How is poverty best eliminated?

US Conservative said:

California is a nightmare living on its legacy. One only need to live here a short time to see the nightmare that is unopposed liberalism.

Click to expand...

As opposed to oh-so-prosperous Great Red States like Mississippi and Louisiana, hm?

mpg said:

Actually, I'm very familiar with the rest of the world. The data say the opposite of what you claim, including the link that you posted.

Click to expand...

Okay, exactly how does the data say the opposite of what I claim? You've got the soapbox - go for it!

Glen Contrarian said:

Okay, exactly how does the data say the opposite of what I claim? You've got the soapbox - go for it!

Click to expand...

In post #21 you said "the nations with the highest levels of poverty are those nations with small governments, low effective taxes, and weak regulation", then you posted a link to the countries with the highest UNHD, and the countries at the top of the list are mainly countries with lower taxes and/or less regulation. There are plenty of other websites that agree with the link that you posted. They've been linked in these forums countless times.

Excon said:

Frankly, I think you are just seeking attention.

Click to expand...

I am looking for rational debate. As always, I am not getting it from you. Stop responding to my posts after this, please.

:doh
Not even.

Click to expand...

Wow, such great debating skills! Punch in an emoticon and simply type "No!" or "Not even!" What a joke.

That is not about property. Which was the irrational belief being spoke to.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry you don't believe you should keep what you make.

Goodbye, Excon. Never thought I'd have to do this, but you are officially the first person going on my ignore list.

Henrin said:

If everyone owns everything, no one owns anything.

Click to expand...

I never said everyone owns everything.

What is the point of me planting the trees for my orchard if someone can just come up behind me and rip them from the earth?

Click to expand...

They have no right to rip up your trees. You plant them, they are the fruits of your labor. That is why geoists do not include improvements such as gardens, orchards, houses, etc when they talk about LVT.

fedup said:

I'm not sure that government can be considered a valid referee in this regard.

Click to expand...

As a libertarian, I understand the sentiment. How would you approach the land issue?

We definitely agree on this.

Click to expand...

eace

Geoist said:

I am looking for rational debate. As always, I am not getting it from you.

Click to expand...

Yep, your response says you are just seeking attention.
Please stop responding.

Geoist said:

What a joke.

Click to expand...

Yes your postings are.
My reply was accurate and concise. That is all that is needed in reply to your nonsense.

Geoist said:

I'm sorry you don't believe you should keep what you make.

Click to expand...

I never said any such thing, so now you have just exposed yourself as being dishonest as well.
That is good information for all to know.


:laughat:

Geoist said:

Goodbye, Excon. Never thought I'd have to do this, but you are officially the first person going on my ignore list.

Click to expand...

:baby2
iLOL



:lamo

US Conservative said:

So you selectively agree with private property rights. Anything else besides land that you dont think can be owned?

Click to expand...

The moon, the sun, other people...

Geoist said:

The moon, the sun, other people...

Click to expand...

You dont see any problems instituting this, in modern US society? The economy? The cost of such a failure?
And two weeks after your political experiment results in the large scale corruption, violence, and other atrocities-failing-what then?
After the rubble stops smoking, im sure thats when the real fun begins, no?

US Conservative said:

You dont see any problems instituting this, in modern US society? The economy? The cost of such a failure?
And two weeks after your political experiment results in the large scale corruption, violence, and other atrocities-failing-what then?
After the rubble stops smoking, im sure thats when the real fun begins, no?

Click to expand...

Has this happened yet with our current (very destructive) property tax system? No?

What I propose is not worldwide communism but a change in our tax system. Instead of paying for both land values AND improvements we would be paying for JUST the land values. Many have practiced it at least partially and they never experienced the armageddon you predict.

PoS said:

First off, one needs to define poverty because there was a study based on the census that states that most Americans who are considered poor have a house with a garage as well as having enough food to prevent them from starving and an XBox for the kiddies. In my view if one has a place to stay, clothing on their backs and has adequate food then one cannot be poor- hence, true poverty has largely been eliminated in the US.

Click to expand...

I think it also has to include the balance in the bank. If one has to support a family，spending most of his salary on items like house mortgage, then he is not well-off.

US Conservative said:

What works best to eliminate poverty? Multiple options are available.

Click to expand...

Elimination of money. Even then it's nit really going towork .

US Conservative said:

What works best to eliminate poverty? Multiple options are available.

Click to expand...

I think if you want to have lasting affects, you have to focus on the next generation. Food stamps, low income housing, etc. only treat the symptoms. Focusing on the kids did the most good in creating the black middle-class where today there are more black women with college degrees and operate small businesses per capital than any other group in America, and if you just take America's black population and run the numbers they would be the 7th mother powerful economy in the world and a member of the G8. It was integrating the schools, the United Negro College Fund, Head Start and black families drilling into their kids the HAVE to go to college starting in the 1970s.

Unfortunately some of the policies that still exist today have worsened the cycle of poverty in the black population for many, where today there are two black populations; an upwardly mobile and education middle-class and the poverty stricken inner-city. Forcing dads out of the home as a condition of welfare eligibility has been a government created a nightmare that has fostered not just poverty but crime, gang membership, out of wedlock birth rates sky rocketing, skyrocketing low educational achievement and generational poverty.

US Conservative said:

Perhaps one day will progress beyond politics.

Click to expand...

There is a massive push for a "one world" approach to society. Behind the push are people who make up what I call the Progressive Machine. Billionaires and millionairs from the US and other parts of the world are coodinating their efforts to bring about their version of social justice, with themselves in the center of power. The evil but brilliant George Soros is one of a number of the wealthiest in the world pushing this agenda.

The angst and unrest has been formented by design. As people become more aware of what Progressive means today, the enevitable failure of it's agenda will be sped along. How long that will take is the quesiton. The pinicle was getting Obama in office, but as they have been learning, they then need results, which Progressivism will never provide.

Glen Contrarian said:

Ah. So instead of answering the question I posed to you, you choose to ignore it altogether. Gee, wonder why? But don't feel bad - no other conservative has been able to explain it away, either. Just like you, they make an excuse for ignoring it, since the reality of which economies are doing best goes 180-degrees against the grain of conservative economic dogma.

And when it comes to California, if you'll recall, California was pretty much a red state between 1964 and 1992...and in I remember well when I was there for several years in the 1980's that California's economy was nothing to brag about. In other words, there's LOTS of blame to go around on red and blue sides...but no matter what you personally want to believe, California's economy is significantly better than what it was under Ahnold.

Click to expand...

GC, how many times are you going to bring up your socialist nirvana is Europe meme? It's been fully addressed, debunked, and debated. Just because you're fixated on your meme and refuse to incorporate the facts presented to you, doesn't mean people need to step onto your platform and take another trip around the same circle.

I got it, in your view, socialism is the end all to beat all. Sorry chief, I'm never going to buy it. You've been presented with reams of facts and you don't want to see them. That's fine, hang with that. Getting on a Merry-go-round with you on the same specific subject over and over is a supreme waste of time.

As to California, I'd really suggest you leave the topic alone. I've lived here for over 50 years, been fortunate to realize the American Dream, and my family roots go back over 140 years, right here in Southern California. We have been a very active and in touch with the community/government family over all those generations, so unless you want to stick to facts, there is little chance of your conjecture surviving the stress test.

By the way, I consideer Ahnold to among the worst Governors this state has ever had in office. Brown is lucky Ahnold came along, because the title of worst was leaning in his direction. Given Browns actions since taking office, Ahnold may have to reliquish the title.

Make government benefits dependent upon job training?

For instance, get a 600 ebt card for breathing, get a 900 ebt card for attending a computer programmer course, or hvac certification etc.

But with a caveat, 2 years later no more benefits

Sink or swim. People will swim.

Geoist said:

I never said everyone owns everything.

Click to expand...

The basic premise of your belief is that the earth owns to everyone.

They have no right to rip up your trees. You plant them, they are the fruits of your labor. That is why geoists do not include improvements such as gardens, orchards, houses, etc when they talk about LVT.

Click to expand...

They own the land, so they very much have the right to remove my trees. Why should they lose their claim to the land where my trees are planted?

mpg said:

In post #21 you said "the nations with the highest levels of poverty are those nations with small governments, low effective taxes, and weak regulation", then you posted a link to the countries with the highest UNHD, and the countries at the top of the list are mainly countries with lower taxes and/or less regulation. There are plenty of other websites that agree with the link that you posted. They've been linked in these forums countless times.

Click to expand...

Huh? I've posted a lot of links - show me which one you're talking about.

That said, WHAT nations have the highest standards of living? First-world democracies. And WHAT first-world democracies have small governments? None. WHAT first-world democracies have low effective taxes? None. WHAT first-world democracies have weak regulation? NONE.

Not. a. single. one. Your claim is bogus.

And how about you list what nations have what are in YOUR opinion "small government". Better yet, list which governments have the conservative 'trinity' of small governments, low effective taxes, and weak regulation.

ocean515 said:

GC, how many times are you going to bring up your socialist nirvana is Europe meme? It's been fully addressed, debunked, and debated. Just because you're fixated on your meme and refuse to incorporate the facts presented to you, doesn't mean people need to step onto your platform and take another trip around the same circle.

I got it, in your view, socialism is the end all to beat all. Sorry chief, I'm never going to buy it. You've been presented with reams of facts and you don't want to see them. That's fine, hang with that. Getting on a Merry-go-round with you on the same specific subject over and over is a supreme waste of time.

As to California, I'd really suggest you leave the topic alone. I've lived here for over 50 years, been fortunate to realize the American Dream, and my family roots go back over 140 years, right here in Southern California. We have been a very active and in touch with the community/government family over all those generations, so unless you want to stick to facts, there is little chance of your conjecture surviving the stress test.

By the way, I consideer Ahnold to among the worst Governors this state has ever had in office. Brown is lucky Ahnold came along, because the title of worst was leaning in his direction. Given Browns actions since taking office, Ahnold may have to reliquish the title.

Click to expand...

That is where YOU keep going wrong: you - like most conservatives - have this bogus perception that we somehow want a fully socialist society. We haven't said that...and I sure as heck haven't said that. I've said time and time and time again that what works best is a socialized democracy in which the social programs are BALANCED by a strong business sector...and this is PRECISELY what you see in ALL first-world democracies: social programs taking care of those sectors where the profit motive does not belong, and business taking care of those sectors where the profit motive DOES belong. Sure, most of us took a hit during the Great Recession, but the first-world democracies are STILL doing better than any other nations on the planet. That much is not in question.

The only question is WHY are the first-world democracies doing so much better than most of the rest of the world (and have done so for at least a half century) when conservative economic dogma says that nations whose governments and economies are thus structured SHOULD be on the way to the economic dustbin of history. That's the question you cannot answer. Actually, you CAN answer it...but you dare not do so, since the only only answer is 180-out from what conservative economic dogma requires.

And since it looks like you and I are both here for the long haul, I guess we'll both be able to watch whether California's economy crashes and burns - as you and others are Absolutely Sure is going to happen - or whether California's economy continues to improve.

Of course, if you wait long enough, ANY economy - no matter how strong - is going to crash and burn. The key is understanding whether it was due to the policies of the politicians...or whether it was due to other factors. In any case, California's economy is certainly improving, no matter what you and your fellow conservatives dearly hope - ahem, I mean, what you and your fellow conservatives Just Know is gonna happen.

I voted taxation and free markets. To start, we take the burden of taxation off the producer and put it on the main freeloader in the economy: the landowner.

CLAX1911 said:

Elimination of money. Even then it's nit really going towork .

Click to expand...

Yeah that sounds like a recipe for success.

idea_steed said:

I think it also has to include the balance in the bank. If one has to support a family，spending most of his salary on items like house mortgage, then he is not well-off.

Click to expand...

Should it really?

This is the definition of poverty

[h=1]poverty[/h]

[pov-er-tee]

noun 1. the state or condition of having little or no money, goods, or means of support; condition of being poor.

Are you using a different definition of poverty?

CLAX1911 said:

Elimination of money. Even then it's nit really going towork .

Click to expand...

Eliminating money would actually cause more harm than good, I think.

Unless a person has no necessities to purchase, they will need some method of transforming their labor into portable form.

Glen Contrarian said:

Huh? I've posted a lot of links - show me which one you're talking about.

Click to expand...

List of countries by Human Development Index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Glen Contrarian said:

That said, WHAT nations have the highest standards of living? First-world democracies. And WHAT first-world democracies have small governments? None. WHAT first-world democracies have low effective taxes? None. WHAT first-world democracies have weak regulation? NONE.

Not. a. single. one. Your claim is bogus.

And how about you list what nations have what are in YOUR opinion "small government". Better yet, list which governments have the conservative 'trinity' of small governments, low effective taxes, and weak regulation.

Click to expand...

Many links have been posted many times. Surely you've seen them. Just go to the websites of the UN, OECD, wikipedia, nationmaster, or the site of your choice. Let us know when you find a link that doesn't say the opposite of what you're claiming.

Erdmutter said:

I voted taxation and free markets. To start, we take the burden of taxation off the producer and put it on the main freeloader in the economy: the landowner.

Click to expand...

How is a landowner a freeloader?