all the rich people, then the poor won't have anyone to compare to.
Then they kill all the intellectuals so nobody can tell them they are poor.
edit on 16-1-2016 by TinfoilTP because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Reality is a hard pill to swallow


You have it out for me this morning! I enjoy the skirmish.



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 10:21 AM
link   
Socialism is a failure world wide. Has been for years. Why expect those claiming to be socialist fix anything? They want the government to run everything, and be in control of our every move. But people are more independent and do not want what the government is offering as a whole. IMO socialism is for lazy people that do not have any drive in themselves to succeed.



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 10:26 AM
link   
a reply to: LeoStarchild

You have it out for me this morning!


Never even heard of you before. I'm just talking about child development (neonatal through 25 years).
You are reflecting on how you felt before you were a parent (it changes your life forever), and taking it upon yourself to judge the "kids" (as you call them) as beneath you.

I am able (via experience as a kid, as a new parent, and as a parent of adults) to reflect back further. I also know my stuff about brain development. But, you go ahead, and laugh at it -- that's what kids do.....dismiss their elders. I am able also to provide you with assistance (via an education on top of real-life experience), and some footing for your next 20 years. Buckle up.....



Well-done, you! Still in adolescent mode......now with more responsibility.

Twentysome years ago, when I had little kids in tow, a wise grandma said to me on our way in to dance class while she was smiling down at them:

"Be glad you know where they are. In ten more years, you might not have that luxury."




edit on 1/16/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)


HMMMMmmm. maybe I'm in the wrong room at the moment.

yeah - thought we were still in the Kids Say the Darnedest Things thread. Anyway - I'm going to let this stand as tribute to the youngsters who are paying attention and are not as ignorant as you all like to think.


edit on 1/16/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 10:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Ceeker63


Socialism is a failure world wide. Has been for years.

HmmmmmmmmmNO, not really.

It is quite the success in the Western countries that practice Democratic Socialism.

You're confusing it with communism and dictatorship. Two very different things.



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 11:18 AM
link   
a reply to: LeoStarchild youcertainly got the right ameritude as the freedom kids would sing



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 11:26 AM
link   
That's cute but i'm just using common sense.. a trait long forgotten in these days.

Passing off your ignorance as intellect is humorous.


ATS.. short for Ignorance in Denial.
edit on 16-1-2016 by LeoStarchild because: (no reason given)


Here's to your Freedom kids..


edit on 16-1-2016 by LeoStarchild because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-1-2016 by LeoStarchild because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 11:30 AM
link   
a reply to: LeoStarchild and blame the poor isn't the height of ignorance?



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: woodwardjnr

Blame the poor? You mean the people who just don't want to work?

The top 1% aren't left out trust me..

The word poor is legitimate in some parts.. but the good lot of them are just lazy.



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 12:22 PM
link   
NVM
edit on 16-1-2016 by AboveBoard because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 02:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Ceeker63


Socialism is a failure world wide. Has been for years.

HmmmmmmmmmNO, not really.

It is quite the success in the Western countries that practice Democratic Socialism.

You're confusing it with communism and dictatorship. Two very different things.

They're also conveniently ignoring the constant "once in a lifetime" crashes caused by capitalism. Like the 1987 Black Friday crash, the "Dot.com" crash of 2000-2001, and the 2008 crash & foreclosure crisis. All of these have happened in my lifetime and have wiped out a generation of wealth. And these are just the cases in America.

Then there's the entire concept that in capitalism, 5 people in Switzerland can own the rights to the precious stones in a different country. And those 5 people and their fellow associates will be the ones to profit from those stones. Yet the people in those countries, like Zimbabwe, the DR Congo, & South Africa, will still make crap wages & have to fight just to get basic labor rights.

But in socialism, those precious stones would be owned by the community & the community members would be the ones who profit from the exploitation of those stones. Private & foreign investment could still exist but the citizens would would their fair share, too. Introducing socialist policies into poor countries that mainly export raw materials would be one of the quickest ways to reduce poverty in those places. Instead, capitalist trade organizations and companies fight those poor people in order to keep labor costs low (which literally means they fight to keep low wages & low worker benefits and protections there).



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 03:12 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen




Why is it that the American Socialists running for President can't come up with a plan to end poverty


In short, because it is America. Attempting to compare the US to a small Scandinavian country is absurd, especially given that the geography, population, neighbours, politics, history, and existing infastructure are completely different. To throw all that under the bus to achieve some ideal like "income equality" or "Nordic model", thereby attempting to shift the world to some conceptual model of it, will only end in disaster.



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 04:03 PM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

To assign the blame for those crashes to capitalism alone ignores the complicity of government intervention in creating and sustaining bubbles in a vain attempt to avert disaster and economic pain all while those at the top pay to keep feeding off the bubble themselves.

How do you think government gets richer?



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join