Why do we have poor people?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-12-2013, 07:12 PM
RE: Why do we have poor people?
Simple answer: poor generally defines those at the bottom of the income spectrum. Raising the average of the spectrum has no effect. There will always be people at the bottom of it.

Are you asking why there are people described as poor? Or are you specifically asking why there are some people who seem destined to fail to live at what some others consider to be a "liveable standard"?

Someone redefines what a "liveable standard" is based on current human tech, and as a result some other folks are then considered poor. The same people whose lifestyles were not considered poor a few decades before. Are we worried about poverty, or just making sure everyone "keeps up"?

He's not the Messiah. He's a very naughty boy! -Brian's mum
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Cardinal Smurf's post
17-12-2013, 03:59 AM
RE: Why do we have poor people?
(16-12-2013 06:51 PM)frankksj Wrote:  It's more complicated than that. Central Banks, which print money, are generally privately owned by the big banks--not the government. The current US Federal Reserve system was architected by the big banks at a secret meeting at Jekyll Island in 1910. However, a completely private central bank has trouble printing money because people simply stop using the money.
Its even more complicated than that again, these private companies are controlled by the board of governers nominated by the government. So ultimate control lies with the government even if the 'day to day' running is by private companies.

Quote: Name one product you've seen in your lifetime where demand (and prices) went up, and the situation didn't quickly self-correct as more and more companies scrambled to open factories and get their piece of that pie, which in turn creates more jobs and drives costs back down again.
Oil, energy, pretty much any commodity.. High demand spikes prices before it implements improvements to increase production.. why? because you cant always produce to peak demand if the low demand periods make your production unprofitable. High energy demands in the winters, make the energy prices go up for the year round, even though the demand is much lower in the summer.

Quote:Even if your wages remained flat, if the cost of living went down, like it does with increased efficiency and greater automation, your standard of living would go up. Yes, it's true that as companies become more automated they need fewer employees to do the same job. BUT, with every new technology a lot more jobs come too. Perhaps some day there will be robots and AI doing all the work and humans will be obsolete. But, today, technological innovations creates more jobs than it destroys. If you question that, just go to a country that has no technology--like Zimbabwe. What's the job market like?

I dont know if a lot more jobs come with increased technology, SOME do, and generally better paid jobs.. 1000 workers could be replaced by a machine that needs 10 men to build and look after.. they will get better wages, but by 100 times? no. Same production, less employees, more profit, incomparable wage increase.

Then you are right, with increased technology we need to employ more people.. a simple example would be; there are more TV channels - more presenters and cameramen etc.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-12-2013, 10:53 AM
RE: Why do we have poor people?
(17-12-2013 03:59 AM)PursuingTruth Wrote:  
Quote: Name one product you've seen in your lifetime where demand (and prices) went up, and the situation didn't quickly...the ONLY times you can find that happened is with government assistance.
Oil, energy, pretty much any commodity..

I wasn't really talking about natural resources, but more goods and services which the private sector can produce more of. My point is that IF demand goes up, and there's no barrier preventing new companies from providing more of it (like patents, regulation, etc.), in a free market society somebody's always anxious to find a way to get their piece of the pie.

Also remember in my post the caveat was 'without government assistance'. The US government regulates how much energy can be produced. If some private company wanted to build a nuclear power plan, he wouldn't be able to without special permits, which haven't been granted. Even still, look at the top chart with inflation-adjusted energy prices. Even with government interference demand keeps going up and up, but prices don't rise accordingly.

The chart below shows inflation-adjusted oil prices. During the 50's and 60's demand was also constantly going up, but prices were not. The roller coaster began right around 1971. I don't claim to know much about oil pricing, but it is interesting timing that this is precisely when Nixon ended the gold standard so he could print a fiat currency to pay for Vietnam, and to hold off the collapse of the dollar which is inevitable for all fiat currencies, he signed a pact that same time with Saudi Arabia that the US would support and protect them unequivocally, and in exchange they had to ensure that all oil was only sold in US dollars, and agree to invest oil profits in US treasuries. Oil prices seem to be heavily manipulated by governments, rather than normal supply/demand forces.

[Image: US%20Electricity%20Prices%201970-2008.PNG]

[Image: historical-oil-price-2011.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-12-2013, 02:16 AM
RE: Why do we have poor people?
Have we no workhouses, no prisons to send poor people too? Beats the Dickens out of me why we have the poor, but if their lives are too miserable to bear, they best move on from this world and decrease the surplus population.

Merry Christmas
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes BryanS's post
20-12-2013, 07:39 PM
RE: Why do we have poor people?
(20-12-2013 02:16 AM)BryanS Wrote:  Have we no workhouses, no prisons to send poor people too? Beats the Dickens out of me why we have the poor, but if their lives are too miserable to bear, they best move on from this world and decrease the surplus population.

If you see a poor, hungry person in the street,

DEMOCRATS: will take food from someone who has surplus and give it to the poor person, leaving the poor person fed, but also dependent.

REPUBLICANS: will ask the police to remove the poor person so they don't have to look at him, hoping he'll die soon and not pass on his inferior genes.

LIBERTARIANS: will teach the poor person how to grow his own food so he's not hungry and becomes self-sufficient.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-12-2013, 10:14 PM
RE: Why do we have poor people?
(20-12-2013 07:39 PM)frankksj Wrote:  LIBERTARIANS: will teach the poor person how to grow his own food so he's not hungry and becomes self-sufficient. will bitch about how the poor person isn't taking personal responsibility, feel high and mighty about the fact they have made it entirely on their own with no help whatsoever from their society or their wealthy families, and winge again about a few dollars being taken from their pocket to give the the poor person enough to feed their children... while dreaming about how they would definitely really help that person out if they really ever felt like it. I mean, they would definitely teach that poor person how to get on in society because they are experts in doing that. Then they would go back to their parents' basement and eat food from their mother's fridge and order pizza using their mother's credit card.

Fixed.

If you're going to claim one group will do x and another y, show us the statistics to back it up Mr "My position is superior because we use facts and logic. I know this because I have such advanced logical skill and knowledge that I think the sum of two numbers is an axiom".

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Hafnof's post
20-12-2013, 11:37 PM
RE: Why do we have poor people?
If you really want to fix the problem of poverty you need to fix the education system. However this would take years to work, even if the system was fixed tomorrow. So why is there poverty and what should be done?

First you have to separate poverty from poor people. Poor is a competitive term for those who do the lowest and most menial jobs. Poverty is the state of being near desperation. It is perfectly ok for a janitor to make markedly less than a doctor, administrator, it is not acceptable that he should live in a crime-infested slum.

Poor people exist because it is necessary to have incentives to rise and work harder. Poverty exists because of a failing educational system, criminization and incarceration for victimless crimes (drug use), aBuse of social welfare programs, and lack of proper education.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes natachan's post
21-12-2013, 10:43 AM
RE: Why do we have poor people?
(20-12-2013 10:14 PM)Hafnof Wrote:  
(20-12-2013 07:39 PM)frankksj Wrote:  LIBERTARIANS: will teach the poor person how to grow his own food so he's not hungry and becomes self-sufficient. will bitch about how the poor person isn't taking personal responsibility, feel high and mighty about the fact they have made it entirely on their own with no help whatsoever from their society or their wealthy families, and winge again about a few dollars being taken from their pocket to give the the poor person enough to feed their children... while dreaming about how they would definitely really help that person out if they really ever felt like it. I mean, they would definitely teach that poor person how to get on in society because they are experts in doing that. Then they would go back to their parents' basement and eat food from their mother's fridge and order pizza using their mother's credit card.

Fixed.

If you're going to claim one group will do x and another y, show us the statistics to back it up Mr "My position is superior because we use facts and logic. I know this because I have such advanced logical skill and knowledge that I think the sum of two numbers is an axiom".

Take a real world example from the last Presidential election: poor people who need medical care.

DEMOCRATS: Obama and most of the democrats favored a single-payer system where the rich are forced to pay taxes to provide free care.

REPUBLICANS: All the GOP candidates were opposed to government handouts, and looked the other way.

LIBERTARIAN: The only major libertarian candidate, Ron Paul, went to medical school, became a doctor, worked for $3/hour in a charity hospital providing free medical care to the poor. The funding for those charity hospitals came from rich people. So it STILL was a matter of the rich paying more so that poor people could get free care. It was STILL a redistribution of wealth. The ONLY difference was it was done without force.

Or, consider education, how people get access to knowledge:

DEMOCRATS: Bigger, centralized government planning through the Dept of Education, funded by force using tax payer money. If a rich person refuses to fund the DoE (ie pay taxes) he is arrested at gunpoint and thrown in jail.

REPUBLICANS: Privatize education, so poor people can't get it and become ignorant, easy to control with their religious dogma.

LIBERTARIANS: Jimmy Wales founded Wikipedia based on libertarian principles, based the financial model on Austrian economics, and picked mostly libertarians to run it. If he followed a typical model, accepting advertising, it's estimated Wales would be worth about $6 BILLION right now. Instead he sacrificed all of it, choosing to live a modest life, so that everybody in the world could have free access to an enormous treasure trove of information that was untainted from corporate interests (link). And to fund it, he asks those who have more to contribute. And libertarians like myself, do generously contribute to keep it running.

No matter how many times we go over this, it just doesn't sink in. Libertarian (as in classic liberal) means just one thing: it is wrong for one person to use threats of violence against another person to coerce him, we must let everyone exercise free will. That's it. To join the Libertarian party there is only requirement, to take this pledge: "I hereby certify that I do not believe in or advocate the initiation of force as a means of achieving political or social goals." Some libertarians, like myself, come from the left and do have just as much concern about seeing everyone in society taken care of. The only difference is we don't use violence to achieve that end. There are, of course, some libertarians are arrogant, elitist and think like you describe, such as Ayn Rand, who I find as offensive as you. But, in my observation, this is quite rare because generally people who have such high opinions of themselves feel its their duty to force everyone to follow their system, to save the ignorant masses from their own stupidity, and lead them (at gunpoint) into the light. In general, you have to be more humble to accept that your opinion is just that, and that everybody has their own opinions and must be allowed to live their life the way they want.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: