BS: Poverty in the USA

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 22 May 07 - 04:33 PM

Great plan, Dickey. How would you apply that to poverty in the U.S.A.?

I'd say an increase in minimum wage, subsidized childcare and educational opportunity would be a start.

What are you doing?

Voting Republican certainly isn't going to solve the problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Bobert
Date: 22 May 07 - 07:29 PM

Living wage = the amount of money it takes to live in various regions + the costs of education for your children... Nothting more, nothing less...

$33,000 per capita should do the trick quite nicely and still leave a wealthy class...

But I seriously doubt the $33,000 figure since it is most likely based on "taxable income"... Taxable income is what is left after all the crooks hide their wealth off shore, after the middle class uses it deductiona and exemptions... If that is what we are talking about then you can probably double the per capita figure... Maybe triple it...

But even with the Dickey figure, there is not reason for poverty other than greed...

Bobert

p.s. Sorry folks for my lack of proof reading skills... They generally aren't as bad as of late but I've been working like a crazy man and am just worn slap out these days...

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Dickey
Date: 22 May 07 - 08:58 PM

"$33,000 per capita should do the trick quite nicely and still leave a wealthy class"

Bobert: If every person had a $33,000 income, there would be no wealthy class unless you consider $33K wealthy.

I looked for a source that you could trust for the per capita income and at Mother Jones it said $37,610 for the US.

http://www.motherjones.com/news/featurex/2005/01/barrel.html

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Dickey
Date: 22 May 07 - 09:27 PM

While searching for per capita income at Mother Jones, AKA MoJo, I found this that says Puerto Rico is the happiest country surveyed with a per capita income of less than $10,000:

What You Think You Know about Happiness and Why You're Wrong

Commentary: Some number-crunching to accompany Bill McKibben's Reversal of Fortune in the March/April 2007 issue of Mother Jones.

By April Rabkin

February 28, 2007

You might think that richer countries are happier. But there's actually no correlation beyond about $10,000 per capita income. See how each country compares on this scatter chart. One surprise is that Vietnam, with a per capita income of less than $5,000, has been just as happy as France, with a per capita income of about $22,000. The happiest country surveyed was Puerto Rico. The unhappiest were Indonesia, the Ukraine, and Zimbabwe. Within Europe, the happiest countries were Denmark, Ireland, and Iceland.

http://www.motherjones.com/news/featurex/2007/03/happiness_extra.html

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Bobert
Date: 23 May 07 - 07:53 AM

I didn't say that everyone would have $33,000, Dickey... I said that if that is the actual per capita income, which I think is not evn close to being accurate, that we would certainly have suffient resources to redistribute wealth in a manner that would end poverty for all those who are willing to work...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Dickey
Date: 23 May 07 - 10:41 AM

"$33,000 per capita should do the trick quite nicely and still leave a wealthy class"

Please reiterate this Bobert because it indicates to me that everybody would get $33,000 but there would still be a wealthy class getting more which is not possible if everybody got $33,000.

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Dickey
Date: 23 May 07 - 10:56 AM

"Great plan, Dickey. How would you apply that to poverty in the U.S.A.?"

How about some community based private enterprize like a babysitting co-op for working mothers, subsidized by the government?

Is there anything that single parent households can produce at home for profit?

It would have to be a network sort of thing. I saw a show on TV about Taiwan. A family, mother, father and kids, took turns manniung a toy wheel making machine in their living room while watching TV. They would make a big cart full and roll it out the back door and down the alley to another family that would make or assemble something else.

Government regulations stand in the way of much of this private enterprize. For example, day care centers required to have a commercial type kitchen to be legal and zoning laws preventing work at home.

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 23 May 07 - 04:44 PM

"...a babysitting co-op for working mothers."

That says it all. You obviously cannot think beyond your mouth.

If they are working, who will be the babysitters?

I guess you expect that they will arrange their working hours to suit the babysitting arrangements. Dream on.

How about govt. subsidized daycare? The govt. could offer incentives to employers to offer on-site daycare or they could offer direct subsidies to parents.

...and Dickey, the reason the Taiwanese family has the option of working at home is because that kind of job is outsourced by the U.S. You'll have to think a little more creatively if you want to offer an alternative to staying at home to care for your own children while collecting welfare.

In fact, staying at home with your child (welfare) until the child is school age is probably a very good solution to the problem. When the child enters school, mom could be given subsidized training and/or education in addition to after school daycare.

That would help but it still does not account for the huge number of people with mental health issues that deserve better care than they are receiving.

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Peace
Date: 23 May 07 - 04:58 PM

Some people are of the mindset that poverty is a matter of choice for most poor people. It isn't. You have heard from a single parent on this thread who did a good job raising her young 'un, and she managed to become a professional. However, she is astute, intelligent (except for the occasions on which she disagrees with me), and she knows whereof she speaks. SHE has empathy ofr poor people, and she's been there herself. So too was another gal on this thread. She's in the opposite end of Canada. She too has been there and done that. They are great women in their own ways, and if they can find it in their hearts to recognize that all people who are poor deserve ways to get back on their feet just because they are human and their mistakes be damned, why the hell can't you, Dickey?

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Peace
Date: 23 May 07 - 05:08 PM

It isn't always about money first. Sometimes it HAS to be about people first.

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Bobert
Date: 23 May 07 - 08:04 PM

Yeah, if the per capita is $33,000 then this is enough dough per capita to get started... This doesn't mean that everyone get's $33K, only that if that is the figure then collectively we have enought wealth to pull it off...

I still dought this is the figure...

I think what one needs to do is take:

1. The GNP

plus 2. Collective wealth and...

...add those 2 mubers up... You know, kinda like doing a financail staement... That would better represtent the national wealth...

Now divide by 300M people and that would provide a more realistic number which we could talk about... I believe that amount might be at least 3 times and probably more like 10 times the $33K per capita...

That is the real way of looking as reditribution of wealth...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Peace
Date: 23 May 07 - 09:12 PM

This is without a doubt the clearest article I have ever read about the issue of poverty, how it comes about and why it comes about. Article here.

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Janie
Date: 23 May 07 - 09:44 PM

Thanks, Peace!

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Dickey
Date: 24 May 07 - 09:44 AM

Again I ask how is this wealth to be divvied up and what happens when the Boss Hoggs have to sell their stocks, $50 million dollar homes, $300 million dollar yachts and their $32 million dollar soup can paintings (oops, actually $11.8 million) to accomplish the task?

Does that "wealth" stay the same or does it shrink because there are no billionaires that are able to pay such artificially inflated prices for things or buy such large quantities of stock?

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Dickey
Date: 24 May 07 - 10:28 AM

This may explain distribution of wealth in more detail

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: AWG
Date: 24 May 07 - 11:28 AM

The total distribution of wealth makes for nice discussion, but in reality it will never happen. People would be better served spending less effort trying to come up with ways to take away from the rich and spend more effort bringing up the standard of living for the poor. Do you actually think the rich are going to volunteer to part with their wealth ?? Me either. This discussion is starting to wander into never-never land, just when some interesting points and sensible solutions were being presented. Without philanthropy you will never get a nickel out of the rich, at least not in the USA. Again, it's back to education, social assistance where required, and more social awareness to the needs of the poor people amongst us.

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 24 May 07 - 03:36 PM

I think we all understand the distribution of wealth quite well, Dickey. From the article you linked:

"Since financial wealth is what counts as far as the control of income-producing assets, we can say that just 10% of the people own the United States of America."

What needs to happen is a re-distribution of financial wealth.

That wealth can be re-distributed through tax reform and govt. funding of social programs.

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Stringsinger
Date: 24 May 07 - 05:32 PM

Ever since Reagan told the lie about the "Welfare Queens", the rise of poverty in the US has increased. During his presidency, street people appeared in droves. There never was a Welfare Queen. Another Reagan myth such as his "war stories" retold about the parts he did in movies.

The Neo-cons actually want poverty to occur. They want the separation between have and have-nots and they started the Class Wars. They intend to exploit poor people in this country by attacking them for being poor and giving them Walmart jobs to live on.

One of the biggest poverty aspects of the US today is its cultural and artistic poverty which is engendered by dumbed-down education and the crap on the media. The privatization of education will favor the rich and exclude the poor. Corporate sponsors are robbing the people of decent programming on the airwaves so that news becomes irrelevant and entertainment puerile.

L.H.,

There are cities in America where you can't go out at night if you are wise. Same deal, if you get robbed, mugged etc. the cops will ask what you were doing there at that time of night. Some are under the delusion that we live in a free country. Free to get killed if you happen to be at the wrong place at the wrong time.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Bobert
Date: 24 May 07 - 08:30 PM

Excellent posts, Frank, d, and Bruce's link...

Yeah, here were are pushing 900 posts and this is really what it comes down to: a redistributuion of wealth... Heck, I don't care as much how wealth is defined for now as long as we understand that redistruting it is not only the right thing to do but the only way that this country will survive its own self...

We can start offf with Dickey's rediculously low figures or we can look at the big wealth picture... Doesn't much matter now as long as we start...

I would think that for starters we could use the low income tax credit as the vehicle and cutting back the Bush tax cuts for the upper 5%, taxing off shore accounts by the rich and returning to a saner estate tax will go a long way toward paying for ***ending poverty*** for all people who get up and go to work...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Dickey
Date: 24 May 07 - 10:27 PM

Bobert:

I am was hoping you would come up with an answer. What was my ridiculously low number? What is the right number? How is it to be distributed? Who gets what?

Taxing off shore accounts will mess up George Soros, the father of offshore investing.


Now that the hook is set, look at http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html and notice Figure 6: CEOs' pay as a multiple of the average worker's pay and Figure 7: CEOs' average pay, production workers' average pay, the S&P 500 Index, corporate profits, and the federal minimum wage, 1990-2005 (all figures adjusted for inflation). You will see that it made an incredible increase of 400$ between 1994 and 2000. It topped out right about at the beginning of 2000. It has not reached that level since. Bubba did alright for his corporate donors.

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Dickey
Date: 25 May 07 - 09:37 AM

After you have digested that, look at Figure 2a: Wealth distribution by type of asset, 2001:

What does this wealth actually consist of? Looks like 90% of the 69% of the total wealth held by the top 1-% is business equity. How can that be redistributed?

Bill Gates sells Microsoft along with the other billionaires that must sell their businesses and who would be the buyer?

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Bobert
Date: 25 May 07 - 06:32 PM

Ummmm, Dickey, it's no secret that CEO's have and still do very well... That isn't the issue here...

What is tghe issue is the number of people who are poor... Now how well CEO's did during Clinton's years...

Why can't you just leave Clinton out of the discussion... You don't hear me bashing Bush all that much in this thread otheer than his freezing the child care subsidies...

This discussion ain't about Bush or Clinton so get over it and get back to the meat and tater's and leave those buks alone... There are no shortage of Bush and Clinton bashing threads to play in...

Poverty ain't about partisan politics but an American problem that needs to be addressed by Americans, regardless of party affiliations...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Dickey
Date: 25 May 07 - 11:53 PM

Ummmm, Bobert:

Once again you contradict your self. Here are "facts" you posted:

*CEO pay among military contractors has tripled since 2001."

*If the $5.15 hourly minumum wage had risen at the same rate as CEO compensation since 1990, it would now satnd at $23.03...

*Such a worker would take 7,000 years to earn Oraccle CEO Larry Ellison's yearly compensation...

Ummmm, Dickey, it's no secret that CEO's have and still do very well... That isn't the issue here...

So why do you enter things into the discussion and later claim they not an issue? Are you always so wishy washy?

Bobert says "Why can't you just leave Clinton out of the discussion" but he posts:

ADC (Aid ot Dependent Children) and AFDC (Aid to Families (ha) with Dependent Children, the two mainstays of public assitance for women and tbheir kids prior to the "Welfare Reform" (ha, part 2) under Clinton, was anti-family...

under Clinton our nation sent an undeniable message

"Welfare Reform Legislation" during Clinton's asministration

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Dickey
Date: 26 May 07 - 12:05 AM

Bobert:

You say my number was ridiculously low but you have no idea what the correct number is.

My number was the average per capita income. I went in search of a number that you would trust and I found a higher one at Mother Jones who you quoted so I thought you had confidence in their "facts"

Here is your latest statement that you will no doubt abandon:

"I would think that for starters we could use the low income tax credit as the vehicle and cutting back the Bush tax cuts for the upper 5%, taxing off shore accounts by the rich and returning to a saner estate tax will go a long way toward paying for ***ending poverty*** for all people who get up and go to work..."

No please expand on that and tell us how much money that would raise and how it is to be distributed to the poor and how much they would get. Remember "what it comes down to: a redistributuion of wealth"

I don't think you have a clue Bobert, you just blabber on as if blabber will fix the problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Janie
Date: 26 May 07 - 11:49 AM

Bobert, thanks for providing context to those two posts of Dickey's where he reposted a link I had already posted earlier in the thread. They had me scratching my head because I was trying to read them in the context of this thread. Could tell the secnond post was supposed to be another 'gotcha' attempt, but otherwise, I was beginning to think he was actually paying attention and 'getting it' instead of 'gotcha-ing it.'

I don't think you have a clue Bobert, you just blabber on as if blabber will fix the problem. Dickey

Excuse me Dickey, I must have overlooked some of your posts where you talked about which agencies and for how long you worked serving disadvantaged populations. And you have the nerve to say Bobert just 'blabbers.' Tell us, in detail, just exactly all the many ways you work or have worked to deal with the problem of some one other than you being hard up.

Fine Dickey. I'll accept your premise that distribution of wealth and income is just fine the way it is and should not be touched. Without any redistribution, and using the percentages from the article you reposted above, show us your solution to 'fix the problem' of poverty. Show us how you are going to created so much sustainable wealth and income, without an increase in costs of meeting needs, that the bottom of the heap has enough to meet basic needs adequately.

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Dickey
Date: 26 May 07 - 02:12 PM

Is working for an agency a requirement for having an opinion?

So far I have seen nothing from the experts about how to eliminate the roots of poverty. All I see are patches being applied while the problem grows worse and this is blamed on a ficticious straw man, Boss Hogg.

All you can think about is helping the poor buggers who cannot help themselves as if they don't have the mentality. Hang a carrot on a stick etc.

On the redistribution of wealth I see no methology put forward, no facts and figures except stats which Bobert claims he don't need, supposedly showing the terrible injustices of who owns what.

Here is blabber "cutting back the Bush tax cuts for the upper 5%," After saying "This discussion ain't about Bush or Clinton" He goes back to saying it is about Bush.

Bobert, just what were those tax cuts dollar wise and how much would this amount would go to the poor?

Taxes were cut 33.3% for the bottom bracket and 16.6% for the top bracket.

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Bobert
Date: 26 May 07 - 05:35 PM

Unfortuantaely, Dicky, unlike you, I don't have unlimited desposable time to sit in front of my computer doing research... Ahhhh, I have a real job... You know what they are??? Nevermind that one...

What I was pointing out in my last post of a couple days ago is that your reverting to bringing up the CEO cempensation packages under Bush vrs. Clinton was nuthing but another red faering baiting on your part... Seems when you have nuthin' else to offer, you drag Slick Willie ou of your tackle box... The probelm is that, sure, I have used ***actual historical events*** that have occured since the beginning of the War on Poverty as part of an overall discussion on poverty... I have not sugar coated Clinton and more than Bush becuase ***actual historical events*** have occured under both admninistrations which have not been helpful...

But for you so say that I am blabbering shows me that you really aren't taking this thread with any level of seriousness... Why is that, Dickey??? This thread isn't about me regardless of how much you would love to highjack it and make it about me...

Like I told you a few months back when you were stuck in yer childish "Get-Bobert" mood, when you do this stuff it makes you out to be a real "jerk"... You, I guess, are about the only person on this thread who doesn't see that...

You were doing okay for awhile but now that yer back to playing your juvinilistic games and trying to highjack this discussion, I reckon it's back to "Ignore-the-Jerk" time for me... If you post somethibng that shows any level of repentance and a willingness to discuss this very important issue I'll respond... Until then...

...bye-dee-bye...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: AWG
Date: 26 May 07 - 10:23 PM

Bobert, you whine way too much !! Less criticism, more solutions, please. Thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Dickey
Date: 26 May 07 - 11:41 PM

Hey Bobert: You are deliberately avoiding the nuts and bolts or as you prefer meat and taters of what to do. You blame it on Boss Hogg and say rich folks need to pay for fixing it but you can't say how to fix it, how much money and where it comes from. Just talk about revolution and redistribution of wealth.

That is because you cannot define the root cause of poverty so you want to cover up the problem with somebody elses money while the problem gets bigger.

If you are such a problem solver let's hear something besides a patch job.

I say much of this wealth that is concentrated at the top is based on intangible things that cannot be distributed to the bottom end without a collapse of the whole system of wealth valuation anyway. And I didn't read it anywhere.

I say revolutions to eliminate the Aristocracy have done nothing but cause destruction and killed millions of people with no improvement in the standard of life.

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Janie
Date: 27 May 07 - 12:13 AM

There is no 'fix', Dickey. There are multiple and complex ways to address the multiple and complex issues of poverty on both societal and personal levels in this country that mitigate and significantly decrease the number of people in this country who are unable to acheive an adequate level of income and resources to assure that basic needs are met.

Everyone, has, and is entitled to an opinion. Informed opinions based on extensive education and professional experience, or on the first-hand experience of having lived in poverty, tend to carry more weight than do others in most discussions--unless one is talking about religion or poverty. Those of us who work with indigent and disadvantaged populations understand and accept that the contempt and devaluation of the human worth of poor individuals carries over onto us. But that doesn't stop us. And one of our tasks is to try to keep that contempt of the poor from stifling the voice of the poor.

Still waiting for details of your 'fix' that does not alter the percentages and ratios of distribution of wealth and income that currently exist in this country.

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Barry Finn
Date: 27 May 07 - 12:35 AM

Again the soul/you/tions would be fair tax accountability for the wealthy & the poor & put more of a burden on high end corporations & put a premium on those, espically, that use the resources that belong to John Q Pulbic, those that steal from us with the permission of Congress & pay a user fee that's akin to spit in your eye. Next free health care to those that can't afford it & free education to all, free child care to those that can't afford it & it should be offered as a company benifit to those that could make use of it just like a company offers health benifits, it should be mandated that they offer child care too, well maybe they could do a bit better than that existing model. Some kind of Welfare reform that would make it easier & fairer for the mentally challanged, the homeless & the families with children in need able to apply for assistence in a friendly user form. Put back the money that was there at the start of the "war on poverty" instead of the money hat's put into the "war on the world". Finally we got a wage increase that's a doller short & a day to late, my son makes that, thank Christ he's got a family instead of a Government to fall back on.

There it is in a nutshell.

I get pissed every time I think about big business, governemt & our taxed system (yes, that's a pun). The Government wants my money but when I was a baby & the milk dried up where the fuck was their tit. Today 56 yrs later they're still sucking the wind out of the mouths of the poor while shoving slogans of reform up they're asses & spening like a drunken sailor on things that profit only the rich & mighty, I can't seem to find any programs that are doing better, only ones that keep getting worst but gas prices are flying high while the industry's in a windfall situation posting the highest profits ever. The politicans are the only ones that'll keep themselves fucking warm this coming winter, you'll see. The only ones that have been sucking on that tit are the ones that are already very well off.

Do you think I'm a bit pissed about how this nation deals with poverty, you bet I am, I had to live it & be born into it & since the first day I sweated to earn a dollar I've been paying for this system ever since & still don't ever plan on seeing a return on it though I watch what I've paid for go into the pockets of them that don't deserve it instead of those the need it, like it was supposed to be, like they promised it would be, my taxes should go to benifit the good of this nation & it's people not it's corporations & they're CEO's. Since when did "We the people" & "for & by the people" turn into "we the wealthy & me the mighty" what's left for the "meek & weak" what happened to give us your "sick & poor". We could've been contenders instead we have become a nation of concubines & courtesans that is now our culture. When will this government marry it's people?
This government sees that it get it's support from every one in one way or form or another. Even from it's poor who don't or can't work, just think of them as the children of those that did once contribute even if you have to go back a few generations, weither they were slaves or fought in some war they & we all came from deserving familes at some point that gave it's due to this nation. So when will the nation as a whole say "in sickness or in health", for richer or for poorer", "in good times or in bad", "till death do us part"? Because for my money I see that the people of this country have been standing by they're promises all along, through wars, through taxes, by their sweat & blood & by their brains & backs. We've been nation building from the start & have never stopped, the poor & middle class machines have never broken down (What have the rich done for us, there's a thread worth posting) but this is getting a bit one-sided, they're dying, it's killing US. I'd say that by now the government & the industries that were made so powerful stop draining it's living foundation of it's support & start living up to it's commitment to stand by it's men, women & children as if they were it's life's blood & give back a bit of what's due it's people.

Pissed? I grew up poor & hungry, fought every day of my childhood life, worried & wonder what's around the corner, under educated, labored my way out & created a business that payed more than it's due in taxes, insurances, medical & legal fees, employed quite a few & took care of those that worked for me, paid into all the unemployment funds, the SS (sounds a bit Nazi) taxes, only to be run down by the IRS when I became hospitalized & driven into bankruptcy & have what income I earned for the next 10 years garnished unfairly. After paying into this country my whole life I end up collecting a lously check once a moth that doesn't even cover my family's monthly medical prescriptions, never mind my children's education, all the while knowing that if my wife's job or health becomes shaky that we'll be one of those that alot of the stat poster's here are complaining about, and I know that, that's the same for many of the blue coller workers in this country, one step away from a civil disaster.

Yes, I'm pissed. "War on poverty" my ass, asshole!

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Dickey
Date: 27 May 07 - 12:56 AM

Ok Janie so to simplify what you are saying, there will be more and more poor people as time goes by. When will the percentage grows so large that the problem cannot mittigated any longer?

I don't think the problem is rich people VS poor people. I think it is the part of society that screws up their future and expects to be saved and those who facilitate the idea that no matter what they do, they will be taken care of.

I think it is society on self destruct because of the garbage being fed to our young people I spoke about earlier and this "mittigation" is part of the destruction sequence.

The "fix" would be the elimination of garbage and replacement with reality 101. The only Boss Hoggs involved are the ones profiting by feeding them this garbage. There are some other Boss Hoggs that take advantage of the poor for profit but it has nothing to with how much money rich folks have or how much taxes they pay.

Rather than identify and solve the problem it is much easier to patch it over with someone elses money.

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Bobert
Date: 27 May 07 - 07:57 AM

1. "Guarenteed minimum income" for all workers thru:

2. Universal and affordable "single payer" health insurance with premiumns based on a sliding scale...

3. More money for job training and education

4. "Child care" subsidies

5. Increase funding for Mental Health

6. Public/Private partnerships between employers and prisons

7. Reform the "manditory sentencing laws"

8. Public Service ads that promote better understanding of poverty so that the rest of these ideas will be embraced...

How to fund:

1. Roll back the Bush tax cuts

2. Reform the tax codes that allow the rich to hide income in accounts off-shore

3. Institute a "value Added Tax" on all all good produced by the "Boss Hog, Inc.s" on stuff made in forieng plants with labor indexed to what it would cost to produce here in the US

4. Raise taxes on everyone who now pays for helath insurance by the amount that they will save with a centralized and more efficient "single payer" system...

5. Stop stupid people from starting stupid, expensive and unnecessary wars

Yeah, this is a bsic framework... These are all things I have advocated in the past and they are all serious suggestions on how to win the war on poverty...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Bobert
Date: 27 May 07 - 08:35 AM

Opps, forgot one other thing...

We need to redfine poverty levels to reflect regional difference in cost-of-living...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Dickey
Date: 27 May 07 - 10:10 AM

Pretty good Bobert. There are a few things I disagree with. The most glaring is "Reform the tax codes that allow the rich to hide income in accounts off-shore" the tax code says they must pay, it does not allow them to hide it and IRS is actively trying to detect offshore accounts and make them pay. Also these are not only availble to the rich. They are available to anybody.
The next most glaring is the fact that the Bush tax cuts have resulted in increased tax revenues. The poor got the biggest cut.

And I see nothing to attack the roots of poverty. The things that cause people to be in poverty to begin with. Something to raise their set of values that is ingrained into them when they are young.

For example slogans on T shirts that say snitches get stitches made off shore and sold by Boss Hogg.

The shirts' message - interpreted with slightly varying twists - essentially urges people to stop talking to and cooperating with police.

Made popular in Baltimore last year by a "Stop Snitching" DVD featuring rappers, a Denver Nuggets player and others, some wielding guns, wishing harm on police informants, the T-shirts, sometimes spelled "Stop Snitch'n," have caught on in urban centers from Boston to Philadelphia and Denver and are now among the hottest fashion trends in Milwaukee.
"I have five, one for each day of the week," said 16-year-old Mike O'Connor, a sophomore at Madison University High School. O'Connor says he wears them just to be fashionable.
But the shirts are fueling more than fashion, police and prosecutors say. They send a dangerous message to others that, if followed, has the potential to "destabilize the whole criminal justice system," according to John Chisholm, Milwaukee County assistant district attorney.
"This is a tremendously big problem," Chisholm said.
Witness intimidation is a real and longstanding difficulty for prosecutors nationwide, and "Stop Snitch'n" apparel, which includes baseball caps, makes solving crimes more challenging, he said.
"We're trying to go in the exact opposite direction," he said.
Police and prosecutors depend on informants to crack homicides, shootings and other serious crimes. If people feel it's unsafe or uncool to cooperate with law enforcement officials, "no one is going to come forward. No one is going to testify and the neighborhoods will suffer," Chisholm said.
Florence Howard knows such suffering.
Her grandson, 21-year-old Austin Howard, was killed this year for reportedly providing information to police.
According to a criminal complaint, just after 7 p.m. on Feb. 15, near 10th and Locust streets, Sheffield Groves entered a house where Howard and some friends had gathered. Groves reportedly pointed a gun at Howard and asked why he had snitched on him. When he didn't like the answer, Groves said, "That don't sound right," and shot Howard in the head, according to the complaint. Groves, who was charged with that and another homicide, then said to someone else in the room "You don't see nothing . . . or I'll be back to see you," the complaint says.
Florence Howard isn't sure what sort of information her grandson may have shared with police, but regardless, she says the shirts should be outlawed.
"They (police) need to do something about those shirts," she said. "They need to let them know they can't go around trying to stop justice...."

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=363034

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: TRUBRIT
Date: 27 May 07 - 09:41 PM

This thread continues to be so moving. Barry's justifiably angry words don't leave a lot to be said. I keep saying this and I fully accept I am being perhaps naive and certainly repetetive, but why - WHY - is national health not here. Much that has been referenced in this thread would have been solved to a large extent by national health. There will always be people born into wealthier families than others -- that is acceptable. BUT if the people born into the poorer families started out with at least the level playing field of THEIR HEALTH, how much fairer would things be.....? I continue to find it totally appalling that one must make life style decisions, job decisions based on medical coverage. My eldest girl has medical insurance because she 'works' for my company; my younger girl is dancing around her home because she has just been offered a full time job with benefits. My son, who is no student, will lose his medical insurance once he turns 19 unless I can squeeze out a 'job' for him in my company also.......THIS IS WRONG......it is just wrong.The thing that Barry speaks of so eloquently - losing one's livelihood due to illness......it isn't right, it cannot be right, it will never be right -- yet we continue to tolerate it.......

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Peace
Date: 27 May 07 - 09:44 PM

"Something to raise their set of values that is ingrained into them when they are young."

You are fuckin' pathetic.

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Ebbie
Date: 27 May 07 - 09:50 PM

About 15 years ago an Australian woman told me of an incident at a drug store (chemist). She said she was in line behind an elderly man who presented a prescription to the pharmacist and said, How much?

At the answer he shook his head and took back the prescription. Too much, he said. I can't pay it.

My friend was distraught and irate. How can this be! she asked.

One of the things that I don't understand is why do we think that we have to come up on our own with a formula for national health care? Why do we think we have to re-create the wheel? Why can't we look at other countries' systems and cherry pick the data?

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: TRUBRIT
Date: 27 May 07 - 10:01 PM

Exactly --- exactly........ And in response to people who say - well, it wouldn't be FAIR -- how would you make decisions around cosmetic surgery for example, or weight reduction surgery - stomach stapling. Seems to me I would rather be in a philosophical debate about whether it is 'fair' to pay to have someone's tummy tucked (which I don't believe most national health systems would pay for anyway) than in a debate about paying for life saving medications.........

Our town is beginning to have a lot of people begging on street corners. It kills me to see it.....I can't help them all so I watch for one particular elderly gentleman who stands there quietly by the side of the road. He doesn't make eye contact with the cars -- he just stands there looking dignified and sad. When I gave him some money once I asked him, did he not have any family. His answer was no -- and he had lived in a rental but the building had been bought and condominimized (God help me, with people like me selling the condos to fat cats) -- he says he was cheated out of his security deposit and didn't have enough money to come up with a security deposit for a new apartment -- if you could find an affordable apartment in our town for someone retired and living on just social security.

I saw him today and double parked so I could give him some money.....I have him a big hug and wished him Happy Memorial Day. Glad I did -- wish I could do more.

This stuff is sickening..........

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Janie
Date: 27 May 07 - 10:47 PM

You are wrong, Dickey. A CEO making more than 400 times the money of the average worker is the one taking other people's money.


Still waiting for your 'fix', Dickey, with the current percentages regarding distribution of wealth.

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Janie
Date: 27 May 07 - 11:00 PM

You did not simplify what I had to say, Dickey. You said what you had to say, and misrepresented it as a simplification of my writing. That is dishonest.

I promise you I will let you know if I ever give you permission to edit my writing. Until then, I strongly suggest you refrain from doing so.

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Janie
Date: 27 May 07 - 11:59 PM

I will say that Dickey has done a beautiful job of proving my point about the way the poor are devalued and held in contempt.

I can't wait to go back to work on Tuesday to spread the news to all the extremely hardworking and extremely hard up poor people I work with that the problem is their values.

"If you would only work 4 jobs instead of three, dear, and eat dogfood instead of spam, all your problems would be solved. YOu obviously don't have a good work ethic and waste money on expensive food. You live right behind Food Lion, surely you could go dumpster diving in your free time to extend that food budget.   I know it is tough washing all your clothes in the bathtub for the past 3 years, since you can't afford to go to the laundry mat. (Why you can't afford that is beyond me--three jobs as housekeeper at anywhere from $1.95 to $2.50 a room, and your rent in the bonifide lowest rent dumb in town is only $500 per month plus utilities.) Now, even though your IQ is 85 and you were beaten and raped for years by your well-off father and your stepbrother, there is no need for you to quit your job as a housekeeper at the local upscale motel just because the manager feels you up everytime you go in to get your pay of $2.50 per room cleaned. He's in the middle socioeconomic class, so his values are just fine. It is somehow your fault that he does this every Friday afternoon. If you quit that job, you just don't have a good work ethic. Now, let us sort out those values a little better. Yes, it does get confusing. If you dump the husband who drinks, smokes crack and beats you your children will not have their father in the home and you will demonstrate a lack of family values for not keeping the family intact. If you don't dump him, you are a wimp, a loser and a fool who deserves what she gets for being so stupid as to stay. Tough one--well--not really. You are poor, no matter what you do, and will stay that way, no matter what you do. And since you are poor, you are a loser with no family values or work ethic--the fact that you are poor proves it. Now, get out of my office, if I try to do something or work with you to try to help you, I am mitigating and simply contributing to your problem."

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Peace
Date: 28 May 07 - 12:01 AM

Dickey is given altogether too much attention on this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Janie
Date: 28 May 07 - 12:18 AM

You are right, Peace. I need to check out of this thread for awhile and go find a way to start a revolution.

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Peace
Date: 28 May 07 - 12:19 AM

A sign of the times.

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Peace
Date: 28 May 07 - 12:22 AM

Janie, when people ask what the poor are up against, it's the type of attitude and argument from people like what's 'is face that shows only too clearly that indeed a 'revolution' of sorts would be required to change anything for the better. Some people just don't give a damn.

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Peace
Date: 28 May 07 - 12:52 AM

"But as I travel around this big old world,
There's one thing that I most fear;
It's a White man in a golf shirt
With a cell phone in his ear."

That is by Tom Russell. Hear the whole thing on the following youtube video.

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Peace
Date: 28 May 07 - 12:55 AM

"Who's Gonna Build Your Wall?"

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Ebbie
Date: 28 May 07 - 03:22 AM

Great video, Peace. Thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: Poverty in the USA
From: Dickey
Date: 28 May 07 - 07:56 AM

"That is dishonest" That was my interpretation of what you said. If there is no fix for the problem, the problem grows larger.

And I did not say the fix is a redistribution of wealth.

"if I try to do something or work with you to try to help you, I am mitigating and simply contributing to your problem."

You are helping by mittigating the problem but you are doing nothing to prevent others from being raped etc and ending up in the same situatuion and requiring even more mittigation.