The One Cause of Poverty That’s Never Considered

[Valjean]

During boom times, the government could afford to be beneficent, but the corporations, banks and rich had been clawing their way back to power ever since the New Deal and Keynesian revolution, and "government for the people."

Business saw the social programs, environmental restrictions, health and safety regulations, &c. as an attack, and declared war in 1971, in the Powell memo.*

By ~1980, "Big Government" had been effectively demonized. With the Reagan and Thatcher revolutions, Keynesian economic policies were supplanted with Neoliberal deregulation and privatization. The "business of government" reverted back to Business, as opposed to the common welfare, and business' primary duty was to its stockholders and executives. Greed was good, and any investment that didn't pay off in the following few quarters was deemed a waste. Infrastructure, education, social programs and general prosperity began the downward spiral that's brought us to today.

*The Powell Memo: A Call-to-Arms for Corporations | BillMoyers.com

 

[Revoltingest]

Trump? A while back you were calling me a Hillary supporter, and now I'm a Trump supporter?

You're a dynamic fellow.

Anyway, we still need a new government. It starts by voting for better leaders, who then reshape the government to better serve the needs of the people.

We'll get what we get.

 

[Revoltingest]

- Agree on the "limiting our concerns" point.
- Not sure I agree with the "exercising excessive control" point. I often hear this sort of complaint, but I think it's implausible. I don't think "controlling" is what's happening, I think it's "profiting from". That's an important distinction.
- I'd like to hear some examples of a "libertarian approach to assisting". Sincerely.

Profiting from poverty?
Tell me how the poor are useful for that....other
than pandering politicians tricking them into
support in elections.

 

[icehorse]

Profiting from poverty?
Tell me how the poor are useful for that....other
than pandering politicians tricking them into
support in elections.

I'm saying that the oligarchs profit from poverty.

 

[Valjean]

We shouldn't limit our concerns to what one
thinks is the "main" one. Moreover, the economic
system isn't the problem...it works just fine for
those who are productive.

But wages no longer track productivity. Productivity doesn't necessarily pay off, anymore. Working more for less: How wages in America have stagnated

Fundamentally, government pretends to love
the poor, but in actuality victimizes them with
disdain, corruption, incompetence, & exercising
excessive control over their lives, rather than
enabling them to be more independent.

So while you you see symptoms of economics,
I see the need for a more libertarian approach
to assisting them more effectively.

But it was deregulation and privatization -- hallmarks of libertarianism -- that led, in large part, to the social decline we see today.

Economics? We recently had two bank failures, which seem to be spreading world wide. Would this have happened had the Trump administration not rolled back the Dodd-Frank act? Dodd-Frank, in turn, was enacted to deal with some of the deregulation that led to the 2008 banking crisis.
The 2008 crisis, in turn, would never have happened if the Glass-Steagall act hadn't been repealed. Glass–Steagall Act of 1932 - Wikipedia

Big Government and regulation is the solution, not the problem.
Government is (was) the only force powerful enough to counter the unimpeded and exploitative growth of corporate hegemony.
Now government has become the captive lapdog of corporate power, monopoly, and banking.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm saying that the oligarchs profit from poverty.

Explain how?

 

[Valjean]

That's why we need a new government.

That's why we need government, period / full-stop.

 

[Revoltingest]

But wages no longer track productivity. Productivity doesn't necessarily pay off, anymore. Working more for less: How wages in America have stagnated

They do relate to productivity. But as I've oft shown,
automation is making many low level workers less
valuable relative to before.

But it was deregulation and privatization -- hallmarks of libertarianism -- that led, in large part, to social decline we see today.

Regulation has quietly increased during the period
that liberals claim there was de-regulation.
Now....give more than the mantra that de-regulation
& privatization caused the problems. How about
elaborating on how this occurred?

Economics? We recently had two bank failures, which seem to be spreading world wide. Would this have happened had the Trump administration not rolled back the Dodd-Frank act? Dodd-Frank, in turn, was enacted to deal with some of the deregulation that led to the 2008 banking crisis.

Are you asking me or making a claim about regulation?
How would the regulation have prevented these failures?

The 2008 crisis, in turn, would never have happened if the Glass-Steagall act hadn't been repealed. Glass–Steagall Act of 1932 - Wikipedia

Big Government and regulation is the solution, not the problem.
Government is (was) the only force powerful enough to counter the unimpeded and exploitative growth of corporate hegemony.
Now government has become the captive lapdog of corporate power, monopoly, and banking.

I think you fundamentally misunderstand libertarianism.
We don't oppose all regulation. We favor regulation that
does more good than harm. Contrast this with the left,
who simply call for more regulation, without considering
whether it will actually benefit us.

 

[Valjean]

You want Trump stage a successful coup this time?
Nah.
We'd better stick with the form of government we
have, but vote for leaders with better judgement
regarding policies....smarter & more libertarian.

I have high hopes & low expectations.

Maybe we should re-adopt the system that worked, during America's Golden Age of prosperity, economic, and corporate growth.
Regulation, oversight and taxation.

 

[Revoltingest]

Maybe we should re-adopt the system that worked, during America's Golden Age of prosperity, economic, and corporate growth. Regulation, oversight and taxation.

Your golden age wasn't so golden for those who
endured severe discrimination, workplace injuries,
housing poor by today's standards, etc. There was
far far less regulation, which contributed to growth
& profit. If you look at levels of taxation, it wasn't
higher back then. Why do you think it was?

 

[Valjean]

Trump? A while back you were calling me a Hillary supporter, and now I'm a Trump supporter?

Anyway, we still need a new government. It starts by voting for better leaders, who then reshape the government to better serve the needs of the people.

But when the candidates are hand picked, and leaders paid for, by the oligarchs, where will we find these better leaders to vote for?

I think some form of ranked choice voting might help, or at least ameliorate the necessity of always voting for the lesser evil.

 

[Valjean]

Profiting from poverty?
Tell me how the poor are useful for that....other
than pandering politicians tricking them into
support in elections.

Did you read the linked article in post #1?

 

[Valjean]

Why is that a bad thing?

The 2 richest don't agree on political issues so if they were buying votes, they would cancel each other out by buying opposing politicians.

Effects of economic inequality - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

You should be a bit more precise. The rich pay that percentage of income taxes. They do not pay that percentage of all taxes. The poor still pay sales tax, and if they have bad habits, such as smoking which often accompanies poverty, they pay tax on that too. And then there is property tax. Since they are renters they do in reality pay those taxes. The landlord does not give them a lower rate because they are poor.

They still; pay a lower percentage of taxes than others, but it is not as one sided as those that site only income tax make it out to be.

Winner

 

[Stevicus]

But when the candidates are hand picked, and leaders paid for, by the oligarchs, where will we find these better leaders to vote for?

I think some form of ranked choice voting might help, or at least ameliorate the necessity of always voting for the lesser evil.

Perhaps when the oligarchs realize that the alternative would be much, much worse, maybe they'll think ahead and find someone better for the people to vote for.

 

[Stevicus]

You're a dynamic fellow.

That may be true, but I neither support Hillary nor Trump. I may decide to write in Jimmy Carter next year. He'll by 100 years old by then.

We'll get what we get.

We get what we deserve, in more ways than one.

 

[Estro Felino]

The number of people exceed the number of jobs by far unfortunately.

It's normal when anything is computerized and even agriculture is highly mechanized. Not to mention factories.

 

[Heyo]

Explain how?

Depends on how you define "profit" (or "winning").

If your goal in life is to have more than others (and the more "more", the better) than it is a win if you can cause the others to have less - even if you have less but less less than the others.

If you don't care about how much the others have as long as you have more tomorrow than you had yesterday, you'll "profit" from an overall increase in cheap goods and services.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Why is that a bad thing?

The 2 richest don't agree on political issues so if they were buying votes, they would cancel each other out by buying opposing politicians.

But they can influence the Overton window.

 

[PureX]

We shouldn't limit our concerns to what one
thinks is the "main" one. Moreover, the economic
system isn't the problem...it works just fine for
those who are productive.
Fundamentally, government pretends to love
the poor, but in actuality victimizes them with
disdain, corruption, incompetence, & exercising
excessive control over their lives, rather than
enabling them to be more independent.

So while you you see symptoms of economics,
I see the need for a more libertarian approach
to assisting them more effectively.

The capitalists love to blame the government that they, themselves, have corrupted, for that corruption. It keeps the government weak, and therefor easy for them to control, and gives the masses someone to blame for their exploitation besides the real culprits: the capitalists, themselves.