Originally posted by Paul Stevens:
Your words were abject poverty and you have proven nothing. According to who and what standards.
I say the world is flat. I can post it again as proof.
Kim Jong II (North Korea's Dear Leader) said:Nuclear weapons don't kill people, people kill people.
Originally posted by Tim Baker:
I didn't say I could prove anything. You wanted me to back up what I said with facts, it is a fact that the US has the highest poverty rate in the WW. You want handy links, well I'm afraid I don't have any. If you don't trust or believe what I said was a fact, feel free to go find out otherwise.
Originally posted by Paul Stevens:
You got it. I don't believe it. Just because you said it does not make it fact. You also used the word abject poverty. Which is even further from the truth.
But the world is flat.
Kim Jong II (North Korea's Dear Leader) said:Nuclear weapons don't kill people, people kill people.
Uncontrolled vocabularies
"I try my best to make *all* my posts nice, even when I feel upset" -- Philippe Maquet
Originally posted by Joe Pluta:
TB: I didn't say I could prove anything.
Not surprising.
It took me about twenty seconds to find the facts. US child poverty rates (usually the best marker of a country's social condition) rank at about 20%, highest among the OECD. However, not by much. Italy is 19.5%, and the UK has 16.2%.
Given our immigrant population, it's not surprising that there's a high poverty rate. Our two most impoverished states are New York and California, while others include Florida, Illinois and Texas, all focal points of immigration.
Anyway, a few facts.
Joe
Kim Jong II (North Korea's Dear Leader) said:Nuclear weapons don't kill people, people kill people.
"I'm not back." - Bill Harding, Twister
Uncontrolled vocabularies
"I try my best to make *all* my posts nice, even when I feel upset" -- Philippe Maquet
"I'm not back." - Bill Harding, Twister
Uncontrolled vocabularies
"I try my best to make *all* my posts nice, even when I feel upset" -- Philippe Maquet
Originally posted by Joe Pluta:
Get of your moral high horse for a moment.
It's not that high, and if you'd just climb up here with me, the world would be a better place.
Joe
Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
Says Joe, who promised us to kill unknown number of innocent babies to save his own!
doco
Originally posted by Joe Pluta:
Says Joe, who promised us to kill unknown number of innocent babies to save his own!
"Thanks to Indian media who has over the period of time swiped out intellectual taste from mass Indian population." - Chetan Parekh
Originally posted by R K Singh:
Let me first change the baby.
Let us say my baby, OK if there is a man-eater lion(forget the world and all) and there are only two children and one of them is yours.
And you can save only one child.
I will save my child first.
Whom will you save ??
Originally posted by Paul Stevens:
But your baby was closer to the lion.
"Thanks to Indian media who has over the period of time swiped out intellectual taste from mass Indian population." - Chetan Parekh
Originally posted by Tim Baker:
The UK government being Labour is a Socialist one.
The US aversion to socialism is probably the reason why so many of their citizens live in abject poverty.
...so many of their citizens live in abject poverty...
What is "poor" anyway?
doco
Originally posted by Donald R. Cossitt:
The people in this country (US) that are in poverty are there for the same reason those who are wealthy are wealthy: because they choose to be, pure and simple.
Originally posted by Donald R. Cossitt:
The problem is that since the "New Deal" Americans have been spoon fed the socialist b*** s*** that it is the government's responsibility to look after us; which is ABJECT nonsense!
Originally posted by Phil Chuang:
Abject Poverty? Ok, if you consider abject poverty to be in a house with running water, electricity, and television. Given that the GREATEST THREAT TO OUR "POOR" is OBESITY, I sincerely doubt that the USA is among the worst of nations when it comes to poverty.
Also, most "poverty" studies I've seen simply measure yearly income - they don't take into account that there are quite a few "rich" persons included as "poor" because they decided to take a year off work.
What is "poor" anyway? Is it on the scale of the US, where the bottom 25% are considered poor? Or is it on the scale of the world? If you measure poverty against a single nation, then yes, you will have poor. By that definition anybody below the 100th percentile is poor. But measured against the world... I'd say that our "poor" have significantly better lives than any other nation's. Visit China, Africa, and Russia before you start describing the US as being in abject poverty.
[ March 17, 2004: Message edited by: Phil Chuang ]
Kim Jong II (North Korea's Dear Leader) said:Nuclear weapons don't kill people, people kill people.
Originally posted by Donald R. Cossitt:
The people in this country (US) that are in poverty are there for the same reason those who are wealthy are wealthy: because they choose to be, pure and simple.
The problem is that since the "New Deal" Americans have been spoon fed the socialist b*** s*** that it is the government's responsibility to look after us; which is ABJECT nonsense!
It used to be said of Great Britain that the sun never set on her. However, since Fabian Socialism (among other things) she is withering away to a mere shadow of her once powerfull self.
This is the fate of America as well I am afraid, and for the same reasons. Government is intended to help people do what they cannot do for themselves; which damned little!
Poor is an attitude; broke is a temporary financial condition.
Originally posted by Donald R. Cossitt:
[QB]
It used to be said of Great Britain that the sun never set on her. However, since Fabian Socialism (among other things) she is withering away to a mere shadow of her once powerfull self. This is the fate of America as well I am afraid, and for the same reasons[QB]
Originally posted by R K Singh:
Actually I killed lion with my hands ... but that I dont want to disclose else PETA people will throw eggs on me![]()
Who chooses to be poor? Its not about choosing to be rich, and its not even about working hard towards it, its about being able to do something that is wanted by the market. If a person is too poor to go to university, and lives in an area with hardly any jobs, they are very unlikely to become rich. Saying that poor people deserve to be poor is an incredibly huge insult.
No, but the government has a responsibility to help those in society who *need* it.
There are some fantastic things out there called history books.
Is that all you think government should do? For some reason I thought that helping to improve the economy and general standard of life through-out the country were fairly good things for it to do. Hmmmm.
This is shocking! Do you really think that poor people are poor because they aren't trying enough? Try going into a poor town with hardly any job opportunities and telling the people that they have an attitude problem. Try telling the single parent who cant get a full time job that they aren't trying hard enough. Try telling the person who works in a factory because they couldn't afford to go to university that they are lazy. There are some people who could improve their situation by trying harder, but there are far more people who, despite doing everything they can, still only have a low income.
doco
Originally posted by Paul Stevens:
Good comeback.
"Thanks to Indian media who has over the period of time swiped out intellectual taste from mass Indian population." - Chetan Parekh
Originally posted by Donald R. Cossitt:
Commentary From the Sidelines of history
Originally posted by Joe King:
Who chooses to be poor? Its not about choosing to be rich, and its not even about working hard towards it, its about being able to do something that is wanted by the market. If a person is too poor to go to university, and lives in an area with hardly any jobs, they are very unlikely to become rich. Saying that poor people deserve to be poor is an incredibly huge insult
No, but the government has a responsibility to help those in society who *need* it. Maybe you'd prefer a country where poor people don't get medical care, education or housing. Maybe you've never been poor and you don't realise quite how hard it is.
You don't seem to have noticed that it was a socialist party (containing several member of the Fabian society) that came into power after WWII and built the country back up. The UK may not be the military power it once was, but it has arguably the strongest economy in Europe - not bad for a country with a Fabian influenced government eh?
Commentary From the Sidelines of history
Originally posted by Donald R. Cossitt:
People choose to be poor by their attitudes.
It is none of the governments business whether I or my family is fed, educated, etc.
They show that the most powerful economy the WORLD has ever known (US)
They show that the most powerfull economy the WORLD has ever known (US) suffered through those same things
Not too bad for FREE ENTERPRISE eh?
Governments do not improve economies
individuals with ideas willing to risk it all over and over and over again do.
If I live in a "poor town with hardly any opportunities" I am going to move to one that isn't and does!!
Not sit on my POOR dead a**
Because they know that socialism doesn't work
I stand firm: Poor IS an attitude!
Originally posted by Paul McKenna:
Most people do not choose to be poor but many also do not choose to work their way out of poverty. If a person is too poor to go to university they can opt for military service and have the military pay for their college education. If a person is talented but poor they can obtain something called a "scholarship". Even better, take a student loan.
Ever read about "rags to riches" stories?
I disagree! Government has no business looking after the poor. Now the government may have to step in and help the disabled and handicapped etc. but not the able bodied and poor. They can help themselves
Too much intervention by the government can destroy anything.
Somehow I do not recollect any prime minister of england after Churchill other than Margaret Thatcher.
Are you saying Margaret Thatcher had nothing to do with the rise of England??
OK, now I remember John Major
Kim Jong II (North Korea's Dear Leader) said:Nuclear weapons don't kill people, people kill people.
Originally posted by Tim Baker:
Some people have obviously never worked for minimum wage.
Commentary From the Sidelines of history
"I'm not back." - Bill Harding, Twister
Originally posted by Jim Yingst:
[Joe King]: I think you mean arse. Last time I checked, an ass was a type of donkey.
Hi, Joe. Welcome to this new thing called the Internet, where it's actually possible to find yourself in discussions with people from OTHER COUNTRIES, not all of whom are standardized on the exact same form of English. Yeah, I know, English originated in England, yadda yadda, but it's not as if it was standardized at the time the US broke away. Differences between UK and US usage exist, and will probably continue for a long time. This is old news, isn't it? :roll: And yes I know you'd say "standardised", but I don't, so deal.
[ March 18, 2004: Message edited by: Jim Yingst ]
Originally posted by Paul McKenna:
Care to elaborate a bit further..
Kim Jong II (North Korea's Dear Leader) said:Nuclear weapons don't kill people, people kill people.
Why does your bag say "bombs"? The reason I ask is that my bag says "tiny ads" and it has stuff like this:
free, earth-friendly heat - a kickstarter for putting coin in your pocket while saving the earth
https://coderanch.com/t/751654/free-earth-friendly-heat-kickstarter
|