what is poverty today

Discussion in 'IntroSpectrum' started by Radium, Jul 27, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. miscreant

    miscreant 1996 was the shit

    Aug 3, 2010
    fuck that @8.25

    i don't know what to say

    no way in hell i'd work for that man

    but you're right

    inflation rises well ahead of wage increases

    cost of living is ridiculous
  2. reggie_jax

    reggie_jax rapper noyd

    Feb 2, 2007
    yea, the longer i am exposed to american politics the more i become convinced that right wingers are in fact much smarter (politically) than their left wing counterparts. ultimately i think republicans have done a great job of creating a political rhetoric that is both crowd-friendly and business-friendly.

    campaigning on cutting taxes is very effective both for individuals and businesses. who doesn't want to pay less taxes? individuals are told they will even benefit indirectly from a lower coprorate tax because it will provide a boost to the economy, while businesses know it will place them at an even greater advantage.

    other republican economic platforms, all of which favor the rich in one way or another, similarily have a crowd-friendly ring to them. free trade agreements are presented as a potential way to boost the economy which can create jobs to the average voter, to the businesses it means overseas tax havens and growth. repatriation holidays are presented as the idea that businesses can bring their money back to our economy and spend here, to businesses it seemingly provides a distinct incentive to do business overseas. deregulation is presented as a way to free up loans for small businesses, while the actual main motivation behind this push is presumably to allow banks and corporations more freedom to take the kinds of risks that lead to the financial crisis of 08 so long as it provides a short term payoff. and of course, especially now in the face of global terror (and before in the face of global communism), defense spending is a given. you don't even have to ask.

    all of these ideas have real tangible benefits to business interests which go hand in hand perfectly with the crowd-friendly rhetoric for voters. the resulting rhetoric is an impressive display of patriotism, personal responsiblity and christian values. you couldn't ask for a better ideology in american politics.

    i think the main hang up the democrats have is that they are too corrupt to effectively defend the core positions that are supposed to define them as a left wing political party. how can they effectively argue against deregulation and tax cuts when they rely on the same banks and coproations for compaign funds? as supposedly tough as obama is supposed to be on business interests, he can't afford to piss off the establishment any more than a republican candidate could. moreover, the republicans have created the dominant accepted wisdom that these things will help our economy, which makes them even harder to oppose with the average voters at a time like this.

    how can they afford to truly be anti-war when we are in a fatal struggle with islamic extremists that want to watch our civilization crumble? how can they afford to even be in favor of environmental protection or social programs when the economy is in the shitter and the republicans are telling people that those programs and protections are the reason why?

    this is why all we hear from obama anymore is 'compromise.' he knows that left wing politics is effectively dead in this country: the only tactic he has left is to look less crazy and more 'balanced' than his republican counter parts. but that's honestly a really lame tactic, and the american public is just about fed up with his nonsense posturing. republicans win because they take a firm approach and have a consistent ideology that anyone can understand. democrats are all over the place in their rhetoric and people are starting to see that.

    word... that seems to be what's happening right now. though you have to wonder if that's the case is it an inevitable result of this that the society will become too topheavy and eventually run itself into the ground? it's hard to imagine an increase in wealth inequality indefinitely. especially in a country where most of the gdp comes from consumer spending
  3. Radium

    Radium f k

    Mar 4, 2008

    i think the whole premise of the right wing ideology is based on the belief that all agents ared just competing against other agents for gains.

    so in this way, where the right wing ideology really excels is in the way its so inherently aggressive.

    to them, i believe that ultimately, everything is always and ever, just a big fight over something. this ideology has an ability to charge a person up in a way the left wing cant. this is what makes them as an ideology so rallying and palatable to a regular person.

    its the same kind of tough love ideals you might see in military recruitment ads and pro wrestling. but even more than that i guess its the same kind of ideals you would find from any capitalist system - which by design is a system that is based on exploitation (me vs you and my group vs your group)

    and i would say the right wing does a good job of cleanly capturing that sentiment.

    the only thing the left wing can do is to promote the ideals that give it any meaning to begin with.

    ideals like like universal love and kindness. but it just may be that such things are impractical to offer with any feasibility in a society that we have. things would have to change.

    what that would mean i guess is a society with less scarcity and more sustainability to invalidate the need and urge to put up a big fight to begin with. but i dont know how close we are to that.

    but check out this chart somebody made about future technology. many of these would be a big move towards less scarcity and more sustainability for society. the introduction of some of these things possess an ability for the left wing to possibly swing itself into prominence as society physically changes to better accommodate its ideological framework.


    one thing about the wealthy we always have to remember is that they dont actually do anything. the true movers and shakers of any society come from the bottom and the middle/upper middle. these are where the creatives and the thinkers come from. people that changed the world - like thomas edison or nikola tesla who both came from modest beginnings.

    the wealthy actually need them to exist as they are the ones that are going to create the next great technology or the next great idea. so i dont think a goal for them is to run society into the ground. they need society to exist because they always must have the next tesla or edison as they are unable to come up with these ideas themselves. the only event that they wouldnt need society anymore is if they have enough power to sustain themselves indefinitely.

    as for now, i dont really see anything about society crashing to the ground - and i think that top heavyness that we see is pretty much the ideal and the full extent of what you would think they would want.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)