Austerity has hardened the nation's heart

Post Reply New Topic

And you relentlessly continue to prove my point.
Whatever, I'm done with this thread.
Maybe one of your other self-imposed mortal enemies will come by and you can carry on with them.......

...again. Sorry, I'm done here. It's like trying to argue the toss with one of those bots that writes comments on blogs, which at first glance appear to be meaningful but turn out to be incoherent bibble. At this point I can't work out if you actually understand any of what I posted, and you keep stringing together phrases which don't make any sense. I'm out - feel free to believe what you like.

I think you proved his or her point (sorry marshall, I've never been sure- leaning towards female).

People know how to fish, but there aren't any fish. In this country, 25% of people have a degree, but there simply aren't enough graduate jobs to go around.

I think I should just be content and say I won the argument since you yet again refuse to address my points. You're a stereotypical right-winger in that you can only "think with your gut" and refuse to acknowledge the big picture (that there are not enough jobs to go around). Your gut tells you "if the economy is faltering, it must mean people are getting lazier and not being productive enough". The data says outsourcing and technology, along with the disintegration of organized labor, have increased productivity to such a high level that unskilled labor and even some skilled labor is no longer as valuable as it used to be. Oh well, be my guest and go down with the sinking ship. The conviction that you are right trumps everything else.

Firstly I didn't say that, so scroll down the text and proof-read first.
Secondly, you're welcome to argue the toss, as long as you don't mispronounce misspelt words based on faulty location or otherwise.. ta.

Oh and by the way, I 've got a vid here on areas which most of the British population do understand is a hit and miss dilemma which seemed to forge itself out of the E.U ages ago but has been more apparent today and of late than in previous party elections

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22712569

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/6 ... 172659.jpg

Last edited by glow on 30 May 2013, 3:18 pm, edited 2 times in total.

In the end, humans are no different from rats.

If you feed rats, they breed for as much as the food will support.

When you cut back the food, the rats will KILL each other until the population drops back down to what the food supply will support.

Providing for the poor, in overwhelming evidence, does little more than promote the explosion of poor people. If someone will provide you your necessities, why bother WORKING for them?

YES, not EVERY person on welfare is a leech, but many are, and when you make it easy to get on and stay on (and uphold silly rights like reproduction), you create an ever growing problem.

Sooner or later, the people making it possible to provide for the poor (the working class who pay the taxes) get sick of having people live without having to work.

Every misguided sentiment for helping the poor and needy is derailed into providing an entitlement to someone who chooses to not be productive.

It's nice to help a child not go hungry, but what are you doing to kick the parent in the ass for not going out and earning the bread to feed their own kid? A child crying itself to sleep for hunger is a powerful motivation to make a parent own up to their responsibilities. A parent that won't work to feed their kid should not only lose custody, but be prohibited from having more kids. We don't do that. Rather, we reward bad parenting.

In the end, humans are not all that different from other primates.

Primates and rodents are both mammalian species.

ruveyn

NAIRU, people, NAIRU! So-called "welfare leeches" are in fact the result of a desired policy to suppress wages in the name of killing inflation.

Why not have government pay them to do something productive? That's the idea behind Keynesian economics. It isn't just put all the unemployed on welfare. Seems better than having to use tax payer money to imprison them when they steal to survive. I really can't deal with people like you who have such a narrow nasty view of humanity. It makes me really depressed. I admit it. I can't deal with your mindset. It makes me feel suicidal, like humanity shouldn't even exist and I would be happy if a meteor wiped everyone out. Everyone's a worthless breeder to you and your ilk. You can't imagine that people generally want to be productive because they are happier when they are contributing to society. Involuntary unemployment is what tends to make people decide to not work and drop out of society. It also makes people turn to crime because hey, nothing to lose.

I get called the bitter one, yet there is something really dark and depressive about this nasty survival of the fittest mindset you and others have. It doesn't have to be that way but you insist it must. That just sounds stubborn and unreasonable to me.

Having kids you can’t support should definitely not be promoted. It’s not like there’s a shortage of people already struggling to survive.

It shouldn't, but I don't agree with the right-wing survival-of-the-fittest economic mindset that just creates more problems. If people felt more useful to society they would start to be more personally responsible. The hard-core capitalist model has to make certain people feel useless, especially when technology and globalization trends take away jobs. People who feel useless stop caring about things like compassion and personal responsibility. The starving rat mentality is what creates crime. Why play by the rules if there's no way you can win by them?

And before some particular idiot comes and accuses me of legitimizing crime or excusing people for being irresponsible (yes, you are that predictable, and you know who you are) - please tell me how you draw that conclusion when I didn't even make any moral claims in my argument. Merely pointing out cause and effect is not excusing something.

Because government has no money. Every dollar government spends it TAKES from those who pay taxes.



Humanity has its pros and cons. A lot of humans are a waste. They are TAKERS with no interest in GIVING to society. They might be rich people who exploit and rob others to pad their own nests or poor people who cheat/game the system to get stuff for nothing. This doesn't make it hopeless, but a strong society doesn't tolerate laziness. Every great civilization falls when the populace gets lazy.



Perhaps, but the main reason that happens is because we have 2-3 generations of people raised to be EMPLOYEES. Lots of stuff needs to be done, but hardly anyone is taught how to be an entrepreneur and work for themselves. Hardly anyone works hard...hardly anyone takes risks. They want to be paid to punch a button for 8 hours a day then marvel when nobody needs button pushers anymore.

The system (designed by those wanting control over the masses) is set up to make people dependent on the state to provide everything rather than learn self-reliance and hard work. We are reaping what we are sowing, and it will never get better until we realize it's a destructive model and go back to what worked.

The problem with being an entrepreneur is that most small businesses fail. At any rate people in shantytowns in the Third World are sort of forced to become entrepeneurs. The same can be said for people who survive on busking or begging. This idea that all the world's poverty problems can be solved with entrepreneurs became popular for a while, the decision to give a Nobel Peace Prize to the Grameen Bank sort of epitomises that, but then people realised that the Grameen Bank achieves very little. Some person starts a business selling a certain type of trinket, and the existing trinket-makers are put out of business. There is only so much demand for these particular trinkets.

Tons of people make money in ways that don't contribute merely because they own property, patents, etc.. and can milk it for all it's worth. It makes sense to tax these people. It also makes sense to tax people who make loads of money solely on capital gains. How are these people not "takers"?


And that is a destructive hateful attitude that will destroy our civilization. Most people aren't lazy. Most are just trying to get by and find happiness. Did someone beat you down to make you have such a nasty view of humans? It literally makes me sick to hear this nonsense all the time.


That's idiotic. You can't be an entrepreneur if others have no money to frivolously spend. Why should one person's survival depend on the frivolous spending habits of another wealthier individual who has extra money to throw around. Not everyone can become an entrepreneur because entrepreneurs must compete for the limited disposable income of others. Our true wealth doesn't come from small businesses, it comes from vast technological advances that are controlled mainly by large corporations.


Utter BS that's been beat into your head by someone else. Enjoy your pathetic lonely life trapped in the meaningless rat race till the day you die.

This question alone is very complex, so my answer will be overtly simple.

There is nothing wrong with having "wealth" (money that works for you). If you have wealth and lend it out, you get a divided. This benefits others because you are a source of capital people can seek out to fund their ideas. Now, something like patent rights eventually pass away, so it's not something that lasts forever. RICH PEOPLE LIVING OFF OF MOM AND DAD'S MONEY WHO DO NOT MAKE THEIR OWN FORTUNES USUALLY ENSURE THAT THEIR CHILDREN WILL BE POOR.

A former boss called this "Shirt sleeves to shirt sleeves in three generations." Generation 1 makes the fortune. Generation 2 enjoys the fortune but fails to add/grow it. Generation 3, having no work ethic, depletes it.

Now, there is nothing wrong with a given amount of taxation, but that's a separate topic altogether. My point is that GOVERNMENT does not have money...it taxes from people and then uses it to pay for stuff. For you to get $1, government will likely take $5 from someone else. There is not one government program that actually gives a person back their own money. Even Social Security (in the USA) is paid out on current taxes going into the program. There is no "trust fund" or fiduciary accounting for the monies taken in by the program.



Sorry to bust your bubble, but humans, by nature, are lazy. Why do we ride a bike when we can walk? Why do we drive when we can ride a bike? Why do we use any number of machines when we can do stuff by hand? They say necessity is the mother of invention. I say laziness is the father of it. It is hard-coded in man to want an easy way to do most anything.

Hence, to reward a person for NOT working is a bad idea. It's not going to produce someone more productive or inventive...it will only encourage them (and others) to be more lazy.

Some of the happiest people work their butts off. It's not sitting under a tree all day that will make you "happy." It's finding a purpose that makes you want to get out of bed every day. If you lived in a perfect world, it wouldn't be a world of leisure...people would be going about doing any number of things that take a lot of time and effort because they love doing what they do.



You need to restudy about 6,000+ years of human history. The vast wealth and power of the USA didn't come from corporations...it came from the ordinary people starting their own small businesses. The "middle class" owes much to this, and the adversarial environment against small businesses is why the middle class is all but gone. Part of this is our own fault for letting corporations get so big and have so much political clout through citizen apathy in political matters, but again, that's a whole separate topic.

Wealth IS NOT a finite commodity. It can be created from nothing and it can be destroyed. A political environment that encourages economic growth CREATES wealth, and a free market allows it to be spread amongst the widest range of people. CERTAINLY, IT IS NOT A PERFECT SYSTEM, but no other system in the world does as much for as many.

You don't need a fortune to make a fortune...it's just easier. Lots of people made good livings getting $100 of goods and reselling them. You can buy a used lawn mower, MAYBE get a permit (if your city requires one), and go and offer your services mowing lawns and raking leaves. People won't pay? How much is YOUR TIME worth? Would you rather spend 2-3 hours on your Saturday mowing the lawn or pay someone $30 every two weeks to do it for you? I have bad allergies. I'd rather pay someone $30 every two weeks than do it myself.

Your whole "corporate" model is based on a dystopian view of a handful of people controlling ALL resources (which is being pursued by some groups). IF we let a handful of people control all the resources (energy, food, land, etc.) then your model will be correct. No hope of a small business going anywhere because they won't be able to open their doors. Everyone will be a button pusher because you won't be allowed to work for yourself (unless you go black market). WE ARE NOT THERE YET, but attitudes such as yours is exactly why we are heading that way. Your aversion to self-reliance and the obligation to work and contribute to society is why these groups are getting closer to owning all the means of wealth production.



No. It was beat into my head by LIFE. I know many otherwise ordinary people who live very, very well who worked hard for it. I likewise know a lot of people in squalor who really don't want to do anything more than is absolutely required to get through the day. Choices have consequences. Yes, hard work is no guarantee of the success you desire, and I know some useless sacks of garbage who are doing very well because they worked the system (politically) to get a cushy job with no real expectations placed on them, but the general rule is that you get out of life what you want to put into it.

It doesn't have to be a rat race, but you can't expect to do well if you won't make an effort to do well.