What is your plan to reduce global poverty?

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Where do those things--fire protection, police, military, courts, education--come from? Even the funding of a military requires the government's threatening to initiate physical force against people (pay the taxes or else). You could argue that police, military, and courts are the only legitimate functions of government and that they are necessary to protect individual rights. However, government-provided fire fighting and education are indeed socialist and not something Ayn Rand ever advocated. (Under real capitalism you would contract with a private fire department.)

ayn rand is hardly respected as a political or economic theorist. knock down that straw man!

see, part of the reason we have fire departments is that if your sh!t starts burning there's a good chance the fire is going to jump and burn down someone else's sh!t.

you did manage to inadvertently mention an ethical reason why government services should be kept to the minimum amount. i've highlighted it.

Why would the road owner earn noticeably less money from the loss of your traffic on his road? I agree that perhaps it would be irrational of him, but that doesn't mean that people wouldn't behave irrationally under capitalism even if it does cost them some money. There's more to getting value from your property than merely selling its services to make money, such as using it to shun your enemies.

and see their financing dry up? ok. not to mention roads are another ridiculously extreme example.

 

[OCGuy]

Why is it always moron liberals who dont understand the concept of limited resources?

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: cubeless
to assist a village in learning how to get clean water and handle it's sewage and farm more efficiently is where you start... once they can eat, you start on education... you start with the basics...

Yes, when over a billion people cannot get clean water, obtaining clean water for them is a start. I just fear that by the time we obtain clean water for 1 billion people, there will be 3 billion who need it.

 

[cubeless]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: cubeless
to assist a village in learning how to get clean water and handle it's sewage and farm more efficiently is where you start... once they can eat, you start on education... you start with the basics...

Yes, when over a billion people cannot get clean water, obtaining clean water for them is a start. I just fear that by the time we obtain clean water for 1 billion people, there will be 3 billion who need it.

i think that at some level it will become self limiting... when the population gets too dense there is a tipping point where you get war, famine, or pestilence to thin the ranks...

and if you want to do something you have to start somewhere...

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: cubeless

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper
snip...

I agree. I don't know exactly how you would go about transforming these societies, but I do think that they need dramatic population reduction to reduce the scarcity and costs of resources needed to improve their economic condition.

ahhh... the ultimate solution: just kill all the poor people...

Actually... if we just made sure no one made it past the age of 60....

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: FernWe have a 'true' unemployed rate at about 20%. Our government is bankrupt. Our states are in serious financial problems. We have no end in sight to our economic and financial problems. We're gonna run out of money trying to keep extending unemployment and medicaid to our ever growing population of unemployed.

I too have been wondering about how federal and state governments are going to be able to continue to extend unemployment benefits (as well as health care for the indigent) to ever increasing numbers of people who need it. I also wonder what would happen if they stopped providing all of that completely. Could it result in widespread social strife and riots?

I think we're gonna see another Stimulus package for the states. It won't be called that, but I bet we're gonna see one. IIRC, I read it is being discussed in Congress now.

Like the federal government, the states are suffering from substantial declines in revenue. Income tax, sales tax, unemployment tax, road taxes and property tax collections are all down. If there's a state tax I missed in the list, well it's down too.

The last stimulus package helped for about a year. I know my state shot through our's that fast.

I'm waiting for next year's state budget. In our last state budget, even with the stim money, the state took the lottery money, which by law goes to education, and used it plug holes in the state level budget. The state also retained sales tax proceeds that should go to the counties leaving them in trouble. They refused to disburse that money at the last minute, leaving the counties in big trouble at the last minute.

But the states can't borrow like the fed. That's why I see another federal level stimulus handed down to the states.

Fern

 

[xj0hnx]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper
Poverty is an economic state of affairs where people have difficulty providing themselves with basic human needs -- food, water, shelter, clothing, health care, safety from violence, and the means necessary to be able to continue to provide those things (such as having a job that provides health benefits or maintaining a vehicle needed to drive to work or to search for work).

You can't build a house without a frame, no matter how many shingles, waterheaters, or paneling someone gives you, you just can't do it. My point was that in America we have the frame, and a supply to build new frames. As bad as some in America have it, life nescessities are right there, many are even welling to bring them to people, but the people have to build their own frame. In many third world areas, there's no frames...for miles and miles, until the frame is built all we are doing is stacking shingles on the ground.

 

[xj0hnx]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper
Of course, you know what my prediction is: The United States will become an overpopulated, impoverished third world country.

I tend to agree. Our resources are being spread thinner across an ever growing population. To each we give less. For each we have less to give.

Appears to be the basis of poverty.

IMO one of our biggest problems isn't population, is population density. There's an unimaginable amount of free, open, unpopulated areas in this country, yet people cluster together in big, growing cities, fighting for resources, and then complain because shit sucks.

 

[cubeless]

Originally posted by: xj0hnx

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper
Poverty is an economic state of affairs where people have difficulty providing themselves with basic human needs -- food, water, shelter, clothing, health care, safety from violence, and the means necessary to be able to continue to provide those things (such as having a job that provides health benefits or maintaining a vehicle needed to drive to work or to search for work).

You can't build a house without a frame, no matter how many shingles, waterheaters, or paneling someone gives you, you just can't do it. My point was that in America we have the frame, and a supply to build new frames. As bad as some in America have it, life nescessities are right there, many are even welling to bring them to people, but the people have to build their own frame. In many third world areas, there's no frames...for miles and miles, until the frame is built all we are doing is stacking shingles on the ground.

and to say that having a car has something to do with relieving poverty means that you are just clueless...

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Fern
The last stimulus package helped for about a year. I know my state shot through our's that fast.

Stimulus: How Fast We're Spending $792 Billion

With only 1/5th of it spent, I'm trying to figure out how you think your "state shot through" it.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Fern
The last stimulus package helped for about a year. I know my state shot through our's that fast.

Stimulus: How Fast We're Spending $792 Billion

With only 1/5th of it spent, I'm trying to figure out how you think your "state shot through" it.

We spent what we were allocated under the stimulus. While I belive we still have funds lined up for road projects, I'm unaware of any more the state is scheduled to receive directly to augment our state budget. I'm unaware of any more we're scheduled to receive to pump up unemplyment benefits either. That's what I was talkin about above.

The future road money will help a little bit. But not because it will create jobs, but because what NC does is use that federal money on projects NC has already approved and budgeted for. Then they take those (original) road funds and divert them elsewhere. So far the feds are letting them get away with that.

The other shenangan NC is getting away with is phonying the jobs data. They've started reporting the contract renewals for teachers and the like as new jobs. E.g., we have 10,000 teachers whose contracts were up for renewal in 2009, NC renews 8,000 in essence terminating 2,000. In most cases this would be reported as a job loss of 2,000. But now instead is reporting 8,000 new jobs. I.e., an artificial swing of 10,000 jobs.

Fern

 

[boomerang]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: FernWe have a 'true' unemployed rate at about 20%. Our government is bankrupt. Our states are in serious financial problems. We have no end in sight to our economic and financial problems. We're gonna run out of money trying to keep extending unemployment and medicaid to our ever growing population of unemployed.

I too have been wondering about how federal and state governments are going to be able to continue to extend unemployment benefits (as well as health care for the indigent) to ever increasing numbers of people who need it. I also wonder what would happen if they stopped providing all of that completely. Could it result in widespread social strife and riots?

I think we're gonna see another Stimulus package for the states. It won't be called that, but I bet we're gonna see one. IIRC, I read it is being discussed in Congress now.

Like the federal government, the states are suffering from substantial declines in revenue. Income tax, sales tax, unemployment tax, road taxes and property tax collections are all down. If there's a state tax I missed in the list, well it's down too.

The last stimulus package helped for about a year. I know my state shot through our's that fast.

I'm waiting for next year's state budget. In our last state budget, even with the stim money, the state took the lottery money, which by law goes to education, and used it plug holes in the state level budget. The state also retained sales tax proceeds that should go to the counties leaving them in trouble. They refused to disburse that money at the last minute, leaving the counties in big trouble at the last minute.

But the states can't borrow like the fed. That's why I see another federal level stimulus handed down to the states.

Fern

If we get lucky, and that's a big if, this administration is going to get their heads out of their asses and start doing something meaningful to create job growth in this country.

History shows us how to do it. Unfortunately for us, it goes against the very fiber of this administration. The grandest social agenda of all time will have to be put on the back burner to make it happen. I have zero confidence that they have the integrity to do what's right.

With the social agenda front and center and certain nations in this world still willing to lend us money, it appears that jobs are just going to have to wait. Critical mass will be reached. The coffers will run dry. Benefits will run out. What happens at that point has the potential to be revolutionary. The question is, who will be orchestrating it?

Edit: typo

 

[cubby1223]

My plan to reduce global poverty?

Elect Hugo Chavez supreme ruler of the world!

We'll also put an HDTV in every village in the third world, with the restriction they can't watch Family Guy.


Sorry, but there is no plan we can do to fix global poverty, when our own country is in such disarray with our debts and corrupt government. We have to fix ourselves from within before we have any shot at fixing somewhere else.

But as I just saw on the news how Florida Rep. Grayson was praised by the White House... there is no hope, Republican or Democrat both parties suck.

Young Americans were trained to be selfish, and they're getting their payoffs in "free" stimulus monies and "free" health care and... The next generation of Americans need to be "fixed" before we can attempt global poverty.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: OCguy
Why is it always moron liberals who dont understand the concept of limited resources?

Probably because there aren't. Conservatives love caves and progressives are bound for the stars.

 

[Ozoned]

What is your plan to reduce global poverty?

I am my brothers keeper.

I am going to follow Obama's lead.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Apply western values and destroy their culture - works great

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Birth control.

 

[LunarRay]

Poverty is a relative term.... I think anyhow..

Some treasure shiny stones and others shiny gold...

To those in the former ship them stones... and from the latter the gold to do the shipping.

Hayabusa,
Birth Control.... omg... I might not be here but for the lack of it back when.... hehehehehe But then I'm poor... so maybe you're right...

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: LunarRay
Poverty is a relative term.... I think anyhow..

Some treasure shiny stones and others shiny gold...

To those in the former ship them stones... and from the latter the gold to do the shipping.

Hayabusa,
Birth Control.... omg... I might not be here but for the lack of it back when.... hehehehehe But then I'm poor... so maybe you're right...

The facts of life are that the population increases, and the more food you give impoverished nations, the more they reproduce. Instead of improving their condition, they breed. Then there are more mouths to feed and the cycle repeats.

On top of that, many nations like China and India with large populations are going to use more and more resources per capita.

More people wanting more stuff.

The only way out is to have fewer people. Imagining that technology is going to pull out a deux ex machina on a perpetual basis is hubris.

Someone once said that truth is beauty, but I've been looking for it long enough to know it can be one homely bastard.

 

[Chunkee]

Limit Terms
Enforce Checks and Balances
Limit Campaign Funding and Contributions
Kill All Lobbyists, and Judges

There is a start.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: LunarRay
Poverty is a relative term.... I think anyhow..

Some treasure shiny stones and others shiny gold...

To those in the former ship them stones... and from the latter the gold to do the shipping.

Hayabusa,
Birth Control.... omg... I might not be here but for the lack of it back when.... hehehehehe But then I'm poor... so maybe you're right...

The facts of life are that the population increases, and the more food you give impoverished nations, the more they reproduce. Instead of improving their condition, they breed. Then there are more mouths to feed and the cycle repeats.

On top of that, many nations like China and India with large populations are going to use more and more resources per capita.

More people wanting more stuff.

The only way out is to have fewer people. Imagining that technology is going to pull out a deux ex machina on a perpetual basis is hubris.

Someone once said that truth is beauty, but I've been looking for it long enough to know it can be one homely bastard.

There is truth in all you say but unless it is universally applied then I find it pretty homely.
I think resources 'owned' enable the owner. Humanity will run out of resources as you suggest.
I think you're right... but like we consume so much of the oil stuff and produce much less we ought to figure out a Greener way to do stuff... not that Soilent Green option.. hehehe.. but a more universal approach that makes sense... with the US and the other hogs in the lead... Ok.. I agree...

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: OCguy
Why is it always moron liberals who dont understand the concept of limited resources?

Probably because there aren't. Conservatives love caves and progressives are bound for the stars.

Progressives arent always liberal

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: OCguy
Why is it always moron liberals who dont understand the concept of limited resources?

and the GOP does? lmfao

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: Craig234
Perhaps the most important issue for humanity, we all but never see any construvtive discussion about it here.

So, let's see who has any good plan.

You can use whatever you want - tough anti-illegal immigrant enforcement, war, new political setups, you pick - but show it will be good for the people of the world.

Sadly, the real point of this thread is to show how bankrupt our political culture is on this issue - how we can bicker over every little bit of garbage, hundreds of posts about two acticvists who entrap a couple of people into helping with with advice on prostitution, somecrazy thing a pundits said, but all we get is 'it's not our problem' on global poverty.

Anyone who just says 'it's not our problem' and isn't concerned with looking for what can be done is IMO amoral at best, and not much of a member of the human race.

Has our culture degraded to that point, that there is no concer as the richest country in the world for the rest of the human race?

I know private charity provided a helpful couple drops in the bucket; if you want to push that, show how it can be increased by orders of magnitude.

Leading anti-poverty people talk about 1% from the advanced nations as making a huge difference. I don't see a problem with that approach.

So, let's see, who has a plan? Only plans are invited, not excuses why to ignore it, not arguments about what our current small foreign aid efforts do.

The last new big thing we did was the Peace Corps - helpful, if modest.

Some say we're on the verge of people becoming more expensive than what they contribute and that this will lead to policies letting many lose their lives to disease, etc.

Other - better IMO - tools include land reform, birth control, and encouragement of the development of local industries.

Protectionism of the modern world, impose severe sanctions on all nations that have severe human rights violations. Impose an international minimum wage that will make everyone compete on the same stage. Violators of the international minimum wage standards will have an import tax that is the inverse of their violation.

If the minimum wage in china is 15 cents an hour, and the international minimum wage is $5 an hour, their imposed tariff would be 97%. China increases their wages or loses their top customers and faces economic collapse. This also eliminates the issue of companies finding the "next china" to move operations to.

 

[gingermeggs]

This is too easy!
First ban Arm sales to poor countries, which can't afford them in the first place.
Cancel their debts and stop giving them aid in money form, let them get on their feet without the corrupting power of external capital.
It defies me why starving people still have more children, the only answer is food aid has created the belief in those people that they will be provided for perpetually by the rest of the world.
Their main problem is corruption, over population and loss of arable land, so their pop. should naturally be shrinking, nobody likes Mother nature when shes got the clippers out, Father time has the remedy!