The One Cause of Poverty That’s Never Considered

[Audie]

Well, if nothing else, at least this might explain why the lower classes in America may be unhappy - even though they ostensibly eat better and live better than their class counterparts in most other areas of the world. Here in America, we have billionaires who live better than the vast majority of people in the world, and even they're unhappy and worried. Why would that be? That's where discussions like this start to get really bizarre.

So, businessmen and entrepreneurs work longer and harder with 20 times the brainpower? If that were the case, wouldn't we see some sort of tangible results at street level? I'm not talking about the poor or the "fat and lazy." Forget them. If we look at the overall conditions of the country and the worsening geopolitical situation, I don't see very many people among the top leadership using that much "brainpower." I really don't, but if you say you hang out with smart people, then I believe you.

What on earth sort of " tangible results at street level" are you talking about?

Henry Ford worked hard. There's Fords right there are street level.

If Americans rich and poor are unhappy, you tell me why.
Analyze the psyches and geopolitics.
The church people will tell you it's a lack of religion.
The poor will say it's a lack of money.
Others sau libs or cons or who knows what.
Lo here and lo there.

But then, anywhere, any group, some are happy, some are not.
How that relates to the cause of poverty or future of capitalism is
obscure to these dim eyes.

Not that I said or implied " smart" , but, I will say that your type
of if/ then is utterly insincere. " if uou are offended I'm sorry" say.

Why that seemed necessay for you to add at the last is also obscure to me.

 

[Heyo]

Businessmen, entrepreneurs as I know them work harder and longer
than anyone you know and twice the hours, twenty times the brainpower of
anyone they employ.

Well, twice as much hours times twenty times the brainpower; if that is true, it would be fair if they earned 400 times as much. Do they?

 

[wellwisher]

Capitalism works similar to nature; efficiency of resources. If you sell burgers, and make money, others will copy you. You will soon need to compete for the consumers dollars. The result are the better burger joints grow the worse disappear. This is nature allowing healthy ecosystems. The problems begins when the Government and self serving Politicians start to mess with the free market. They can turn something good into crap and then blame everyone but themselves.

The student loan debt, which is creating a hardship for thousands, has government interference written all over it. The free market would not have allowed this situation to happen in the first place, since efficiency means minimal defaults; tougher loans standards up front to spare you and them future hardship. Government created your pain.

As another example, the Democrats purposely favored Green energy while adding extra burdens to fossil fuel. This is not how the free market works. That is not free and open competition, leading to the best outcomes. It caused inflation and hardship for most people. The boneheads in government, do not even factor changes in energy costs into their inflation equations, to game the free system and make the crooks look less crooked and less incompetent.

If you look the American Government's debt, name me any company in the free market as incompetent and still standing with that level of debt? No company would or could operate that way in a free market. The free market expects efficiency and not incompetence and corruption. When such boneheads in government, cannot even balance a check book, why should they be allowed to makes rules for the more efficient free market? Why lead from the back of the competency line? The con artists will them blame their own failings on business greed and not their own incompetent bonehead power lust.

I would like to see the most efficient business; stable with good books, make the laws as to how government has to deal with tax money and their budget. The goal is to help the boneheads become more efficient. Tax revenues to the Federal Government is at an all time high. The problem is not lack of money, but it is a spending problem. That excess spending impacts the economy, with the harm to the free market, blamed on business, but not the boneheads in government.

Can anyone justify a Government, regulating the free market, when it cannot even balance its own budget? Why not allow teens with their first credit card to lead the economy? They would do less damage to the free market, since there are basically harmless. Teens are not as sleazy as the bonehead politicians pushing their free economy hurting agendas with debt.

 

[Audie]

Well, twice as much hours times twenty times the brainpower; if that is true, it would be fair if they earned 400 times as much. Do they?

It would have been more Chinese-y of ms to say ' two thosand"

I don't know what-y it is to get too literal.

 

[Audie]

Capitalism works similar to nature; efficiency of resources. If you sell burgers, and make money, others will copy you. You will soon need to compete for the consumers dollars. The result are the better burger joints grow the worse disappear. This is nature allowing healthy ecosystems. The problems begins when the Government and self serving Politicians start to mess with the free market. They can turn something good into crap and then blame everyone but themselves.

The student loan debt, which is creating a hardship for thousands, has government interference written all over it. The free market would not have allowed this situation to happen in the first place, since efficiency means minimal defaults; tougher loans standards up front to spare you and them future hardship. Government created your pain.

As another example, the Democrats purposely favored Green energy while adding extra burdens to fossil fuel. This is not how the free market works. That is not free and open competition, leading to the best outcomes. It caused inflation and hardship for most people. The boneheads in government, do not even factor changes in energy costs into their inflation equations, to game the free system and make the crooks look less crooked and less incompetent.

If you look the American Government's debt, name me any company in the free market as incompetent and still standing with that level of debt? No company would or could operate that way in a free market. The free market expects efficiency and not incompetence and corruption. When such boneheads in government, cannot even balance a check book, why should they be allowed to makes rules for the more efficient free market? Why lead from the back of the competency line? The con artists will them blame their own failings on business greed and not their own incompetent bonehead power lust.

I would like to see the most efficient business; stable with good books, make the laws as to how government has to deal with tax money and their budget. The goal is to help the boneheads become more efficient. Tax revenues to the Federal Government is at an all time high. The problem is not lack of money, but it is a spending problem. That excess spending impacts the economy, with the harm to the free market, blamed on business, but not the boneheads in government.

Can anyone justify a Government, regulating the free market, when it cannot even balance its own budget? Why not allow teens with their first credit card to lead the economy? They would do less damage to the free market, since there are basically harmless. Teens are not as sleazy as the bonehead politicians pushing their free economy hurting agendas with debt.

True free market capitalism might be the best system for the outer
space monster in the planet Zor.
Human nature being what it is we need regulations..
Human nature being what it is we get too much, not
enough, and little that is not counter productive

 

[Stevicus]

What on earth sort of " tangible results at street level" are you talking about?

Henry Ford worked hard. There's Fords right there are street level.

Henry Ford is long dead. But the streets are in rough shape, falling apart, full of potholes. A lot of the infrastructure has been poorly maintained and overdue for repair. One sees more and more people out on the streets, living in tents - but I guess they're just fat and lazy and don't want to work. Still, people who do work can still see them and note this as evidence that the supposed "brainpower" of the upper classes isn't really producing any tangible results at street level. Remember, they are judged by the results of the society they produce, or as Jesus would say "You will know them by their fruits."

But yes, Henry Ford worked hard, and Ford still exists as a corporation which makes motor vehicles. However, I don't really want to delve too deeply into the topic of Henry Ford.

If Americans rich and poor are unhappy, you tell me why.
Analyze the psyches and geopolitics.
The church people will tell you it's a lack of religion.
The poor will say it's a lack of money.
Others sau libs or cons or who knows what.
Lo here and lo there.

But then, anywhere, any group, some are happy, some are not.
How that relates to the cause of poverty or future of capitalism is
obscure to these dim eyes.

Not that I said or implied " smart" , but, I will say that your type
of if/ then is utterly insincere. " if uou are offended I'm sorry" say.

Why that seemed necessay for you to add at the last is also obscure to me.

I was only addressing what you yourself chose to bring into the conversation. The post you responded to was not addressed to you or anyone else personally, though it seemed relevant to the overall topic of the thread. It was you who chose to bring up that grew up around scientists, business people, and entrepreneurs, and claimed that they work harder and longer than anyone I know (as if you know anyone I know), twice the hours, and with 20 times the brainpower. So, all I said in response was that I believed you in what you said.

 

[Audie]

Henry Ford is long dead. But the streets are in rough shape, falling apart, full of potholes. A lot of the infrastructure has been poorly maintained and overdue for repair. One sees more and more people out on the streets, living in tents - but I guess they're just fat and lazy and don't want to work. Still, people who do work can still see them and note this as evidence that the supposed "brainpower" of the upper classes isn't really producing any tangible results at street level. Remember, they are judged by the results of the society they produce, or as Jesus would say "You will know them by their fruits."

But yes, Henry Ford worked hard, and Ford still exists as a corporation which makes motor vehicles. However, I don't really want to delve too deeply into the topic of Henry Ford.



I was only addressing what you yourself chose to bring into the conversation. The post you responded to was not addressed to you or anyone else personally, though it seemed relevant to the overall topic of the thread. It was you who chose to bring up that grew up around scientists, business people, and entrepreneurs, and claimed that they work harder and longer than anyone I know (as if you know anyone I know), twice the hours, and with 20 times the brainpower. So, all I said in response was that I believed you in what you said.

Why even bother with a response like that?

 

[Stevicus]

Why even bother with a response like that?

Why indeed?

 

[Audie]

Not everyone with money worked for it.

That's not,me. I'm skinny.

 

[Lyndon]

Henry Ford was a Nazi, wasn't he??

 

[Kfox]

Henry Ford was a Nazi, wasn't he??

Henry Ford was good to Black people, he even gave them equal pay to whites; something unheard of during that day. But he did have much hatred towards the Jews. Not sure if he felt the ALAM that initially prevented him from building cars had Jewish people on it, or what; but he was an anti-Semite. Not sure if that makes you a Nazi though.

 

[Kfox]

Well, twice as much hours times twenty times the brainpower; if that is true, it would be fair if they earned 400 times as much. Do they?

Often what you get paid is not dependent on how much you work, or how smart you are, but how much you generate.

 

[Audie]

Often what you get paid is not dependent on how much you work, or how smart you are, but how much you generate.

Our friends seem unwilling to recognize that the application
of brainpower hard work tends to get better results than being
unwilling to take a job.

And that this rich capitalist elite of whom they are so resentful
outworked anyone they employ to create the corporation and keep it going.

Going "Godwin" just shows how dim the comprehension, how determined
the resistance to getting it.

 

[Heyo]

Often what you get paid is not dependent on how much you work, or how smart you are, but how much you generate.

The only people in a factory who "generate" anything (a marketable product) are the workers. What does a janitor or a clerk or a CEO "generate"? Why pay them at all?

 

[Nakosis]

It's not just about giveaway programs or free stuff (since the wealthy have gotten the lion's share of that anyway), but it's about rebuilding and restructuring our economy to be productive again.

I just wanted to get back to the OP since since a lot of tangent arguments have happened since.

My objection to this is that there is no guarantee that the government, in the process of increasing taxes on the "rich" is going to actually use this money to rebuild the economy. In the last two years, the government went into debt in it's plan to "rebuild the economy" and we have a worse situation for the poor as a result. The rich same opportunity to help the economy. They can create jobs, give to charities, community programs. Offer scholarships.

For the rich, it is beneficial for the economy to boom. They need customers with money to buy their products. So they have the same incentive as the government to use their money as the government to support improvements to the economy.

So the only reason to see increased taxation as a solution is you have a bias for big government. There is no real logical reason, from past history, to have this bias. And hey, I have a bias against big government. So more inclined to see keeping money in the hands of those that earn it as the better solution.

So the solution being offered is not really a solution, it's a bias. I think if giving money to the government was a solution they would have made some progress by now.

My solution would be to change the mentality of the poor because there is no guarantee either bias for big government or bias for the wealthy is going to solve the problem of poverty. Give the poor the tools they need to be self-reliant. Not looking for support from either the government or the rich. Really, my my experience they are as likely not to get it as get it from either source.

Don't depend on the government, don't depend on the rich. Depend on yourself.

 

[Nakosis]

The only people in a factory who "generate" anything (a marketable product) are the workers. What does a janitor or a clerk or a CEO "generate"? Why pay them at all?

The CEO generates decisions. Sometimes not even good decisions but it is a duty that most don't want to perform. It's a lot of responsibility to take on. So those that are able to generate more good decision than bad are worth a lot.

The janitor generates a clean work environment which keeps the workers happy and productive. Usually a company has a head janitor which supervises the folks under him and can make a good salary. Any janitor that does well and shows initiative has the opportunity to move up and increase their pay.

 

[Heyo]

Don't depend on the government, don't depend on the rich. Depend on yourself.

If I didn't depend on the government (i.e. rely on a working justice system) and didn't depend on the rich (i.e. rely on them giving me money), I'd simply take the money from a rich person. That's called self-reliance.

 

[Nakosis]

Henry Ford is long dead. But the streets are in rough shape, falling apart, full of potholes. A lot of the infrastructure has been poorly maintained and overdue for repair. One sees more and more people out on the streets, living in tents - but I guess they're just fat and lazy and don't want to work. Still, people who do work can still see them and note this as evidence that the supposed "brainpower" of the upper classes isn't really producing any tangible results at street level. Remember, they are judged by the results of the society they produce, or as Jesus would say "You will know them by their fruits."

You might want to put the "fat and lazy and don't want to work" argument to rest, unless someone is actually arguing that position.

And what about the fruits of government? Don't they also have some accountability for the homeless problem?
The current state of affairs negates the solution offered in the OP. We need something new IMO.

 

[Nakosis]

If I didn't depend on the government (i.e. rely on a working justice system) and didn't depend on the rich (i.e. rely on them giving me money), I'd simply take the money from a rich person. That's called self-reliance.

Exactly, be smart enough to take the money from the rich yourself, in a legal way of course.
Now you're talking.
If you take the money, you get to decide how best to use it.

Offer services to the rich, offer a product to the rich. Figure out what they want or need and deliver it to them.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Our friends seem unwilling to recognize that the application
of brainpower hard work tends to get better results than being
unwilling to take a job.

And that this rich capitalist elite of whom they are so resentful
outworked anyone they employ to create the corporation and keep it going.

Going "Godwin" just shows how dim the comprehension, how determined
the resistance to getting it.

Yeah, that is maybe to simple if you include sociology as actually observed and as it in the end, it ends with the problem of luck as how you were born and grew up as per nature and nurture.