whats your solution for poverty

[Heebie Jeebie]

Absolutely, I live on about that (savings) without a roommate (960/month plus hustle). I have plenrty of friends in the neighborhood that live on ~12k (retirement, SSI, etc). No one is starving, they all have luxuries.

I pay 520/month for rent and electricity, 40/month for internet (I should get a better deal) and 100/week spending money (which also covers food, laundry and other expenses).

Right that penny makes all the differance in determining if a person is in or not in poverty!

 

[Heebie Jeebie]

Of course that's HIGHLY subjective. If a person makes 11k a year, and spends 10k a year on clothes from Dillards, then no, I presume they could not maintain significant standard of living. However, THE GOVERNMENT has defined this number, not me. So, it's safe to presume that through calculations on the cost of essential living items, then yes, 11k a year would cut it.

You act like the number isn't an arbitray number though. It is. So we can change the number to whatever we decide. If we want to lower the number of people living in 'poverty' we can just lower the nember. If we want more to be said to be living in it, we can raise the number. That's all I was saying.

 

[Masada]

Right that penny makes all the differance in determining if a person is in or not in poverty!

How does $25 more in food stamps each month effect their economic class status?

You are missing the point. And you are stopping short of presenting YOUR SOLUTION to poverty. Why don't you go ahead and tell us what YOUR solution would be.....

Cant wait to here this......

 

[Masada]

You act like the number isn't an arbitray number though. It is. So we can change the number to whatever we decide. If we want to lower the number of people living in 'poverty' we can just lower the nember. If we want more to be said to be living in it, we can raise the number. That's all I was saying.

Then you would also have to change the definition of "poverty" as well. And why not? You liberals love changing the definitions of words...let's just change that one too.

The number IS NOT arbitrarily set. THAT is the number THE GOVERNMENT says a person can sustain an acceptable standard of living in relation to actual POVERTY. Perhaps you are confusing "being poor" to "living in poverty". There's quite a bit of difference. Yes, a person who makes 11k a year is very poor, but it's enough to avoid actual "poverty", assuming the money isnt spent on drugs or non-essential items.

 

[Heebie Jeebie]

How does $25 more in food stamps each month effect their economic class status?

You are missing the point. And you are stopping short of presenting YOUR SOLUTION to poverty. Why don't you go ahead and tell us what YOUR solution would be.....

Cant wait to here this......

$25 doesn't does make a differance to some and to others it might. To some $100/month would change their situation and to others it would. There are millions of variations to this and I hope you don't want me to list them all.

I already gave my solution to poverty, it can't be 'fixed', there is no solution to it. Only the individual can work their way out of it. Some will and some won't.

 

[Heebie Jeebie]

Then you would also have to change the definition of "poverty" as well.

Changing the level we say is poverty doesn't chance anything, it just gives different statistics. Personally if we want to 'solve' poverty we should say that anyone who makes more than $1000/ year is above the poverty level (that puts you in the top 44% of earners worldwide). Then we would have practically no one living below the level and we could stop trying to 'fix' something that is out of our control.

 

[Masada]

$25 doesn't does make a differance to some and to others it might. To some $100/month would change their situation and to others it would. There are millions of variations to this and I hope you don't want me to list them all.

I already gave my solution to poverty, it can't be 'fixed', there is no solution to it. Only the individual can work their way out of it. Some will and some won't.

At least you acknowledge that government can't fix it through entitlement spending. It's good to see you agree that the only solution for poverty is better choices, and harder work.

I maintain, the primary reason people are poor or live in poverty is because of CHOICES they have made. Not to say "all", but most.

You acknowledge working one's way out of poverty, and acknowledge "some will, some wont". So why the attitude? If it is the INDIVIDUAL'S responsibility, why the attitude and negative statements about everything else?

 

[Masada]

Changing the level we say is poverty doesn't chance anything, it just gives different statistics. Personally if we want to 'solve' poverty we should say that anyone who makes more than $1000/ year is above the poverty level (that puts you in the top 44% of earners worldwide). Then we would have practically no one living below the level and we could stop trying to 'fix' something that is out of our control.

It may change statistics, but it doesn't change reality. Hey, wake up Peter Pan, this isn't fantasy. It DOES REQUIRE A certain amount of money to simply sustain your life. Shifting the goal posts to get different stats does NOTHING for shifting reality....

lol....come on man, are you serious????

 

[ecofarm]

Right that penny makes all the differance in determining if a person is in or not in poverty!

Yes, Heebie, just like that 1 day makes the difference between statutory rape and consentual sex. Tough. Life is not easy.

 

[Un biased]

With tax hikes + middle class becomes = more poor, Middle class and + high increase in property tax = increase in homeless. Were in a Recovery but banks are to scared to hand out loans and bussiness are scared to hire their is no faith in our economy.

 

[Masada]

I'll give you a serious answer to poverty, and reducing it's prevalence. I'm not joking when I say this either. Very few people will ask me "how", and "why", and I won't offer it unless you really wanna know my answer.

But the answer is in reducing and eliminating progressive/liberal philosophy, or certain aspects of it at least. There is a growing tide in America, of people who truly do believe that it is the GOVERNMENT'S job to take care of them, and to pay for their lifestyles. From cradle to grave. There is a growing tide of "group think" in America, that supports Socialism over Capitalism. Just look at polling data of young Americans. The MAJORITY of them believe Socialism is a good idea for America. It's poisoned innovation, work ethic, and personal responsibility, along with education.

You want to reduce poverty? Teach people that welfare is not good for them, which would be the opposite of what liberalism espouses. Teach them to avoid it at all cost. Teach them that equal outcomes are impossible, and equal opportunity isnt always PRECISELY equal all the time, but teach them to seize any opportunity they DO get. Teach them the PROPER roles of men and women in society, and we can do that without denegration, oppression, or any "ism" attached to it. Teach them how to become productive citizens, instead of teaching them how to work a system to get more government money. Stop incentivizing welfare. Stop electing politicians who tell the American people that entitlements like unemployment benefits are the BEST way to stimulate the economy. Term limits, so politicians cant spend a lifetime getting to know lobbyists and CEOs who line their personal pockets. Being a politician was never designed to be an occupation one became uber wealthy in! It's a service job. It's taken decades to reeducate these last 5 or 6 generations, and it's going to take a few to reverse it. It's not impossible, but it's hard, and America doesn't like "hard", they like quick and easy. That's gotta change. Get rid of liberalism and progressivism. It's pessimistic and negative. It generates envy and class warfare. It pits one class against the other. It's poison.

 

[dnsmith]

No **** Sherlock?? Don't be trying to impress me with anything you might know about the Roosevelt administration....I was there and lived it. The people loved Roosevelt so much that they elected him four times. The Republicans hated him so much that after he died they put a two term limit on service:

I was there too. As a democrat I liked him, but then I was young and idealistic. Had WWII not come along the recession would have continued.

 

[Heebie Jeebie]

At least you acknowledge that government can't fix it through entitlement spending. It's good to see you agree that the only solution for poverty is better choices, and harder work.

I maintain, the primary reason people are poor or live in poverty is because of CHOICES they have made. Not to say "all", but most.

You acknowledge working one's way out of poverty, and acknowledge "some will, some wont". So why the attitude? If it is the INDIVIDUAL'S responsibility, why the attitude and negative statements about everything else?

If you read back near the beginning I have always maintained that we can't 'fix' poverty. Some people will be able to get out of it and others won't. It's just statistics. Just like if you gave everyone a million dollars, in a year some would have way more and some would have way less.

 

[Heebie Jeebie]

It may change statistics, but it doesn't change reality. Hey, wake up Peter Pan, this isn't fantasy. It DOES REQUIRE A certain amount of money to simply sustain your life. Shifting the goal posts to get different stats does NOTHING for shifting reality....

lol....come on man, are you serious????

Of course it doesn't change reality. So you can set the poverty line anywhere you want as it has no bearing on reality.
Maybe someone can live out of poverty on $11,000 in Iowa but not in Chicago or any of ther of billion combinations you can think of. The poverty level is only set for statistics, to determine who can get what help from the government. It doesn't have anything to do with reality.

 

[Heebie Jeebie]

Yes, Heebie, just like that 1 day makes the difference between statutory rape and consentual sex.

Is that why you got in so much trouble? Dang and I thought it was just that you had a lousy lawyer.

 

[Masada]

If you read back near the beginning I have always maintained that we can't 'fix' poverty. Some people will be able to get out of it and others won't. It's just statistics. Just like if you gave everyone a million dollars, in a year some would have way more and some would have way less.

Remember you said that the next time you hear a liberal politician talking about raising taxes to ensure "fairness" in our society.....

 

[ecofarm]

Is that why you got in so much trouble? Dang and I thought it was just that you had a lousy lawyer.

Pathetic.


Anyway, I've posted my answer to the OP somewhere in this thread.

You guys play nice.

 

[Masada]

Of course it doesn't change reality. So you can set the poverty line anywhere you want as it has no bearing on reality.
Maybe someone can live out of poverty on $11,000 in Iowa but not in Chicago or any of ther of billion combinations you can think of. The poverty level is only set for statistics, to determine who can get what help from the government. It doesn't have anything to do with reality.

That's not true. The dollar amount is based in reality. It literally TAKES 11K per year to sustain a lifestyle outside of the definition of poverty. THAT'S REALITY. That nunber will no doubt go up over time, as it has historically, BECAUSE OF ACTUAL COSTS GOING UP OVER TIME.

lol....what world are you living in? Sure, you'll get different statistics, but we all know they would be bogus stats.

Good point about the difference in living in Iowa and Chicago.....guess what, it bolsters my claim even further. People CHOOSE to live where they live. No one is FORCED to live in Chicago, or Iowa for that matter. A simple CHOICE could be made to relocate to a place with more feasible cost of living expenses. The poverty level IS NOT only set for statistics, it is set AT THE ACTUAL COST OF AN ACCEPTABLE LIVING STANDARD.

Have you even tried reading "how" they come up with poverty line income stats? lol.....you're funny man......

 

[Heebie Jeebie]

Good point about the difference in living in Iowa and Chicago.....guess what, it bolsters my claim even further.

But the simple fact is that people live all over the country and have different costs of living but the poverty level is set for the whole country regardless of where you live. So it's an arbitrary number. It could be set at any level desired and it wouldn't change a single persons situation.

 

[DA60]

1) realize that short of a Communist sharing of the wealth - it is impossible to end poverty.

2) end ALL present government welfare programs (except for mentally/physically handicapped) and replace it with government emergency shelters in every major regional center that provide basic shelter, food and medical/dental for anyone that needs it.

3) provide full medical coverage for everyone under 20 - children should not medically suffer because they have loser parents.

4) as soon as the last person presently over 35 dies - Social Security dies with them. If the seniors need help, they can go to the above mentioned government shelters.

5) balance the federal budget, shrink the military budget, reduce income taxes across the board, end corporate taxes, reduce non-safety regulations, simplify the tax code and generally make starting and running domestic businesses as easy as possible.

And 6) IMO, it is NOT the government's job to make sure everyone is making decent money. Their only job is to get out of the way of business and provide the BASIC necessities of life for those that need it...and NOTHING else (in these regards).

 

[Campbell]

I'm 42. I'm an ex-paratrooper that used the GI Bill College fund to go to school, it carried me into my master's (MSc, Intl. Env. Sci), which I did in Europe and researched in Africa. I'm finishing my PhD, here in the US, at a top school. I'm a candidate, all my classes are done, I've passed my quals and my proposal was accepted. I spent 2 years straight in rural African conducting research. I'm currently finishing the write-up of my dissertation, after which I will teach HS to give back to the community before settling in Kenya.

ecofarm's Album: pics

I guarantee that I am FAR more experienced than you and my education dwarfs yours. I've seen and done things you only dream about, all my life.



You see, this "argument" of yours that I'm an idiot? That just got thrown back in your face. Now, you either come up with legit debate tactics or produce a CV that blows mine out of the water (not possible). This presuming that your debate opponent is an idiot and you can just blurt out garbage to win? Nope. You fail.

I don't dream about ****. You have about three times as much education as I have but I began working in a service station during my jr and sr year in high school...40 hours Monday thru Friday during school and sixty hours a week during the summers. I went to work at the Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant(ORGDP) in 1952 as a process operator trainee. We went to school 27 months. Assigned to a different area each month and on the rotation attended school in a classroom for 40 hours each time we were on day shift. We learned about compounds, gas flow, pneumatic instrumentation, big electrical systems, motor operated valves, trigonometry, solid geometry, etc. and were taught all the operational functions involved in the 4400 stage gaseous diffusion cascade. When the last plant(K-33) went online in the summer of 1955 the plant used more electrical power than the city of Chicago. One of the five plants had 640 2500hp GE or Westinghouse motors driving axial compressors and punping the uranium hexaflouride through barrier tubes in converters the size of a small house. K-33 was the third largest steel structure in the world when it was completed, falling behind the Eifel Tower and the Empire State Building. It was 84 ft. tall, covered 32 acres, had two floors and a partial basement. The cooling towers around the place put up a vapor which could be seen in a city 30 miles away. On perfectly clear days in winter one might have to drive through a snowfall at those towers if the wind and other conditions were right. We called it "tower effect snow." We produced the uranium 235 isotope for weapons and medical research. We also produced low assay material and withdrew submarine reactor fuel for the then new atomic fleet. When all the AEC, now DOE gaseous diffusion plants were online they used 10% of all the generated power in the United States.

In 1965 I began a night school in electronics and attended 4 hours a night four days a week for two and a half years. At that time I had been caught in a reduction in force in my process job and went to the data processing center as an computer operator trainee. I became a shift supervisor and after four years was promoted to operations supervisor over three exempt supervisors and three shifts of technical people who ran one of the 50 largest IBM computing centers in the world...probably the biggest in the se U S. At a peak in the center I had 41 technical employees reporting to me. We installed Oak Ridge's first supercomputer, the CRAY XMP/24 and I was the project manager dealing with all the trades, all disciplines of engineering, helped write the bid specifications before we selected a system etc. The project cost $11 million and $8.5 million was for the computer...the remainder site prep and incidentals.

I'm retired, live in a 4 br brick rancher on 1 1/2 acres with 220ft. lake frontage. I have a dock, a boat, a wife and a german shepherd dog. My wife also worked at the plants and between the two of us we draw about $5,000 per month in pensions and social security. We have a 2009 Lincoln towncar and a new Ford F-150. We've never touched our 401K's.....now rolled over to IRA's and everything we have is paid for. My three kids have good educations, two with masters degrees. I have eight grandchildren and two great grandchildren. Live it up ol boy because that's what we do. We've been to Las Vegas six times since 1999, Biloxi MS at least a dozen times, Tunica, MS more than that and I don't even know how many times we've been across the mountain to Harrahs in Cherokee, NC. We love to gamble.

One more little factoid and I'll hush. Union Carbide had a policy which allowed me to serve in the army (AAA) in 1957/58 and never miss a raise or any seniority while I was gone. I continued in the Tennessee national guards until 1964. When I was discharged I was a tank commander sgt E6 on an M-48 medium patton tank.

It sounds like you have your **** together but you're not the only one.

 

[ecofarm]

I don't dream about ****.

I'm sorry to hear that. When you've done anywhere NEAR what I've done in the fight against poverty (let alone my plans), bother me. When you have a clue what it's like to live in poverty (in the US or anywhere else), bother me.

Until then, keep the ad homs to yourself.

It sounds like you have your **** together

Damn straight, and way better looking than most. Watch who you talk crap at.

 

[Alyssa]

I'm 42. I'm an ex-paratrooper that used the GI Bill College fund to go to school, it carried me into my master's (MSc, Intl. Env. Sci), which I did in Europe and researched in Africa. I'm finishing my PhD, here in the US, at a top school. I'm a candidate, all my classes are done, I've passed my quals and my proposal was accepted. I spent 2 years straight in rural African conducting research. I'm currently finishing the write-up of my dissertation, after which I will teach HS to give back to the community before settling in Kenya.

ecofarm's Album: pics

I guarantee that I am FAR more experienced than you and my education dwarfs yours. I've seen and done things you only dream about, all my life.



You see, this "argument" of yours that I'm an idiot? That just got thrown back in your face. Now, you either come up with legit debate tactics or produce a CV that blows mine out of the water (not possible). This presuming that your debate opponent is an idiot and you can just blurt out garbage to win? Nope. You fail.

:roll: Do they offer a PhD in navel-gazing? i suspect you'd probably be a candidate for that, as well. anyhow, enough with the pissing contest.

Poverty cannot be eliminated from human society in its current state of development. If there is any type of economy where resources are distributed based on monetary value, there will always be people with more, and also many more with much less. The point is, poverty is here to stay. The best method to minimize its impact on society as a whole is to level the odds rather than allowing a certain sect to control the deck of cards and the rules of the game. It's a choice between liberty and security.

 

[ecofarm]

:roll: Do they offer a PhD in navel-gazing?

Yes, navel gazing is how I've managed to become a wartime paratroop, a euro-educated masters and a top-school US PhD. It's also how I managed to survive, alone, in the African bush for two years.

But I hear you have a server, so that's an accomplishment too.

Don't hate 'cause I'm beautiful. After all, you have a server and a mundane job (I presume). Those are important things!

Poverty cannot be eliminated from human society in its current state of development... It's a choice between liberty and security.

That's a bunch of BS, probably generated by someone who doesn't know the first thing about poverty from any perspective.

 

[Alyssa]

Yes, navel gazing is how I've managed to become a wartime paratroops, a euro-educated masters and a top-school PhD.

But I hear you have a server, so that's an accomplishment too.

The internet is a place where people can go to spin their tall tales in a world where no one requires proof of their arrogant assertions.

Like I was saying, people have been trying to solve the problem of poverty and have continued to fail miserably. And yet they miss the point-- with any finite resource, there will always be those without.