OFFLINE

you know, i've been looking at all these riots across europe. for various reasons, there's been greece (continually), spain, italy, the uk, portugal, ireland. there are a lot of people who have been lied to, and promised too much, and now that we've arrived at the tipping point, between curtailing government spending or seeing big government through to its conclusion, these people feel shafted. but really, the fate of "western civilization" is in the balance here. all of our governments have grown drunk with wealth and prosperity. so much so, that they abandoned sound fiscal policy - capitalism and competition - which is what helped "the west" rise to prominence. instead, they've adopted leftist quasi-capitalism, or what is now being called "state-capitalism." and much like a ouija-board, if you tinker at all with leftist theory, you can open a portal to much darker forces. once you give the government power over the people, you start down a path to oppression.

anyway, i think these riots will continue as some governments try to get their fiscal houses in order, and they a lot of powerful agitators, who are encouraging the chaos, as means of bringing about a new order.

i think the only reason america has been thus far insulated, is because of the sheer size of our economy and relative wealth. but that's not to say the same thing won't start happening here, IF the government can't follow the mandate that was given this last election. obviously the democrats aren't supportive of truly shrinking the size of government (which is the only way we can really tackle the issue of debt reduction, and thus far, the republicans have ignored the calls for true fiscal responsibility. this omnibus bill has more than $8 billion with a B worth of pork, and now all these sweeteners are being added to the tax deal, and basically, it looks like business as usual.

OFFLINE

I don't think we should riot, but every homeless veteran, every person who lost their home and/or job through no fault of their own should set up tent cities in DC, or in their represenatives' town, or somewhere that the wealthiest 2% can help take care of them.  What else are they going to do with all the money they saved with the tax cuts extended?  You can't take it with ya?! Unless of course, they create jobs as they say these cuts will.  

Why is it that the people who have the most are often the last to help others?  People with little of nothing will "give the shirt off their back" to help others who are worse off.  Maybe it's because they have been there before and understand the situation.

OFFLINE

first, i want to thank you for challenging me on this. i like being challenged for my views. but as the chasm between us is so wide on this one, i currently don't have enough time to devote to a well thought out response. BUT, i will respond some time this weekend!

OFFLINE

Hear hear Sarah.

There is nothing leftist about the British Govt and there hasn't been since the last Labour Govt was defeated in the 1979 election that saw Margaret Thatcher become the first and so far only female PM. We only seem Leftist to you Americans because your 'left wing' is more right wing than our supposed left wing which is really the right wing, and the right is more right than it used to be. Which is still less right than your left. *breathe mort breathe*

OFFLINE

just briefly, but "the center" has been shifted to the left. especially in europe, but america isn't far behind. in short, what should be the center, has shifted to center left. this leaves only the **** liberal on one extreme, and basically any kind of conservativism being portrayed as far-right extremists.

OFFLINE

Americans riot, but not about things like this.  We grouse and grumble about economic matters, but we typically don't get in a riotous mood, unless of course, the World Bank or IMF is meeting somewhere.

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Russell Jones:
Americans riot, but not about things like this.  We grouse and grumble about economic matters, but we typically don't get in a riotous mood, unless of course, the World Bank or IMF is meeting somewhere.

we haven't cut any programs yet, either.

OFFLINE

Eliminate Burger King of Mickey D's and see what happens.

OFFLINE

Hmm the centre here has moved more to the right thanks to Tony Blair. Now the Cons and the party formerly known as Labour aim to please the centre, which is really just the middle class ergo the right. Ironically this leaves the Lib Dems, who until we had our election short ago, were the party who were the real centre. Or so we thought. Oh how the joke was on us....

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by David Macleod:
Hmm the centre here has moved more to the right thanks to Tony Blair. Now the Cons and the party formerly known as Labour aim to please the centre, which is really just the middle class ergo the right. Ironically this leaves the Lib Dems, who until we had our election short ago, were the party who were the real centre. Or so we thought. Oh how the joke was on us....

yes, since the last election there has been a tack back toward the right, but what i'm saying is that it's really more of a tack back toward the center. how do i know this? virtually all of the west's governments have been operating under huge deficits, with even more and farther stretching programs coming along all the time. obviously except for all of the last elections in all of the countries that have shifted back toward fiscal responsibility. there's a reason for that being so widespread. it's unsustainable any longer.

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by David Macleod:
Hmm the centre here has moved more to the right thanks to Tony Blair. Now the Cons and the party formerly known as Labour aim to please the centre, which is really just the middle class ergo the right. Ironically this leaves the Lib Dems, who until we had our election short ago, were the party who were the real centre. Or so we thought. Oh how the joke was on us....

Tony Blair didn't take the 'centre' to the 'right'  as most historians will now tell you. These terms (and 'left' are bandied round with little understanding.  Since biblical times there has been an instinct to protect the weak in a society and this instinct has been shared by people of many different political leanings.  There were 'Christian Socialists' and 'Social Catholics' in the 19th century, and most of the original British social reformers were Tory philanthropists like Lord Shaftesbury, and Richard Oastler.  Bismarck (yes him) created the German Welfare state and Hitler and Mussolini were both major advocates of national welfare.

What Dod is talking about is the replacement of self reliance and individualism by the state (however defined) as the thing that ultimately takes care of you.  Once, the individual might look to him/her self for sustenacne, after that the family or friends, after that the parish or charity, etc.  The state was a distant abstraction, small scale and barely taxed at all.  When life was like that there were huge surges forward in growth across the globe and the capitalist mechanism that underpinned such vibrancy made Britain and the US great.  Yes there were problems as the anti capitalists always point out.  Unfortunately, the problems were not the result of capitalism per se and were FAR more problematic where capitalism was not the order of the day.

Dod's point is that the state has replaced the individual providing thi great big nipple and those sucking it most will refuse to be weaned off it

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Alun Hughes:


Dod's point is that the state has replaced the individual providing thi great big nipple and those sucking it most will refuse to be weaned off it

correct. but for the record, i do believe there should be social safety-nets for the disabled, children, vets, and the old. i just don't feel you do any good to society, when you start introducing all these programs for perfectly healthy, otherwise fine, adults. what has made us (the west) great? individualism, and entrepreneurship. without this drive that has motivated men to better themselves, there's no future for us. and the more people you put on the dole, the less you encourage people to rely on themselves enough, to improve their standing.

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Sarah Skinner:
I don't think we should riot, but every homeless veteran, every person who lost their home and/or job through no fault of their own should set up tent cities in DC, or in their represenatives' town, or somewhere that the wealthiest 2% can help take care of them.  What else are they going to do with all the money they saved with the tax cuts extended?  You can't take it with ya?! Unless of course, they create jobs as they say these cuts will.  

As someone who lives in a city that makes up that 2% (or at least a good chunk of my city) I promise you "we" cannot help these homeless.

Originally Posted by Sarah Skinner:
Why is it that the people who have the most are often the last to help others?  People with little of nothing will "give the shirt off their back" to help others who are worse off.  Maybe it's because they have been there before and understand the situation.

Last to help others? You posit a bad stereotype. First, broke people cannot help broke people; with that in mind I say the homeless and the poor are the last ones to help others. Second, in a proper free market system a wealthy person has already helped others by producing something someone else was willing to pay for that was greater value (e.g. advertising on Facebook). Finally helping people in the way you propose is just mobocracy. I.e. the ends ("helping" people) does not justify the means (threatening violence).

You use the example of someone with nothing giving the shirt off their back. That is not what I have seen with the poor (and I spent plenty of time in poverty). Also, a poor person would only have one shirt to give, i.e. they cannot help many. And giving one's property to another rarely helps. It is not compassionate to give someone who is bad with money, money. There is always snickering about sports/movie/music stars that had plenty of money but squandered it (segue, at one time Michael Jackson made $1 billion in signing deals... he was going on the "This is It" tour because he was broke when he died); but know what? I bet all of us would do the same thing.

If you really want to help the poor I propose the following: Abolish all state lotteries, only the poor play them and no one wins. Set the maximum APR on all loans to ~35%, this would decimate the payday loan places who just ravage the poor with insane interest rates. Make it so that all loans on an item must be less than the item's current and predicted value; someone should never owe more on an item than it is worth. Eliminate subsidies that create false demands, which in turn artificially inflates the price. Listen to the video below for a great example of this.

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Sarah Skinner:
I don't think we should riot, but every homeless veteran, every person who lost their home and/or job through no fault of their own should set up tent cities in DC, or in their represenatives' town, or somewhere that the wealthiest 2% can help take care of them.  What else are they going to do with all the money they saved with the tax cuts extended?  You can't take it with ya?! Unless of course, they create jobs as they say these cuts will.  

Why is it that the people who have the most are often the last to help others?  People with little of nothing will "give the shirt off their back" to help others who are worse off.  Maybe it's because they have been there before and understand the situation.

okay, sarah, here we go.

i'm not sure what tack to use here. i think the general feel i get from the above post is that you have contempt for the wealthy. that you feel they suck up more from society than they contribute. that they have more than their fair share. and perhaps they do, but they are what has built the country we live in.

why do you think it is that our lower class lives much more lavishly than most other nations' middle class? why do you think it is they enjoy all our modern amenities? heat, a/c, electricity, automobiles, running water, cell phones, t.v.s, the whole nine yards. why do you think it is that our lower class doesn't live as mozambique's lower or middle class, or uzbekistan's lower or middle class?

look at it this way. do you know how rich edison was? yet, he transformed society from burning coal fires, to the electrical grid. and his company, con-edison, still employs many thousands or workers (feeds them and their families), and still services millions of homes. do you know how filthy rich henry ford was? yet, because of him, even poor people can now drive rather than walk, and ford motors has employed over the span of its history, likely millions of workers.

here's a question. do you think bill gates personal wealth, is greater than the amount of wealth microsoft has created throughout its history? here he is, a billionaire, yet microsoft employs thousands of people, and the retail from microsoft products, likely creates hundreds of thousands of additional jobs.

and even when it comes right down to taxes, people making more than $250,000 a year pay 90 something percent of all taxes, already. so this really isn't about equality at all. instead it's more like a mob shakedown. "your protection fee has just gone up. and if you want to stay in business, you better pay up."

this government has become so monumentally bloated,   it doesn't need to increase revenues! in fact, every time it has, it's increased spending too. our problem isn't a tax problem, it's a spending problem. $14 trillion dollars in debt? are you kidding me? and it was the government who passed all the laws that brought about the housing collapse, and our current economic recession. you want to talk about greed? well we've been giving the government a trillion dollars a year to operate on, and they still overspend! you show me any other company worth that much that the taxpayers have had to bailout on an annual basis.

OFFLINE

The poor in our Countries live relatively better than those in less developed Countries. However there are still great gulfs between the better off and the poor and if the US is anything like us the gulf is never narrowing always growing. Why? Because the Govt looks after the rich and treads on the poor. The rich can 'hide' their money in offshore accounts and use tax loopholes to stay rich while the rest of us are taxed to death at every turn.

There are some very rich people who give a great deal of time and money to help those worse off than themselves and equally there are poorer people who do the same. The fact is that most people have a 'charity begins at home' mentality toward helping others.