America Wastes $22 Trillion In War On Poverty

NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
reasonevangelist said:
Idk... i think "evolved types" like myself, tend to take care of anything we borrow or use, as if it were our own. Anytime anyone lends me anything, or gives me something i couldn't acquire on my own, i try even harder to protect it as well as possible, because how will i replace it otherwise?

And as far as housing projects... why would anyone want to live in filth and squalor? If someone GIVES me a place to stay, for free, i'm going to keep it in the best possible condition, out of both appreciation, and the fact that i don't want to live in unacceptable conditions.

Things that are easily gained and easily replaced, tend to get neglected and abused. Some people actually understand and value the effort required to maintain things that aren't easily replaced or repaired... but a disturbing amount seem to either miss or disregard that.
Click to expand...
I gave the example of Cabrini Green. People were given housing for free and they destroyed it. When things broke, people didnt own the building so they didnt bother to fix it. People vandalized and damaged the buildings because the government was not there to stop them and it didnt matter to the occupants because there was no down side to the actions.

The same thing goes for people who rent property. They vast majority of renters do not care about leaving the building in the same condition they found it. There is little financial motivation to maintain and upgrade property that isnt yours.

The pilgrims tried socialism at the start of the founding of the new world and nearly starved to death due to the associated problems.

People are self interested animals. The more we try to ignore our nature the less things work properly in society.
 
NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
What is my motivation to answer stupid fucking loaded questions?
Click to expand...
I am not sure how being able to explain the motivation in a financial or social system is addressing a loaded question.

If people could just take whatever they wanted and had access to free food, water, shelter, clothing, entertainment... What would their motivation to work be?? There would be a huge need for jobs to provide all this free shit so there would certainly be demand for work...

But what is the motivation for the worker? Why not just party 24/7?? Why not vacation all year round? Why not hop on a cruise ship and never leave??
 
NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
Red1966 said:
War on poverty? Are we killing poor people? Doesn't seem right.
Click to expand...
Isnt it amazing how people will line up to give away their freedom?

One of the great equilizers in America is wealth. If you make enough you can basically make your own rules.

That is why I think Politicians want to regulate wealth. They want to be the gods, not the rich people... The politicians are envious of the power that wealth gives and want to usurp it so the people have to come crawling to them for scraps... And the civilians lick it up...
 
R

reasonevangelist

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
I gave the example of Cabrini Green. People were given housing for free and they destroyed it. When things broke, people didnt own the building so they didnt bother to fix it. People vandalized and damaged the buildings because the government was not there to stop them and it didnt matter to the occupants because there was no down side to the actions.

The same thing goes for people who rent property. They vast majority of renters do not care about leaving the building in the same condition they found it. There is little financial motivation to maintain and upgrade property that isnt yours.

The pilgrims tried socialism at the start of the founding of the new world and nearly starved to death due to the associated problems.

People are self interested animals. The more we try to ignore our nature the less things work properly in society.
Click to expand...
So do you think people should not bother to elevate and advance themselves to better paradigms? Should so many remain merely self interested animals who don't mind living in squalor, as long as someone else provides it?

I have witnessed the behavior you described... in others. It's disturbing and upsetting to me. Sure, i could be apathetic about my own living conditions like that... but it would make me feel worse, not better. I already learned that i don't want to live that way, or take that approach to how i do things. I think maybe poor people don't fix things because they can't afford it, or maybe don't know how, not because they don't care at all (though contrarily, i've met some who had the resources to fix or learn to fix, even to assume a preventative approach, but literally didn't care at all...). But i'm also not saying no people behave as you describe; some obviously do, but instead of just throwing our hands up and saying "welp! they're animals!" we should perhaps try to teach them to appreciate the purpose of maintaining their own surroundings, even if they don't own them. "Do i like to live surrounded by problems?" is not a question i need to ask myself. Maybe other people just haven't had the chance to figure it out yet? Maybe they just learned to assume that things break and deteriorate and that's that, and you can't stop it, so no use trying to avoid it, or worrying about it happening? I've met people who seem to think that way... those who destroy, dispose and replace, instead of maintain, prevent and repair. Very different types of people. It's obvious which of those types of people have learned to appreciate even imperfect and/or inferior things.
 
NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
I repeat, what is my motivation to answer a stupid fucking loaded question?
Click to expand...
You are trying to convince people that your social engineering model is the one that works better. It is on you, not us.

What is the goal of this system again? Is that considered a loaded question?

What is my motivation to be a productive member in this society?
 
NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
reasonevangelist said:
So do you think people should not bother to elevate and advance themselves to better paradigms? Should so many remain merely self interested animals who don't mind living in squalor, as long as someone else provides it?

I have witnessed the behavior you described... in others. It's disturbing and upsetting to me. Sure, i could be apathetic about my own living conditions like that... but it would make me feel worse, not better. I already learned that i don't want to live that way, or take that approach to how i do things. I think maybe poor people don't fix things because they can't afford it, or maybe don't know how, not because they don't care at all (though contrarily, i've met some who had the resources to fix or learn to fix, even to assume a preventative approach, but literally didn't care at all...). But i'm also not saying no people behave as you describe; some obviously do, but instead of just throwing our hands up and saying "welp! they're animals!" we should perhaps try to teach them to appreciate the purpose of maintaining their own surroundings, even if they don't own them. "Do i like to live surrounded by problems?" is not a question i need to ask myself. Maybe other people just haven't had the chance to figure it out yet? Maybe they just learned to assume that things break and deteriorate and that's that, and you can't stop it, so no use trying to avoid it, or worrying about it happening? I've met people who seem to think that way... those who destroy, dispose and replace, instead of maintain, prevent and repair. Very different types of people. It's obvious which of those types of people have learned to appreciate even imperfect and/or inferior things.
Click to expand...
I have a better idea. Why dont we just teach people that they are responsible for themselves and they have the ability through their own labor to better the lives of themselves and their family. Then we wouldnt have to confiscate so much wealth from productive people to give to non-productive people in the hopes that magically they will change.

Altruism is a wonderful goal but if you do not recognize the human condition you are bound to create more problems than solve.

The problem is the government keeps taking on social issues that it is not designed, equipped nor has the inherent power to fix.
 
NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
Would you like a good example?

Scottland....

They voted no on independence and the biggest reason was they were getting more back than they were putting in. Millions upon millions of people and yet the majority voted for the teat instead of freedom to choose their own destiny.

And they arent even greedy Americans..
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
Kirk is a good avatar for you. The difference between you two is that he never took himself seriously...
Click to expand...
You have gotten me all wrong in every post you have directed at me. You have either been telling me what it is you think my views are, or asking loaded questions which assume incorrectly that I hold some belief, which if I answered would be confirming it.

Now move along, you don't know me.
 
R

reasonevangelist

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
Would you like a good example?

Scottland....

They voted no on independence and the biggest reason was they were getting more back than they were putting in. Millions upon millions of people and yet the majority voted for the teat instead of freedom to choose their own destiny.

And they arent even greedy Americans..
Click to expand...
That's a shame. But it also lends credence to one of my favorite sayings: "what's right is not always popular; what's popular is not always right."

I sometimes express that sentiment as "the majority is often wrong."

I learned that by living most of my life as various minorities, despite my alleged "white male privilege." I also learned that democracy is mob rule, and mob rule doesn't protect the minority, which is very bad when the majority is wrong!

A quote i either coined or unknowingly stole: "any advantage given will be taken."

Honor can become a liability when facing those who lack it.

I had to learn that one the hard way... but i suppose it could have been worse, and despite the agony and grief of that lesson, i'm glad it wasn't worse. But then i had to accept the adoption of that tactic in relevant situations, because in any conflict, it's wise to minimize one's liabilities and vulnerabilities; if your opponent lacks honor, he will gain advantage by exploiting yours... (any advantage given will be taken) so shedding the burden of honorable conflict, while in conflict with the dishonorable, is probably the best way to deny them that advantage... and if you don't deny them that advantage, they'll take it. Being at a disadvantage while in conflict with someone dishonorable, is not a good place to be. When it comes down to it, victory is sometimes (if not always) more important than honor.

Maybe the problem with the Scots is that they spent too long being trained to need to be told what to do, and when they finally had the chance to escape their cage, freedom seemed too scary and overwhelming. I've met plenty of people who reacted that way when faced with an opportunity to escape the very paradigm they previously decried. Freedom includes the potential to make irreparable mistakes; some people aren't prepared to face that.

I don't fail to recognize "the human condition," i just don't think everyone handles it the same ways, and i think those who react unfavorably can be shown a better way; most people who are shown a better way, and actually believe that way is indeed better, will adopt it.
 
NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
"I don't fail to recognize "the human condition," i just don't think everyone handles it the same ways, and i think those who react unfavorably can be shown a better way; most people who are shown a better way, and actually believe that way is indeed better, will adopt it."

What if they dont want to be shown a better way?? You assume everyone is as motivated as you are. I can show you countless examples of where that would be incorrect. People generally do not value what they do not have to work for. Hunger is motivating. Being cold or hot is motivating. Having to have ones needs met and comfort provided through food, shelter, etc. is motivating. The government provides more and more of these things and ponders why there is less motivation.

America is like the Scotts. Our public education system is designed to put out people that are dependent upon the government and barely able to survive in society. The educational system does not teach people how to be entrepreneurs or how to start businesses, etc. The foundation of the system tells minorities and poor people that they cannot possibly get ahead in life without government help because life is unfair to them. The politicians get more docile votes to control and the people get welfare handouts that never break the cycle of poverty because they are not meant to. They are simply meant to increase dependence upon government.

Your solution assumes education is the answer. What if people do not want to be educated? Will there be re-education camps? My solution lets everyone worry about themselves and whomever else they choose to care for.
 
R

reasonevangelist

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
"I don't fail to recognize "the human condition," i just don't think everyone handles it the same ways, and i think those who react unfavorably can be shown a better way; most people who are shown a better way, and actually believe that way is indeed better, will adopt it."

What if they dont want to be shown a better way?? You assume everyone is as motivated as you are. I can show you countless examples of where that would be incorrect. People generally do not value what they do not have to work for. Hunger is motivating. Being cold or hot is motivating. Having to have ones needs met and comfort provided through food, shelter, etc. is motivating. The government provides more and more of these things and ponders why there is less motivation.

America is like the Scotts. Our public education system is designed to put out people that are dependent upon the government and barely able to survive in society. The educational system does not teach people how to be entrepreneurs or how to start businesses, etc. The foundation of the system tells minorities and poor people that they cannot possibly get ahead in life without government help because life is unfair to them. The politicians get more docile votes to control and the people get welfare handouts that never break the cycle of poverty because they are not meant to. They are simply meant to increase dependence upon government.

Your solution assumes education is the answer. What if people do not want to be educated? Will there be re-education camps? My solution lets everyone worry about themselves and whomever else they choose to care for.
Click to expand...
I considered that, but didn't go into it. I used to be more motivated, and might have clacked out a novel about it...

Everyone needs to be motivated though... at least toward refraining from causing unnecessary problems for others. If someone wants to destroy themselves, that's their body; just don't cause me or others problems in the process, and i won't dispute their right to destroy themselves if they so desire.

Also: not everyone can be the entrepreneur or successful business owner. Someone has to actually do the work.

But you know what? Work sucks ass, unless you're doing something you WANT to do, which is rare for most people, and is not going to be an available option for everyone. At some point, people say "fuck it!" and refuse to do anything they don't want to do.

Bottom line: people either want to figure out how to rise above and escape their unfavorable conditions, or they don't. Give them the opportunity to do so (and don't just fake it while providing crap education and misinforming everyone), and if they reject it just because they want to be stupid and miserable... fine. If they want a darwin award instead of a good life, let them have it. Let them cull themselves so that the rest of us who actually want to figure out how to create a good life, can do so, and with less obstruction and disruption from idiots determined to remain idiots.
 
Red1966

Red1966

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
I gave the example of Cabrini Green. People were given housing for free and they destroyed it. When things broke, people didnt own the building so they didnt bother to fix it. People vandalized and damaged the buildings because the government was not there to stop them and it didnt matter to the occupants because there was no down side to the actions.

The same thing goes for people who rent property. They vast majority of renters do not care about leaving the building in the same condition they found it. There is little financial motivation to maintain and upgrade property that isnt yours.

The pilgrims tried socialism at the start of the founding of the new world and nearly starved to death due to the associated problems.

People are self interested animals. The more we try to ignore our nature the less things work properly in society.
Click to expand...
Actually, the majority of those at Jamestown DID starve to death. The few that did survive wouldn't have but that the local natives took pity on them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top