 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Poverty in the USA
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Dickey Date: 17 Jun 07 - 08:52 AM Words of wisdom by Kipp: "If you give someone a fish they eat for a day , If you teach them to fish they eat for a life time and then make they can teach someone else to fish" You others who are so busy trying to prove that I am some sort of enemy should spend your time and animosity trying to figure out the root causes of poverty and what can be done about them rather than persue your class warfare agenda. Yes there are some Boss Hoggs out there feeding on poor people. Is it too much trouble to sort them out? Do the Unions care? I think the unions see a corporation as a target and whip up controversy between the company and the workers for their personl gain. What has this done to Detroit? It is the most crime ridden country in the US. Good job Unions. You bled that one to death. Toyota will soon be #1. Will they be the next target? United Auto Workers President Ron Gettelfinger says his union is still interested in helping to organize workers at Toyota's U.S. facilities, despite having been unsuccessful so far. In fact, he said he wants to help the world's No. 2 automaker "continue to be a success." Uh, oh! It's no wonder that Toyota isn't exactly jumping for joy at the prospects. They've done just fine without the UAW, and probably don't need the UAW to come to its "rescue." Consider what has befallen General Motors, Ford and Chrysler the past few years. The UAW has certainly helped them continue to be successful, hasn't it? And thanks to the union, GM has given its workers more than $73 billion in benefits over the past 10 years, according to a Newsweek article. Which in turn means has meant $1,200 of every car GM sells goes toward health care costs. In contrast, Toyota's health care costs are about $200 per car. http://www.djournal.com/pages/story.asp?ID=239002&pub=1&div=News Yeah, I got a problem with overhead when it is totally wasted. It is another case of "You people are not capable of surviving in this world without us" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: AWG Date: 17 Jun 07 - 08:13 AM Mick, I never said anything about being 'pro management'. I'm only pro 'companies that treat their employees fairly'. Those companies don't need a union, and as the number of these companies increases, unions will only be able to cling to the companies they already have. The numbers will not decrease, only as a percentage of the entire work force, as the work force grows. Eventually, maybe, unions will be something we read about in the history books. (we can only hope). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Bobert Date: 16 Jun 07 - 06:55 PM Oh, what the hey... 1100... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Big Mick Date: 16 Jun 07 - 03:20 PM Janie, Evolutionary processes are very hard to predict, because they will respond to what is presented as an obstacle to survival. Hence, the labor movement will be a result of their own activities, the political process, and happenings around the world. What I can say is this. Due to globalization of business, all that is old will become new. The IWW (Wobblies) were about a century ahead of their time. In those days, communications and transportation being what they were, the idea of an employer that was abusing his workers in Iowa having a problem with Unions as a result, in Romania, just wasn't feasible. But today that is the case. A good guess as to where labor will head will be towards a truly international model. We see a lot of this already. I don't see the USA unions merging with others in other countries soon, as the US labor unions are all independent of government control other than the laws they operate under. Many union in other countries function as an arm of government. But I believe that workers around the world will unite more and more, and the labor movement will be the impetus behind that. More later, Mick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Janie Date: 16 Jun 07 - 12:44 AM Mick, I would be interested to know what your ponderings have been regarding labor in the USA and globalization. Economic development has to figure in to any systemic approaches to remedy poverty in this country. Incidentally, I'm headed out on a family vacation in the morning, compliments of my parents and sister. I don't think I'll be on-line much for the next week. I'll be interested to see what y'all come up with when I return. Janie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Big Mick Date: 15 Jun 07 - 09:33 PM ***CHUCKLE*** Typical academic. AWG's response to my arguments is that I am so biased that I can't be taken seriously. I suppose that I could say the same of you. You are so pro management that you can't possibly be unbiased. Pretty weak, Prof. What really bothers you is that I won't let you just pass off perceptual biases that have been used against the unions by management for a long time. One of the reasons I win so many union organizing elections is that I inoculate the workers against the half truths, misperceptions, and outright lies used by management consultants to get workers to vote against there own self interests. I let them know early on what they will hear, and tell them the truth of it. I don't seek to shield them from the facts about what is wrong with labor. I let them see that when one balances the plus' and the minus', they are always better off with a voice in the workplace. And try as you might to convince folks that we are a dying breed, you should realize that our demise has been proclaimed many times. But a righteous ideal cannot be killed. Dickey, you have a problem with overhead? What the hell kind of capitalist are you? Or is overhead a bad thing only when it comes to unions? Try as you might, you cannot deal in facts. You just keep throwing out these tired old management lies. Here is one you can check out. Check the financial bonding rates for union officials as compared to virtually all parts of society. And especially among business owners. We have one of the lowest rates out there. What does that mean? It means that the risk of loss due to malfeasance or criminal activy, as calculated by scientists known as actuaries, is among the lowest in the nation. So much for your attempts to brand us as thiefs and wasters of our members money. We are not perfect. We have among us those that don't represent the workers well, take exorbitant salaries, and shouldn't be a part of our movement. I know this from first hand experience as I just came out of a fight of over a year with one of these. But when you compare our ranks with those that would see us gone, we do very well. Yeah, I am a Union Man. Proud of it. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Bobert Date: 15 Jun 07 - 08:50 PM Best case study I think I have ver read... Much better than those I used to read about even the most dreaded of my clients... Yes, Janie... This, very sadly, sums up Dickey... He is "sealed dead in his armor"... Oh, the life of being a "Boss Hog" shill is a lonesome one, indeed... Hey, if this means the end of this thread then so be it... It's been fun (kinda) and not-so-fun (kinda) but the htread is at a point where it either needs to go forward with "What do we do now about poverty" or just turn it over to Captain Dickey and let him do what he has tried to do now since ity's beginning and run it into the iceburg... But he won't see it that way because, yes, the lense has been perminently attached and he is no longer capable of doing much more than trying to change the conversation because the conversation does not fit his and "his handlers" values... So, I'm kinda with you, Janie... We both have dealt with lots and lots of folks with mental problems and use all kinds of games to keep the "professionals" at bay and it has grown somewhat tiresome here... The games that Dickey has played have become both borish and not productive to the discussion... But if he lived to be a 1000 years old he wouldn't have a clue what we both have come to realize... Yes... It is about values... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Janie Date: 15 Jun 07 - 01:10 PM There you go again, Dickey, with your misquotes, mistrepresentations and outright lies about what I have said. Do not again attribute to me any statement defining the root cause of poverty as anything other than the lack of resources. I have typed that statement so many times that I will simply copy the last one. Actually, Dickey, I have clearly identified the root cause of poverty. Lack of resources. The items you listed above, as you very well know, were an answer to a question you asked which was, "What creates the need for resources? How do people get in the position of needing these resources?" Later, after I realized what you were actually asking, I amended my answer and very clearly and carefully explained to you that people need resources in order to stay alive. Your 10:36 am post, to which I am responding, is simply another way in which you reveal that any concern you actually have related to poverty, and I am not convinced it is an issue you consider of importance at all, is about trying to insure you and the masters for which you are such an ineffective sycophant don't have to give up any portion of your excess wealth, power or other resources. The value of continuing to 'play' you and to occasionally mess with your pointy little head is that you provide a very simple and easy to discern example (and thus not very effective) of the tricks and deceptive practices used to try to manipulate public opinion, obsfucate issues to conceal your real agenda and lack of values and integrity, use of specious logic and and fallacious arguments, feeble attempts at 'bait and switch'. You illustrate the intentional deceptions through misquotes, misrepresentation and, as you just did regarding my statement on root cause, outright lies. You demonstrate how to dodge responsibility for your words and deeds, and also for the actual intent and meaning of those words and deeds. I wish there were not a real person behind what you exemplify in your words. But there is. There is you. I do not pretend to know any other aspect of who you are than what you reveal of yourself, intentionally or not, on this thread. I do not want to believe that there exists a real person who so clearly embodies the stereotype of Bobert's "Boss Hogg" and his sycophants, even if that is only one piece of who that person is. In terms of the psychological make up of such a person, there is little difference between the values and morals of "Boss Hogg" and a gun-welding gang member. The gang member is at least honest about who and what he is. He will readily acknowledge his antisocialness, his greed, his total disregard for anyone who is not one of his gang. And it is possible to have some empathy for the gang member. It is possible to imagine how the conditions of his life and environment made him into what he is. That doesn't mean he is not accountable, but it does make empathy possible. What you represent is as big a menace to the health, safety and welfare of our neighborhoods and communities as is the gang. This is indeed a personal attack on you, but also on all those of whom you are representive. You have blood on your hands, Dickey. But before you wielded the knife that sliced through the muscle, sinew and bone of the back you stabbed it in, you were careful and deliberate to create a lens, a filter of psychological defenses, and incomplete and inconsistent bits of information, ideas and justifications, through which blood is not visible, and through which who and what you are is also not visible to yourself. then you grafted that lens to your eyes in such a way that you don't ever have to be concerned that they will come off. So you will never have to see the blood, death, suffering and destruction that you wreak on the people and the earth. You are incorrigible and absolutely corrupt, but so well protected from yourself that you will never, ever have to know it. You'll just have to rot in hell. I am surprised at myself for saying these things, but I mean every word. Janie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Kipp Date: 15 Jun 07 - 01:10 PM This is not just to any specfic person , But we we do not any kind of revelution that pit one group or class against against another. I am not against the rich if it were not for some of these people to take achance and creat a product the a lot of people could use where wpould we be because of this we as a human race and this country would not be have for thr most part be haveing the standard of living we have and for yhe most part would like for every one in this country to attain And to think that thoes that took the risks should not have the finanical compensation for what they have done and that includes job for people Fact poor people can not create wealth nor can they create jobs. Granted we are to comsumtion oriantated but for now that is the nature of the beast. One more factas the future unfolds we will have less and less unskilled jobs. eventually technogy will more that likely take over all most every aspect of life and our jobs. Education is one of the best wepons to fight against poverty and yes I realize we are behind it that area. There seem to be another fact that some seem to overlook the more skills that a person has that is marketable the more they are worth So eventually someone with no skils will have vert little worth in the job market place. So every one has a roll to play here in this war on poverty. For instance when a rich person buy's a yhat someone or one have to build it don't they. This is away to redistubute weath is it not. If the poor are thught the skils to produce some thing that those with money want or need than we all benifit don't we. If you give someone a fish they eat for a day , If you teach them to fish they eat for a life time and then make they can teach someone else to fish Kipp |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Peace Date: 15 Jun 07 - 11:48 AM The resources to 'fix' things are dwindling, being held in fewer hands. An example is the family farm. They are being bought out by conglomerates, and as that has happened, people have had to rely more on 'jobs' as opposed to a way of life. IMO, we will have two classes of people soon: thems what's got, and them what don't. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Dickey Date: 15 Jun 07 - 10:36 AM "Our focus is on remedying poverty in the United States" Why not focus on fixing the roots of poverty? Janie mentiond some root causes: greed selfishness stupidity bad choices overpopulation the inertia of large social systems A lack of education lack of opportunity lack of motivation self-righteousness failure to be responsible for the self failure to be responsible for the effect of the choices one makes on others failure to be responsible for and to others ignorance lack of life skills lack of social support lifestyle choices corrupt government officials substance abuse A great conflicting statement: "So, screw root causes... We have a problem and we need a cure" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Janie Date: 15 Jun 07 - 07:49 AM I think it important to lay out some assumptions. These assumptions suggest questions. How we as a society answer these questions will impact the pool of solutions we consider to be viable. Assumption: Our focus is on remedying poverty in the United States. Assumption: There is no turning back the clock on the globalization of economies, communications and information. Assumption: It is not possible for the United States to remedy conditions of poverty world-wide. This is not a value-laden assumption and does not imply that we have either the right or the responsibility to do so. It is simply an assumption that it is not within our power. Assumption: The United States controls enough global resources at the present time to have the capacity to take care of it's own population. Assumption: Systemic changes that are likely to significantly remedy poverty in the United States will impact economies and social conditions in other parts of the world. Question: Are there currently sufficient resources available in the world to meet the basic needs of the world population? If yes, for how long? Question: To be considered viable solutions, how future-oriented and sustainable do solutions need to be. Janie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: AWG Date: 15 Jun 07 - 07:47 AM I stand by my assertion that companies are realizing that treating employees better is the way of the future, both from an economic point of view, but also it's 'the right thing to do', and keeping unions out is 'the icing on the cake'. Mick is so baised on this topic that it's laughable. I never expect him to agree to anything said against unions, true or not. C Ya. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Dickey Date: 15 Jun 07 - 12:03 AM "collective bargaining, contract administration, etc. These are known as chargeable costs. Other things, such as political activity, are non chargeable costs. They are known by these indicators, because some folks don't want to be a part of the union, and/or don't support the political aims. This legislation was passed by the right wingers and the National Right To Work Committee, to damage unions. Unions can only charge folks that elect non-member status the amount equal to the chargeable costs. Guess what they found out? The Unions range between about 88% and 98% of their money being spent directly on administering the contract and serving their members" Yes. All of that is overhead the the workers must pay. Blood money that feeds the union bullies. And union GOONS do come around on construction jobs and but things up if it is not strictly union. Where did Jimmy Hoffa go? October 3: Last night at Philadelphia City Hall, union thugs ruthlessly and violently attacked critics of President Bill Clinton gathered to protest at a fundrasing event he was attending. In the midst of a heated debate between a legion of 300-pound Teamsters bribed to come out in support of the President and impeachment supporters, the union goons started throwing punches at the protesters. In one instance, a Teamster mercilessly threw an impeachment supporter to the ground and started kicking him -- without provocation. Even the Clinton-loving Philadelphia Daily News confirms this account: "[T]he friction between pro-Clinton Teamsters Union members and anti-Clinton protesters erupted into not one, but two separate brawls in which beefy Teamsters kicked and punched some anti-Clinton protesters. Blood was trickling down the face of one man and other protesters' signs were torn." http://www.patrickruffini.com/new.htm Union Goon @ Work |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Bobert Date: 14 Jun 07 - 08:01 PM And, ahhhhhhhh, let's get beyond the root causes... They are too debatable and the debate is not that all constructive on what we can do about remedies... It's kinda like being told you have cancer... Do you want to delve into what might have caused it or how to treat it... After over a thousand posts I believe we have beat around the "causes" bush enough for that discusssion to no longer be helpful... Face it, poverty in this wealthy nation is a national disgrace... It is one thing that folks from other countries look at about the US and just have to shake their cellective heads as to why our collective "value" system allows, even rationalizes why it isn't their problem, poverty... No, it is a disgrace... And it hurts us not only domestically but in the eys of folks who think that we represent some kind of role model... Yeah, we do get a lot of things right but on poverty??? We get an F... It is a disgrace... I could no longer care less to trace it's every meandering path... We have it and it's a disgrace... I have proposed a way to alleviate it... I have show how to pay for it... Okay, my proposals are "large brush strokes" variety but that is what it is going to take... Janie talks about how folks run like "pigs from a gun" when we get to discussing "values"... She is right when it comes to those who beieve that the status quo is just peachy... Or those who are not willing to put their values on record but would rather just attack those of us who have been perfectly willing to step to the plate... Everyone here knows who is on each team... So, screw root causes... We have a problem and we need a cure... Plus, Einstien said that a problem cannot be solved with the same consciencness that created it... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Bobert Date: 14 Jun 07 - 06:42 PM NO, quite the contrary... Employers are jacking up their demands for increases production at the very same time that they are perfectly willing to allow the standard of living to go down for their workers... Oh, sure... There are exceptions but these are just that... "Boss Hog" has never had it so good... He gets to polute all he wants because the Bush administartion has stacked the E.P.A with flat earth managers and he gets to run rougshod over his emloyees... A perfect storm... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: GUEST Date: 14 Jun 07 - 06:21 PM Prof, the fact is that as the labor laws and OSHA protections have been weakened, the incident rates have gone up. The cases of abusive treatment towards employees have gone up. When employees try to organize, the employers purposefully violate NLRA because the enforcement dollars have been cut to the point of almost being useless, plus the Board in DC throws out many cases because they are dominated by right wing members. Imagine the part of government that was established to be a watchdog for workers rights dominated by right wing, pro business partisans. Employers have gotten smarter alright, but not at treating their employees better. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Janie Date: 14 Jun 07 - 05:49 PM I'm really encouraged to hear what you are saying Mick. I have reached the point where I tend to be sceptical about the intent and good will of the chief muckymucks of most large organizations, including Unions. It is important to hear from within the labor movement what is fomenting there, and to get a better idea of how well the orginal values and mission are being expressed by the institutional union in the field, where the actual work is done. Radical change needs to happen in this country. No matter who gets elected to national office in the next election, the tendency will be to consolidate and preserve the established power structure. The pressure for changw will have to build from without and from the bottom. This will occur only if real information makes it into public awareness, and not just official statements from organizational representatives. Janie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: AWG Date: 14 Jun 07 - 03:55 PM For the most part, well said, but let's back up the truck a bit. I think the main reason the labour movement is 'dying', so to speak, is the fact that companies are finally beginning to smarten up and treat workers other than like a 'commodity' to be used and abused. Compnaies are realizing that paying and treating workers fairly will keep the 'leaches' out of their business by keeping the workers happy. Happy workers with fair pay and benefits want no part of a union and their blood-sucking ways. Compnaies were stupid 100 years ago, but they are starting to get it. Sorry Mick, yours is a dying breed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Janie Date: 14 Jun 07 - 01:58 PM Well said indeed. Janie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Peace Date: 14 Jun 07 - 01:54 PM Well said, Mick. All of it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Big Mick Date: 14 Jun 07 - 01:00 PM On 13 June at 9:40 AM, Dickey posted this gem: Union Goons are the ones that pour acid in the electric panels of establishments because they did not hire union electricians. They are trying to make a living too without having to pay blood money to the union. OK, Dickey, just who among the "goons" are you referring to? You have made a pretty broad generalization there. Do you understand what demagogery is? Would you like me to start pulling up stories of the violence against striking workers by management goons? Outfits such as Armored Group International? How about the Security Guard in North Carolina, who in his day job was a Sheriff and harassed workers trying to organize? There are so many examples of violence against workers, that you would be foolish to try and make that comparison. Here is another one for you. You indicate that the company was trying to avoid paying "blood money" to the union. Now that is exactly what I talk about when I make the case that folks like you operate off preconceived notions instead of facts. What the company was trying to avoid was the payment of fair wages and benefits. Dues. Of course dues are to be paid on time. How the hell else would the union be able to carry on the duty of fair representation? How do they pay their light bill, etc? As to you having to pay dues, of course you do. You are getting the same wages and benefits as the union negotiated. The cost of negotiation comes out of dues as well. Here is another one for you, but read it slowly for comprehension, OK? In the States, Unions are tasked with defining which of its costs are for the business of collective bargaining, contract administration, etc. These are known as chargeable costs. Other things, such as political activity, are non chargeable costs. They are known by these indicators, because some folks don't want to be a part of the union, and/or don't support the political aims. This legislation was passed by the right wingers and the National Right To Work Committee, to damage unions. Unions can only charge folks that elect non-member status the amount equal to the chargeable costs. Guess what they found out? The Unions range between about 88% and 98% of their money being spent directly on administering the contract and serving their members. So much for one such bit of misinformation. I want to take on one that my friend Bobert threw out there earlier in this conversation. He said: So if anyone expects that this dieing movement is going to lead the charge on the war on poverty, I wouldn't bet the farm on it... I understand why he said that, it is a popular perception in todays world. Another variant is something like "unions were important once, but they are not needed anymore". Let me take a crack at both of these perceptions. Our labor movement is not dying, but it has been injured by years of anti union legislation, and by supposed friends in the Democratic Party and their inaction to take a principled stand on these issues. They are their with their hand out for the money, but when it comes to meaningful labor law reform, can't find them. At least the Republicans tell us they are going to screw us. But we are still out there, we continue to plug along, and the issues are of critical importance. Our demise has been predicted many times, but to paraphrase, they are exaggerated. As long as a soul-less bottom line on a spreadsheet governs corporate actions, we will be here fighting. As to being important once, but not needed now. Tell that to the workers at the Tar Heel, NC, USA pork processing plant. They have an incredibly high worker injury rate. Their pay is substandard, as is their health benefits. There is a company store approach to Workers Compensation, with the company forcing the workers to use the same Doctor for Workers Comp as they do for personal health care. Tell that to the workers in the turkey processing plant I was organizing a few years back. The company would plant managers by the bathrooms and harass the women so badly that they would wear Depends adult diapers to work to avoid leaving the lines. I will never forget watching through the fence at shift change and seeing a crying woman, as her hands warmed up, because they hurt so bad, and her friend holding her and giving comfort. Apologists for Corporate World can say what they want. But these are things I have seen. They couldn't care less about the little folks and view them as nothing more than a commodity to be used. The Ugly American would like to think that this stuff happens only in the Third World. Horseshit. It is going on daily in this country. We are the only major group out there speaking out on these issues. We have our problems, but I am seeing daily a more radicalized movement emerging. I intend to be in that group. Save your canned responses. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Janie Date: 14 Jun 07 - 12:09 PM The issue I have when 'values' are introduced into socioeconomicpolitical discussion and debates is that the term is often given lip-service only in support of fallacious arguments. People, groups, governments, agencies, politicians and preachers should be prepared to really examine their own values, to weigh how consistently one operationalizes one's espoused values in one's own life, to acknowledge and overtly deal with the internal conflicts and dilemmas that always exist within one's system of values, to acknowledge and recognize the inherent dialectic between values and self-interest,self-preservation, and the id, to own up to all the many times in each of our lives we choose to ignore what our values otherwise guid us to do,and to otherwise treat a discussion that includes talk of values with the seriousness and importance it deserves. Yes they should. But mostly they don't. What they are likely to do is rationalize some justification for failure to implement or operationalize their own espoused values. That being the case, playing the 'values' card is usually bullshit. Incidently, in today's corporate world, those who allow their behaviors to be consistently guided by their moral or ethical values are likely to find themselves fired. Would that make ethical behavior a root cause of poverty? Janie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Janie Date: 14 Jun 07 - 10:33 AM Indeed I see no one seeking a solution.... I wonder why that statement does not surprise me. By the above statement it sounds to me like you do not want a fix for poverty. You do not want the government to fix poverty or a government that can fix poverty. You want the government to mitigate the effects of poverty. Would this not lead to and ever increasing need for mitigation? How about pollution? Do you want the government to eliminate pollution or just fix the results of pollution? How about Aids? Hmmm...I'm inclined to think the answer 'e'. But it is possible, though not probable that I left one possibility out and should have included 'f. all of the above.' Janie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Kipp Date: 14 Jun 07 - 09:59 AM I think that there are several reasons for poverty. One right noe is that were are in a transition from an industral socity to a inromatiam society. and there is only rome for so many. Things that used to be done like for instance tune a car is no longer the same technology has changed that car no longer a tune mechanicaly but by computer or parts are just replaced thus requireing new skills. Other thing are just not repared they are just thrown away an we get new.New always it seems new Even the things tat were mass produced on an assembly line are now done in part by machines or robots of some sort. Labor is now hired through temp angencies and for the most part they are not covered by the existing labor laws. I my self have found that the temp angencies are in colution with the corporations that they provide workers for. The temp angencies are a way around things like union organising discrimination suits and the like. Of course it is more insidious than that. No benifits no unimployment compensation well maybein some instances It is an easy way to fire some on by only just say your services are no longer need. I could go on with this topic for a long time but in reality we have this work force that is underpaid but with promises they will become full time but that never ever happens and the works move from one temp job to another. And put up with more that the perminate workers do because of those promises Kipp PS another way of cercomventing this is for a corporation to move to a place like China |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Dickey Date: 14 Jun 07 - 09:21 AM "supporting anyone who is seeking solutions" Indeed I see no one seeking a solution. All I see are people seeking temporary solutions. I see no one trying to identify the root cause. You can attack me all you want and claim I am attacking someone else. It makes no difference. Poverty will continue to grow until the root causes are eliminated or at least reduced. I have never impuned anybody in their efforts to help the poor. I merely point out that that is not going to eliminate poverty. "There has never been, and I hope there never will be, a government, society, entity, or machine that is able to exert sufficient control over the thoughts, choices, and behaviors of each and every human being to the extent that would be necessary to 'fix' poverty." Janie: By the above statement it sounds to me like you do not want a fix for poverty. You do not want the government to fix poverty or a government that can fix poverty. You want the government to mitigate the effects of poverty. Would this not lead to and ever increasing need for mitigation? How about pollution? Do you want the government to eliminate pollution or just fix the results of pollution? How about Aids? I hope Bobert realizes that liberals understand that ***their*** base of voters can be whipped into a lather by bashing rich folks and corporations. Bobert: do you run a union shop? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Bobert Date: 14 Jun 07 - 07:11 AM Just a quick note before heading off to the salt mines, AWG... No, I'm not saying I am against "gay people"... What I am saying is that these so called "family values" conservatives understand that ***their*** base of voters can be whipped into a lather by bashing gay marriage or civil unions... Same trick, different election cycle... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: GUEST,dianavan Date: 14 Jun 07 - 03:46 AM Nevermind. Dickey is more intent on blaming the victim than supporting anyone who is seeking solutions. In fact, he'd rather attack those that attempt to help. Poor people make him feel superior. He needs the poverty of others for his self-image. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Janie Date: 14 Jun 07 - 01:54 AM What creates the need for resources? How do people get in the position of needing these resources? Shame on me. My apologies, Dickey. I misread and misenterpreted the above statement. I'm not sure if it is because of my own cognitive distortions, or if the question is so absurd that I didn't take it in at first. I missed that you are actually wondering why anyone would need any resources. Most people need food if they are going to eat. Without the resource of food, they go hungry, and, eventually, starve. There are some climates in the world where people probably don't actually need any clothes. They may need shade (but that would be shelter.) It might be nice if they have luxuries like animal fat to attempt to ward off hordes of mosquitos. However, if they stay to windward, the wind might be luxury enough. In most climates on earth, however, the protection of clothing during certain parts of the year is essential to survival. Clothing, be it cloth, woven from grasses, or a deerhide thrown around oneself, is a resource. In any climate in the world, there will be, at least occasionally, the need for shelter. That shelter might be a house, a hut, a tent, a cave, a tree, or a hole inthe ground. That shelter is a resource. Now, how do people get in the position of needing resources? Well, if they don't care if they live or not, I guess they don't need resources. If, as a general rule, physical survival doesn't matter, then people don't need the resource of food. People don't need the resource of water. People don't need shelter or covering to insure they don't freeze to death. Dickey, people get in the position of needing resources by virtue of feeling like they need to stay alive. I'm surprised you have never figured that one out. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: TRUBRIT Date: 14 Jun 07 - 01:48 AM Yeah Janie -- great post and so TRUE.......people very rarely choose their disadvantaged positions..............shit happens a lot of the time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Janie Date: 14 Jun 07 - 01:04 AM What creates the need for resources? How do people get in the position of needing these resources? In no particular order, not even close to inclusive or even mutually exclusive,and rarely, if ever, solely because of any one of the following reasons: drought, natural disaster, greed, selfishness, stupidity, illness, injury, stacked decks, bad choices, overpopulation, war, public policies, disenfranchisement, caste systems, arrogance, mines played out, new technologies, social injustice, pestulence, narcissism, cruelty, fear, the inertia of large social systems, discrimination, lack of education, lack of opportunity, lack of motivation, lack of altruism, lack of empathy, self-righteousness, personality disorders, cognitive disortions, racism, classism, failure to operationalize values, masking selfish interests as values, intolerance, failure to be responsible for the self, failure to be responsible for the effect of the choices one makes on others, failure to be responsible for and to others, ignorance (intentional and unintentional), lack of life skills, lack of social support, oppression, lifestyle choices, house fires, living too long, being too young, repression, did I already say oppression?, having skills become obsolete after age 45 or 50, corrupt government officials, raided pension funds, grossly inequitable distribution of resources, substance abuse, head injury, genetic disorders, being human, failure of the human race in general, and those who should know better in particular to opt for sustainability where possible, and the natural and inevitable tension, or dialectic, between the individual and society. It is not simple, Dickey. Get over it. I gather from your wishes that you want there to be poverty.... I gather from this statement, Dickey, that you a. Have reading comprehension difficulties b. Have not actually read most of my postings to this thread c. Your reality testing is significantly impaired by cognitive distortions d. You are attempting to be manipulative and/or disengenious e. Some combination of b, c, d, but not a, above. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Peace Date: 14 Jun 07 - 12:13 AM "And soon the situation there was all but straightened out, For he was always known to lend a helping hand." Gospel of Bob |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: AWG Date: 13 Jun 07 - 09:33 PM Bobert, are you saying you are against gay people ?? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Bobert Date: 13 Jun 07 - 09:14 PM Exactly, AWG... Cuttin' off funding for programs that were originally deisgned to help fight poverty won't get us there... We need to reinvest in our own citizens, especially the 1 in 5 kids who live in poverty... There were 21 million women living in poverty in 2005 and there are more now... Most of these women had at least one child and a large percenttage of those who had children had more than one child... That is one heck of a lot of poor women and kids... This is the reason that I have harped on the importance of child care subsidies to help women who are playing be the rules and working crappy jobs paying crappy wages... This is doable and affordable... The Washington Post reports that about $100B a year in tax revenmue is being hidden in places like the Caymen Islands... Less than 20% of that would shore up our nations child care needs... The US is about the only civilized (???) nation that does not recognize that caring for our children is part of the entire "family values" package... We do not even have a law on the books that says women should be given paid leave when the bay is born... Evey Europen country has such a law in place... I mean, here wwe have these self-appointed, self-rightous rigth wigers going arounf blowin' crap about how they are for family values but when it come to "walkin' the walk" these creeps walk it like a man with no legs??? Makes me sick that stupid rednecks actually believe these anti-family bigots and actually vote for these anti-family bigots because these anti-family bigots bash gay people??? Only in Redneck America... Go figure and while yer figurin'... ... beam me up... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: AWG Date: 13 Jun 07 - 08:57 PM To quote Dickey...'I gather from your wishes that you want there to be poverty.' (to Janie). I'll defende Janie here, and say she wants less poverty, but cutting off government funding won't get us there. Resourses means more than just money. Hi Janie. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: AWG Date: 13 Jun 07 - 08:51 PM Bobert, to quote you...'You were **almost** doing okay at some point in this discussion but you have regressed... AWG, at the very least, hasn't relapsed and has made an effort... But you???',......What the heck does that mean ??!! Who do you think you are, you don't run his thread. Remember, there is a new sheriff in town !! I hope you like the taste of crow. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Dickey Date: 13 Jun 07 - 08:44 PM Kipp: I am not demanding any thing. I am just asking politeley. Janie: What creates the need for resources? How do people get in the position of needing these resources? I gather from your wishes that you want there to be poverty. Several people here claim it is the big corporations and rich folk that want poor people to be poor. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: AWG Date: 13 Jun 07 - 08:41 PM Is there something going on between Dickey and Janie ?? Lot of tension there. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Bobert Date: 13 Jun 07 - 08:38 PM And as for "goons", Dickey... I see you ***didn't*** bother to look the term up in the dictionary... No, you are quite wrong... "Goons" is a slang term for anti-union people who used intimidation to stop labor union organizing... This is the historically correct use of the term... Your interpretation of linking labor union folks to term is incorrect... Like Janie said "Noting your igorance is neither satisfying or unsatisfying. It is an observation." My exact sentiments... I might add that if it is true that a "little learning is a dangerous thing" then if taken to the extremes of a " a lot of little learning" then where does that leave you??? You were **almost** doing okay at some point in this discussion but you have regressed... AWG, at the very least, hasn't relapsed and has made an effort... But you??? Betty Ford material... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Janie Date: 13 Jun 07 - 07:18 PM Actually, Dickey, I have clearly identified the root cause of poverty. Lack of resources. You are absolutely right. I stand firmly by my statement that there is no 'fix' for poverty, even in the presence of sufficient resources within a society. There has never been, and I hope there never will be, a government, society, entity, or machine that is able to exert sufficient control over the thoughts, choices, and behaviors of each and every human being to the extent that would be necessary to 'fix' poverty. Of course, you may have some fantasy that you would somehow be exempt from being under that absolute control. I suppose Janie gets great satisfaction by calling people ignorant while stating there is no fix for poverty and being unable to identify any of the root causes of poverty. Noting your ignorance is neither satisfying or unsatisfying. It is an observation. Janie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Peace Date: 13 Jun 07 - 02:01 PM That is wonderful to hear, Kipp. If you ever feel like messaging me just to shoot the breeze, please do so. PS, I'm an old 'folkie' (OK, more folkieishrocksorta) from the 1960s, and I agree that the religion stuff has no place in folk clubs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Kipp Date: 13 Jun 07 - 01:55 PM Peace, I am in the process of doing just that but right now I am being kind of careful because if some on discovers something I have written down they just might take it the wrong way. I have been offered a chance to write some things for a local paper same thing though being carfukl is the word for now Any way the coffee house thing is my idea in that it might give people with different views a chance to find a comon ground I am not about limiting it to conseritive liberal but forintance christian Jew Moslem Athest etc. on a different range to things if only to get all these folks talking to each other and making music to gether sharing their poetry there art what ever Kipp |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Peace Date: 13 Jun 07 - 01:21 PM There seems to be a grass roots movement to do just that. Today the meeting places are people's homes or yards, and folks get together to sing and exchange songs. Thank you, btw. I play guitar and sing a bit. Do you write songs, Kipp? I really like where your head's at to do with poverty, and I am wondering if you've written songs that express the way you feel. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Kipp Date: 13 Jun 07 - 10:07 AM Fist of all to Dickey, I don't have to explaine anything to anyone if I choose to I will it is up to me I'am not asking wnyone else to explain why they are where they are where they are I't is really no one business I would not be so rude. Next to Peace I can play several instruments But the one thakr for me is my greatest achevment is ther fiddle, to that I will add the guitar the five string banjo, mandolin and the Irish flute I had voice lessons also that is the only real music lessons I have had. But to and to this I wiuld like to restart the coffe house movement over again but this time it has to be a bit different. One of it main functions is to help to restore the sense the sense of comunity that has either been lost or taken away this I think is one way is for us to have our voices heard and to form networks of like minded people all ocver this country for starters. But they the coffee house has to also be a serious business also Kipp |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Dickey Date: 13 Jun 07 - 09:45 AM A friendly reminder: Dues Reminder Submitted by smw63 on Wed, 09/13/2006 - 8:31pm. 2006-04 April 2006 There are absolutely no late dues exceptions. Dues are to be paid one month in advanced. The Union books are to be closed on the last business day of the month, every month by 4:30 PM. Delinquent dues result in suspension, which in turn adds on a $200.00 re-instatement fee, (Vermont Members $150.00 re-instatement fee) plus a two-month advanced payment of dues, in order to be re-instated. Suspension will also have you immediately removed from the shop or job site you are working in. Please be prompt with dues payments! http://www.smwlocal63.org/node/218 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Dickey Date: 13 Jun 07 - 09:40 AM Mick: If you take the Union's threats and ultimatums out of the picture you get a more friendly attitude toward employees. You are evoking class warfare and creating animosity where none exists and shilling for the Union. Union Goons are the ones that pour acid in the electric panels of establishments because they did not hire union electricians. They are trying to make a living too without having to pay blood money to the union. I suppose Janie gets great satisfaction by calling people ignorant while stating there is no fix for poverty and being unable to identify any of the root causes of poverty. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Bobert Date: 13 Jun 07 - 07:51 AM Ahhhhhh, okay... In a perfect world a second labor movement could be the vehicle for leading our nation outta poverty but the only way that can happen is for progressives to ***out frame*** the issues and not allow the goons to change the discussion... (For Dickey: Look up the term "goon" in your dictionary before accusing me of using inflamatory terms...) As for "out-framing" issues in these times it usually comes down to the folks who have the most $$$ who can buy PR/media access... The Amercian people are too busy runnin' in "Boss Hog's" hamspter wheel of life trying to make ends meet to have m,uch time to delve into the facts of issues and tend to just go along with who ever has the most money to tell them what to think... The immigration issue is proof positive... More later... Gotta go to work... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: AWG Date: 13 Jun 07 - 03:21 AM Bobert, I'll respond to your allegations by saying that no, when I started out renting rooms 15 years ago, my motive wasn't to help the poor. It was to pay the mortgage, and I made very little profit. But as time went by, as I kept rents low, more and more people called who were on social assistance, well below the 'poverty line', and students. It was then that I started thinking about the benefit I was providing to people on welfare and students, by offering them low cost, quality housing, when most other landlords in town wouldn't touch them with a 10 foot pole, or wanted outrageous rents. I made very little, if any, profits over just 'paying the bills', and that's the truth. Rich landlords are the one's who own multi-unit buildings like apartments, etc. But I felt better knowing I was doing a little something to help them out, and my rents were secure by Mr. and Mrs. Taxpayer (isn't that what you all wanted, government programs to help the poor). I just took more risk. Sorry for the delay to respond, Bobert. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: AWG Date: 13 Jun 07 - 03:02 AM Wow, Mick, where do I start ?? For starters, if I didn't hit a nerve, you sure acted like it. Read your post. What exactly am I supposed to be a shill for ? All Im saying is the thief kept his job because he was a union member, that's all. Anyplace else, he'd be out of a job. Why can't you admit this ?? Your story states what I have been saying all along. C'mon Mick, you're better than this, you must be holding back or something, I expected a better exchange of ideas. All I see is a union member who is defending fellow union members from criticism, saying they get equal treatment, even though he openly admits this fellow 'brother' kept his job after stealing, because he was a union member. Hmmmm...... Oh yeah, almost forgot, I do believe in just cause. I just don't believe that when a company demonstrates it, it should be ignored for union members, but not non-members. I mean, he did steal, didn't he ?? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA From: Peace Date: 13 Jun 07 - 01:39 AM Hear, hear! |
