A SAD, SAD DAY...

[mylexicon]

This is not a party political topic, it's a US problem ? the richest nation on earth has 1 in 8 people living below the poverty line. Democrats and Republicans both play up to businesses because that's how you gain/stay in power.

Last year [2002] alone, another 1.7 million Americans slipped below the poverty line, bringing the total to 34.6 million, one in eight of the population. Over 13 million of them are children. In fact, the US has the worst child poverty rate and the worst life expectancy of all the world's industrialised countries, and the plight of its poor is worsening.

https://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/story/0,13918,1076608,00.html

I shouldn't need to tell you that this kind of poverty creates all kinds of social problems that the US really shouldn't have. I'm not suggesting abandon capitalism or start taxing corporations heavily ? just addressing the fact that something needs to happen here.

Stop, please. These kind of statements make me frown and in general ruin
my day.
First of all the wealth of the united States doesn't belong to the U.S. it belongs
to individual's who live within our borders. Having more rich people doesn't
entitle us to special treatment.

And just for the sake of argument let's calculate what we could do with the money
necessary to keep people out of poverty. I'd imagine that the average poverty
stricken individual could probably use an average of $10,000 dollars to help
pull them out of poverty. $10,000 times (280,000,000x12.5%)=$350,000,000,000

After you factor in administration fees and federal budget robbing and political end-fighting that number
probably grows to about 400billion. 400billionpfft.....thats chump change for
us. In fact its about equal to our current welfare budget. So what's the deal.
Why are we so hell bent on spending that much money on Americans who
have already been given more opportunity that 3/4 of the globe. We could
put the entire middle east or all of Africa on welfare with that kind of scratch
and that might actually provide us with some sort of benefit.

Secondly, why do we even have to spend it. Why can't that money be invested
on furthering a capitalistic system that will continue to generate cash flows for
poverty stricken individuals rather than jeopardizing everyone's future by taxing
the machine that we have. Furthermore, am I the only one who realizes the
the negative social impact that taxes have. The harder you tax the rich the
harder they have to work to generate cash flows necessary for growing their
businesses. The harder they have to work, the harder they expect their upper
middle class, middle class, and lower class employees to work and the more
they cram their goods and services down our throats. The harder the employees
have to work, the less leisure time they have and the worse their quality of
life. Taxes have been climbing for centuries and the quality of life (stress wise) has taken a nose dive. And most of the tax hikes have been to generate
revenues for our lower class or for other ridiculous political initiatives
that don't really do anything other than make it look like Washington is busy.

When will people wake up and stop then insanity that surrounds class warfare
and vote buying?!

[asdf_admin]

I would not say USA people like war ... but we are prone to justify the death of innocent people. Yet it does not make sense.

Many people support the War on Terror, but many have a difficult time to place that with Iraq. What is done is done, and perhaps I can speak for many of us ... it would be sad to pull out of Iraq and to reason all the deaths that have been wasted on a cause.

SHUT UP LIBERALS. I am firm believer that history will tell the truth in the matter of Iraq. None of us know the answer. I hope and do wish Iraq to become a free and self governed country, but once again history will speak the truth in about 10+ years.

War sucks in any aspect you look at it. I just hope the deaths of all the people in Iraq are worthy of the cause of creating a better place for the people.

[ftc]

War sucks in any aspect you look at it. I just hope the deaths of all the people in Iraq are worthy of the cause of creating a better place for the people.

and if america fails?

who is going to explain to the future generation iraqis who will be suffering from numerous radioactive diseases, robbed from their natural resources, poverty levels in a decline with no safe jobs available, a shady puppet government in rule and terrorism lurking in the background that their mother father brother sister uncle etc. died for the just cause?

you cannot implement democracy when there is no strife for it. you have to realize that some places in the world prefer a dictatorship and are better off when you compare whats at hand. especially in a case when a half-assed democracy is going to make the situation even worse.

[Civic_Zen]

They only believe they are better off with a dictatorship. That doesn't make it true. Give them 5 years under a democracy and see how they feel.

I mean, are you listening to youself? Better off under a dictatorship?

You are hilarious my friend.

And what the hell are you talking about, radioactive diseases?? If there is any radioactivity in Iraq, its from something Saddam did, not anything the US is doing. Your entire argument is baseless.

[ftc]

Re: A SAD, SAD DAY...

if you were more aware of world history you would notice that many countries have adopted a pozitive dictatorship regime sometime during the course of time which has helped them develop into their current position.

let me give you a more simple example:

you cannot take a new born baby and put him in school.

there is a period where the child is nursed to adopt to the rules & regulations, a period where it is told what to do and what not to, a pre-learning period if you will which also applies to countries and their citizens aswell. do you really just expect that the iraqi people are going to go to their municipal courts and vote for a president and the campaigns are going to be just peachy?

Perhaps saying 'radioactive' was jumping the gun, but do you know what are in those bunker-buster shells they've been dropping for years? Think about the side effects all that hi-tech weaponary has.

As I said before, it's nothing but a target practice range for the hawks and their new toys.

Want a base? Look into the "Gulf War Syndrome"

[asdf_admin]

and if america fails?

who is going to explain to the future generation iraqis who will be suffering from numerous radioactive diseases, robbed from their natural resources, poverty levels in a decline with no safe jobs available, a shady puppet government in rule and terrorism lurking in the background that their mother father brother sister uncle etc. died for the just cause?

you cannot implement democracy when there is no strife for it. you have to realize that some places in the world prefer a dictatorship and are better off when you compare whats at hand. especially in a case when a half-assed democracy is going to make the situation even worse.

that is a mere speculation. and it is fine to speculate on the outcome on any event, but you can not get angry for people that believe otherwise. as i stated earlier, they only truth in the matter will be history itself.

i do understand your viewpoint and it will determined. i just hope i am right and you are wrong, because i do want to explain that Iraq was a murder crusade and the destruction of a country to my little girl.

[Yao]

Re: A SAD, SAD DAY...

Civic, asdf,

I think ftc may very well be right in his stance about pressing democracy on a people and that sometimes a 'benign' dictatorship is better than democracy. This may sounds strange, but look at it from this side:

Most 3rd-world countries have a very weak state, which means no legitimate power amongst the people, and very little operational institutions that can check the state in it's democratic efforts.
In a society divided by ethnical or religious boundaries, there is always a struggle for power over the other groups. In a poor society the state is the grand prize which can make you rich if you obtain it. Once in office, the government is not likely to give up it's position, for that would mean a gigantic decrease in income for those involved.
So in both cases democracy has no feeding ground in the thoughts of the people.

Among scholars and researchers on these topics, it is already common thought that sometimes a dictatorship could be favourable for the following reason:
There is no possibility of fighting among the people for power (as it is taken), and a government that is centralized like that is by far more capable of implementing rules and measures that have to be taken, by force if neccesary.
It's a tricky one, but if it gets the job done better than democracy, so be it.

My African Hero is Yowereni Museveni from Uganda. He has managed to evade the ethnical problem by making a semi-federal construction, in which the administrative regions correspond with the boundaries of ethnical identities. They have a certain amount of autonomy where it comes to the spending of the allowed fundings, too.
This part is taken from a co-student who wrote about this, and whom I respect very much:

The Movement system is a governmental institution-building which focuses on decentralization. The so-called local ?resistance? councils of which all adults are automatic members, choose representatives, who then choose members for a parish committee, who choose a sub-county committee who choose a district committee. At the apex of this pyramid structure is the countries parliament (NRC) and the Movement?s National Executive Committee (NEC). Only the people in the village committee, the smallest unit, are therefore directly chosen. Museveni?s decentralization design therefore does not follow ethnic or religious lines. According to the constitution, boundaries of districts are only based on rational grounds:

Any measure for the alteration of the boundaries of or the creation of districts or administrative units shall be based on the necessity for effective administration and the need to bring services closer to the people and it may take into account the means of communication, geographical features, density of population, economic viability and the wishes of the people concerned (art.179.4 of the 1995 constitution)

Effectively this means that areas are divided in small units and are easier to control. In a way the Movement system establishes a fragmentation of power within ethnic groups and therefore a fragmentation of the (possible) opposition.

Presidential elections held in 1996 and in 2001 kept Museveni in power, economic growth had soured during his rule and his government was one of the first on the African continent to recognize the seriousness of the AIDS epidemic

She ends with this part, which I fully support:

If we are to compare the type of democracy Uganda has to the democracy as we know it in the West we might judge it as non-democratic because there are no political parties within a political arena. You could, probably successfully argue, that it is at least semi-authoritarian. There is a reason however why I went into depth of the political history of Uganda. The maxim goes that those that do not learn from history are bound to repeat it. Africa can not be compared to western society, and political systems as we know them should not be imposed on them. Africa has to feel its way as it goes along. If we are to look at our own history we can hardly claim that we reached the level of democracy of the present time without mistakes and blatant disregard of human rights and lives. Recent events can only teach us that we still have to be on guard not to loose the rights we take for granted now.
History has taught Museveni that following established ways of democracy can very well lead to new ethnic and religious conflicts. With the Movement system he tries to avoid this trap and only time will tell if he succeed.

A long post, but worth the read I think.

[mylexicon]

Re: A SAD, SAD DAY...

Civic, asdf,

I think ftc may very well be right in his stance about pressing democracy on a people and that sometimes a 'benign' dictatorship is better than democracy.

..................... :ROFLMAO:

Intellectuals crack me up. Look, first off, dictatorship is only better than
democracy in the event a country has absolutely no positive outside
influences for change. That's not the case in Iraq. Even more importantly, that is almost
never the case now that the U.N. is hellbent about overseeing the success of their relatively
new anti-poverty crusade. In fact, the number one thing holding U.N. relief efforts
back is dictators.Dictators who seize U.N. shipments of food and material.
Dictators who give kickbacks to security council members in order to have them
veto military action. Which was pretty much the rule when dealing with North
Korea until about '98 and it was certainly the rule in the Iraqi war.

Iraq. Saddam gets sanctions put on his people, then he doops
the oil for food program and uses that money to lure greedy Europeans to
sell him military equipment and launder his money. Removal of Saddam
with U.N. backing could have been the greatest thing that ever happened to
Iraq......but sadly the U.N. dropped the ball because half the security council
was in bed with saddam. Then they vieled their failure with Bush-hatred and
irrelevant political science text books. (I mean seriously, the U.N. tells people
they shouldn't eliminate dictatorship when the whole point of their institution
is to have democratic representation from every country on earth for the
purpose of open debate!!!! Please! That shit stinks so bad I can smell it all
the way down here in Texas)

Textbook. And like good little non-confrontational Utopianists.....everyone
bought it. This planet is like one giant game of bs; some people can spot it,
and others end up holding half the deck. The U.N. didn't try to stop us in Iraq
becuase it was morally wrong......they tried to stop us because they were frightened
by the ambiguity that would have followed Saddams removal.

[ftc]

Re: A SAD, SAD DAY...

hmm texas, figures. i don't like repeating myself but if you thoroughly read whats being said before typing up a come-back post, you'd realize both me and Yao are trying to explain the fact that you cannot force democracy onto a people. they have to want it. thats why there are revolutions. the people rise up against the regime. then, if outside help is necessary or asked for, think about it - at the un council discussing it with other nations. but go ahead collectively, not just alone. what some people are misunderstanding, which i'd like to underline one more time, is that US is not the world police. They don't have the right to go into countries with false pre-emptive criteria, then say that although they fucked up on the intelligence it's better now for the people & the world - democracy has arrived woohoo.. have the media cover it as if the people were waiting for this moment, celebrating the arrival of the great saviour. well, it's nothing near this! nobody is arguing that saddam was a bad dictator, that he ill treated his citizens but you just don't go and take him out - there are international laws. no matter how much you hate a leader you're not allowed to invade their country. usa has just trampled these laws and i hope those who made these decissions will pay for it some day. yes i agree the un is not the best solution but look over the past years at the security council and the vetos america has given. nobody said "hey screw you america, we're gonna do it with or without you!". its easy to asume that the countries who didn't support the war had business relationships with saddam (which could quite possibly be a valid case) but you dont blow off the united nations because the outcome doesn't please you. whats the purpose of having this organization then? "We'll see what the UN decission is, and if we don't like it we'll go ahead anyway" ?? unfortunately this is exactly what the bush admin did. if you can still stick behind this atrocity, its time to get away from the propaganda and start understanding REALITY.

[Yao]

Re: A SAD, SAD DAY...

You should've read my post better Mylexicon: your statement about dictatorship is apliccable to that.

But do you call yourself a positive influence from outside for Iraq? I don't. Even with the stupid oil-for-food programme they had Saddam pinned down. And yes, the people suffered. Question was: were they going to sit it out until he died, or were they going to take the situation in their own hands?
The US didn't wait for the answer and moved in, even without the consent of the UN. FTC has said it even before I could, but I fully support his post.
The US of A is not the world police, and by acting like it and ignoring all international treaties on this, will only increase dissagreement with it's policies from other countries around the globe. There is something called the Geneva Convention, you know.

I've given my opinion on the UN and the Security Council before in other threads http://www.mercuryserver.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=205.

[mixu]

Props to ftc and Yao for having a handle on the way the world functions...

mylexicon, crawl back into your Texas hole ? you clearly love the sound of your own voice too much.

This is not a party political topic, it's a US problem ? the richest nation on earth has 1 in 8 people living below the poverty line. Democrats and Republicans both play up to businesses because that's how you gain/stay in power.

Last year [2002] alone, another 1.7 million Americans slipped below the poverty line, bringing the total to 34.6 million, one in eight of the population. Over 13 million of them are children. In fact, the US has the worst child poverty rate and the worst life expectancy of all the world's industrialised countries, and the plight of its poor is worsening.

https://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/story/0,13918,1076608,00.html

I shouldn't need to tell you that this kind of poverty creates all kinds of social problems that the US really shouldn't have. I'm not suggesting abandon capitalism or start taxing corporations heavily ? just addressing the fact that something needs to happen here.

Stop, please. These kind of statements make me frown and in general ruin my day.
Blah, blah, blah...

Just to reiterate, can you not see the problem here? I'm not saying what the US should do or who should do what...

I'm not saying someone should spend the money to address it...

I'm saying you should simply recognise this as a problem ? the richest nation on earth and 1 in 8 live below the poverty line. You just don't see that in other major industrialised capitalist countries.

There is an inherent problem in the system here. Now either you have no idea or respect for society or have no belief in it whatsoever. Or are you so selfish that you just look after yourself? Maybe the US could do away with the police, the army, schools and public services ? that'd save you some taxes.

Simple question ? is it right that so many people in the US live in poverty? Yes or no?

[thesightless]

actually USA has one of the lowest poverty rates in the world. go to Ghana or serbia if you want to see poverty, stop crying, b/c if you cared about the race as much as you say, you would go over there and help a situation that is about 100 times worse than the USA was in the early 30's/

[mixu]

Here's the quote again:

The US has the worst child poverty rate and the worst life expectancy of all the world's industrialised countries.

It was raised in the context of business and the wealth in the US. Of course there are countries far worse off than the US ? but neither Ghana or Serbia are included in the world's major industrialised countries. And it's shameful to suggest I don't care about them.

[Yao]

Re: A SAD, SAD DAY...

My dad told me some horrific stories about your offshore industry man, highest safety standards, but people who require special kind of tuition because their IQ is too low have to do dangerous work b'cuz they can't afford health insurance. SICK.

BTW: I'm going to Ghana next summer and stay there for about 7 months. And I'm looking forward to going there, been there 2 months last year and had the time of my life. I will also be visiting Burkina Faso and if possible (as soon as the shooting stops) Ivory Coast. Don't talk to me about poverty, you ain't seen nothing yet...

[runningman]

Re: A SAD, SAD DAY...

I HATE AMERICA...I HATE THIS COUNTRY...DEMOCRACY MY ASS...HALF THIS COUNTRY DIDN'T EVEN VOTE BECAUSE THEY ARE TOO POOR, DISENFRANCHISED, OR TOO EXISTENTIAL AS A RESULT TO CARE...ALL OF THE WHITE, HICK, RICH, EMPTY, CHRISTIAN, PEDANT ROBOTS CAME OUT IN DROVES...

CAPITALISM REALLY WORKS DOESN'T IT????

I AM AGNOSTIC, BUT PROBABILITY SAYS GOD DOESN'T EXIST...ISLAM IS EVIL, CHRISTIANITY IS EVIL...PLEASE PLEASE STOP USING THESE IRRATIONAL IDEAS AS PLATFORMS FOR YOUR MORAL AGENDAS!!!!!!!

I UTTERLY RESENT ALL OF YOU THAT DIDNT VOTE THIS YEAR...I AM APPALLED THAT YOU VOTED THIS RICH HICK PRESIDENT AS OUR LEADER...HE HAS NO MORAL AGENDA AND APPARENTLY YOU DON'T EITHER...

I AM DISGUSTED

IF YOU VOTED FOR BUSH OR YOU DIDN'T VOTE AT ALL, YOU ARE EITHER A NIHILIST, A CHRISTIAN PEDANT, OR JUST PLAIN DUMB/BRAINWASHED...

ALL I CAN SAY IS YOU WILL SEE THE INEVITABLE TRUTH OF YOUR LACK OF SKEPTICISM AND YOUR FAITHFUL CLINGING TO AMERICAN IDEALOGY IN THE FACE OF AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF EMPIRICAL DATA THAT SHOWS THE EVILS OF THIS REGIME

JUST WAIT AND SEE...I AM VERY VERY SCARED...AND YOU SHOULD BE TOO


I HAVE DECIDED NOT TO HAVE CHILDREN...THANKS!!!!!!

you really should smoke more weed.. your one of those fly off the handle type people eh? and if more voted they probably would have voted for bush.. it was praticaly a land slide he won by 4 million votes.. the only reason why it was close because the tv (democrats) said it was going to be closer.. exit polls. .. that makes me laugh.. i thought you were smarter then this..