New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

HARK! The clarion call of socialistic UTOPIA!!

PhilFish

Administrator
Staff member
Fly, upon angels wings to heaven!!

(er, if the vote passes....)

"More than 100,000 residents in Switzerland have signed a petition demanding that the government ensure a minimum monthly income of nearly $2,800 (2,500 Swiss francs) for all adults in the country...."


http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/switzerland-to-vote-on--2-800-monthly-‘basic-income’-minimum-for-adults-181937885.html


Ride!!!!!!!!!! for Switzerlaaaaaaaaand......!!

(see McCain cameo at onset.... :) )

I love the way some of the same people that are such social flutterby's and love their church socials, teach their children to be socially acceptable etc. hate "socialism".

What's new about a story where "the people" finally rise up against those stealing the wealth of their nation or culture to become super wealthy and powerful so that they can keep their competition and the po' folks down?

How many times in history will this have to be repeated before most, instead of only some, see the value in moderation of extreme positions in order to try to maintain a balance that does not simply shift from one extreme to the other?

We should know by now, there are downsides to too much of anything.

This explains a little more of the background about your called "socialist" movement in Switzerland. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-04/angry-swiss-aren-t-done-slimming-the-fat-cats.html
 

PhilFish

Administrator
Staff member
I love the way some of the same people that are such social flutterby's and love their church socials, teach their children to be socially acceptable etc. hate "socialism".

What's new about a story where "the people" finally rise up against those stealing the wealth of their nation or culture to become super wealthy and powerful so that they can keep their competition and the po' folks down?

How many times in history will this have to be repeated before most, instead of only some, see the value in moderation of extreme positions in order to try to maintain a balance that does not simply shift from one extreme to the other?

We should know by now, there are downsides to too much of anything.

This explains a little more of the background about your called "socialist" movement in Switzerland. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-04/angry-swiss-aren-t-done-slimming-the-fat-cats.html
No problem here with competition, reducing salaries and the like. What the article references is essentially a guarantee...

more power to them..
 
No problem here with competition, reducing salaries and the like. What the article references is essentially a guarantee...

more power to them..
I'm not so much just for reducing or increasing, but for finding a workable balance. Some have taken more away from the lower and middle to add enormously to their tops. What many are looking for and how it is done should be the debate, is how to move things more back into balance, where the top takes less so the bottom can have a little more. Advocates for the bottom are not looking to make each and every person a millionaire, which is impossible, but there seems something wrong with what are supposed to be intelligent compassionate creatures when some have more than enough for hundreds while hundreds go without enough for themselves, much less their families and I'm not talking about people that don't work very hard, but some people that work very hard at one, two and sometimes 3 jobs and still struggle because some of those they work for seem to like their fat paychecks, but don't like to pay others enough to live off of .

The balance has gotten out of whack and needs to shift again to something more in balance. How that is done in Switzerland, here or in the rest of the world should be something lots of people are working on before they have far bigger problems to deal with than whether they can afford a minimum wage or minimum income for their people which is not simply a unidirectional payout, but income that also comes back to the same economy.

If one boosts commerce by having a larger segment of the population with a higher bottom level of income, there is not only less poverty, but more job opportunities and fewer people that need assistance. The way it is today, there is a small segment of the overall population that has much more than it needs, thus financial resources that are not used for commerce, but for holding onto and while the funds may be invested in something, unless what it is invested in is spending that money to hire people or to buy goods and services, it is not going into the economy the same way paychecks for the lower and middle income do.

The plain simple fact of it now is that some people have far more than they need or can use while many have less than they need and unless the few begin to spend a lot more money, instead of sitting on it or hoarding it, the commerce needed to support economies of any size will fail to meet what is needed to support them. Unless the wealthy keep sucking blood from the non-wealthy, even the wealthy will die and even if they do continue to suck blood out of the non-wealthy, eventually they will have sucked all the blood out or those whose "blood" they are sucking will rise up against them. Looks like the Swiss may have enough citizens that have had their blood suck to the point they want to stop it, not just with increased minimums, but with upper end limits that will help fund the increased minimums and serve to move back toward something closer to a workable balance.
 
Last edited:

justoffal

Senator
Fly, upon angels wings to heaven!!

(er, if the vote passes....)

"More than 100,000 residents in Switzerland have signed a petition demanding that the government ensure a minimum monthly income of nearly $2,800 (2,500 Swiss francs) for all adults in the country...."


http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/switzerland-to-vote-on--2-800-monthly-‘basic-income’-minimum-for-adults-181937885.html


Ride!!!!!!!!!! for Switzerlaaaaaaaaand......!!

(see McCain cameo at onset.... :) )

Normally I would argue this point....but of late I have become aware of a Global trend that definitely appears to be organized wherein the uber wealthy continue to place barriers to financial success in front of the working class. ( years ago I would have called myself a crazy conspiracy theorist but I have seen enough evidence to be convinced ) I'm afraid the working class has only one effective tool to fight back with.... The wage ...... Raising it is the only way to counter the trend. Any other system that involves promises or non cash benefits is constantly subject to sleight of hand bullshit by the money changers....

Not to pervert a good and well known Maxim here but I cannot resist:

"Give me cash or give me death"...... You can keep your social reforms, your bennies, and your fancy cafeteria food!

JO
 

fairsheet

Senator
People who live below a certain subsistence level, represent a cost to society. They're dirty and smelly, and/or society has to cover some of their costs. The Swiss (the ulitimate capitalists) seem to understand that any functioning society will have its lowest caste.

So..this measure seems to be suggesting that IF a "Swisster" (or whatever they're called!) wants to do his capitalist thing in Switzerland and wants to engage the lowest caste, he'll have to pay them at a subsistence minimum, rather than foisting those costs off on the rest of society....socialist style.
 
If we had a government that truly represented the people, rather than the 'money power' (i.e. a corporatocracy), we would not have the dislocations in our economy that we have today. A good government would not stand idly by while its manufacturing base was transferred overseas by owners in search of cheap labor, and then watch its labor force descend into poverty. A good government would not allow the dumping of foreign goods on American soil, with minimal, or no tariff, while American goods are subject to all kinds of regulations and tariffs overseas. These dumped goods, cheaply made in China and elsewhere, then compete with domestically produced goods, whose owners quickly discover they cannot compete, thereby forcing either the closure of their manufacturing sites completely, or the transfer of manufacturing to a low-cost producer nation that can produce competitive goods for America.

A responsible government would not negotiate so-called 'free trade' agreements that are lop-sided in favor of foreign countries, like Mexico, which draw even more of our manufacturing to their soil, and which impoverish our populace even further; a populace that is growing in leaps and bounds because of our ridiculously porous borders, and needs the work. [Btw, a good government would not allow such porous borders to exist. These porous borders exist because the New World Order crowd want it so, and our government obliges].

No, my friends, raising the minimum wage does not resolve the problem. These minimum wage demands merely highlight the underlying sickness that afflicts our country (and other countries), and that sickness lies with those individuals you voted into office. Our own problem is Washington; it needs a drastic overhaul. With few exceoptions, these so-called representatives are all traitors to the Republic, and do nothing but jerk us around. In fact, we no longer have a republic, since our Constitution, and Bill of Rights, have truly become worthless pieces of paper (as George W. Bush reminded us while in office).

The FED is a private bank that is destroying our currency through debt and inflation. Its existence has made it very tempting for our leaders to borrow money (by printing press) to finance useless projects that produce no benefit--like interminable overseas wars and quagmires. The FED has been doing this for 100 years. Why do we still have it? And so on--- It all circles back to the type of government we have, and the revolving door that allows the same politicos to rule us decade after decade through the corrupt 2-party system.

Now, I am not saying 'no' to raising the minimum wage. Am saying its benefit is temporary, and will only lead us to another crisis.
 

SW48

Administrator
Staff member
Supporting Member
I am curious if anyone here personally knows someone that has true wealth or is truly in poverty?

I've rubbed shoulders with people who seemed wealthy but turned out not to be. I have also known people that fell on hard times briefly.

But I know noone today that I can say is truly wealthy or anyone that is living in poverty. Unless someone is hiding either from me.
 

NightSwimmer

Senator
I say "If I don't rub shoulders with them, then they don't exist."

Has anyone been harmed by sequestration? Not me!

Has anyone been harmed by the government shutdown? Not me!

Would anyone have been harmed by a government default? Maybe not me!

If it doesn't affect me personally, then why the hell should I give a damn?

I am a rock! I am an island!

I've got mine... The rest of you can just go fvck yourselves!
 

SW48

Administrator
Staff member
Supporting Member
I say "If I don't rub shoulders with them, then they don't exist."

Has anyone been harmed by sequestration? Not me!

Has anyone been harmed by the government shutdown? Not me!

Would anyone have been harmed by a government default? Maybe not me!

If it doesn't affect me personally, then why the hell should I give a damn?

I am a rock! I am an island!

I've got mine... The rest of you can just go fvck yourselves!


I guess we know how you feel. :)

I was just asking because this thread is talking about these people who have everything and people who have nothing. Who are these people? Everyone I see at the grocery store has a cell phone and the people that I know who are supposedly wealthy don't seem happy at all.

Maybe I am missing something. The word "poor" and "wealthy" I think needs defined.
 

fairsheet

Senator
I know some genuinely wealthy (8 figures) people and they seem happy enough. I know even more moderately wealthy people (7 figures) and they seem happy as well. For what it's worth though, all the rich people I know, essentially created that wealth.*

I also know some genuinely poor people. And...they all have cellphones! But..for the most part, that's ALL they have. Cellphones are cheap these days and to the extent any poor poor person, thinks that cellphone represents wealth, they're that much the poorer for it.

*NO..they didn't create it by their lonesome, and they know it. The point is that their wealth wasn't handed to them, nor did they just "fall into it".
 

Renee

Governor
I am curious if anyone here personally knows someone that has true wealth or is truly in poverty?

I've rubbed shoulders with people who seemed wealthy but turned out not to be. I have also known people that fell on hard times briefly.

But I know noone today that I can say is truly wealthy or anyone that is living in poverty. Unless someone is hiding either from me.
I do...both. (Mike bloomberg...and all my students )
 

Renee

Governor
I guess we know how you feel. :)

I was just asking because this thread is talking about these people who have everything and people who have nothing. Who are these people? Everyone I see at the grocery store has a cell phone and the people that I know who are supposedly wealthy don't seem happy at all.

Maybe I am missing something. The word "poor" and "wealthy" I think needs defined.

Wow...talk about faulty generalizations. Do people in the grocery stores tell you what they earn and do wealthy people tell you they are unhappy? I know an Italian guy who is depressed, those poor Italians...depressed (tongue in cheek)
what is wrong with having a poor person having a cell phone? In today's world they are a necessity.
 

Wahbooz

Governor
Normally I would argue this point....but of late I have become aware of a Global trend that definitely appears to be organized wherein the uber wealthy continue to place barriers to financial success in front of the working class. ( years ago I would have called myself a crazy conspiracy theorist but I have seen enough evidence to be convinced ) I'm afraid the working class has only one effective tool to fight back with.... The wage ...... Raising it is the only way to counter the trend. Any other system that involves promises or non cash benefits is constantly subject to sleight of hand bullshit by the money changers....

Not to pervert a good and well known Maxim here but I cannot resist:

"Give me cash or give me death"...... You can keep your social reforms, your bennies, and your fancy cafeteria food!

JO
How about that. It does my heart good when I see someone actually wake up to the fact of wage disparity in this economy. Congratulations.
 

justoffal

Senator
How about that. It does my heart good when I see someone actually wake up to the fact of wage disparity in this economy. Congratulations.
Well it's a damn shame that it has to be done that way because it's not the best way....unfortunately it has been reduced to the only way and therefore I cannot oppose it.

The Horatio Alger story is only good when you're dealing with a benevolent upper class..... Our modern day upper class seems to have honed their greed to the point of being able to sleep perfectly well at night while starving the children of their working classes to death.

I cannot support that.....nor will I ever be convinced to support that.

JO
 
I am curious if anyone here personally knows someone that has true wealth or is truly in poverty?

I've rubbed shoulders with people who seemed wealthy but turned out not to be. I have also known people that fell on hard times briefly.

But I know noone today that I can say is truly wealthy or anyone that is living in poverty. Unless someone is hiding either from me.
When in dire poverty in any Capitalist society, absolutely all ones energies go into simply surviving, social life goes out the window, unless I suppose one is young and hopeful and resourceful, 'No body knows you when you are down and out', so no most of us do not know many of the millions of poverty ridden people in our midst.

The New Rich also do not tend to rub shoulders with the great unwashed, they fear the filth might rub off. ..........

We do tend to keep within our allotted brackets where friends and aquaintences are concerned.
 
I know some genuinely wealthy (8 figures) people and they seem happy enough. I know even more moderately wealthy people (7 figures) and they seem happy as well. For what it's worth though, all the rich people I know, essentially created that wealth.*

I also know some genuinely poor people. And...they all have cellphones! But..for the most part, that's ALL they have. Cellphones are cheap these days and to the extent any poor poor person, thinks that cellphone represents wealth, they're that much the poorer for it.

*NO..they didn't create it by their lonesome, and they know it. The point is that their wealth wasn't handed to them, nor did they just "fall into it".
Give me old money any day ..................
 

Days

Commentator
I am curious if anyone here personally knows someone that has true wealth or is truly in poverty?

I've rubbed shoulders with people who seemed wealthy but turned out not to be. I have also known people that fell on hard times briefly.

But I know noone today that I can say is truly wealthy or anyone that is living in poverty. Unless someone is hiding either from me.
Do you live in America? If so, go visit your local churches at night; there you meet all the former home owners who are now homeless. Ten million homes have been forcibly seized in foreclosure over the past seven years... you haven't noticed?
 

Wahbooz

Governor
Well it's a damn shame that it has to be done that way because it's not the best way....unfortunately it has been reduced to the only way and therefore I cannot oppose it.

The Horatio Alger story is only good when you're dealing with a benevolent upper class..... Our modern day upper class seems to have honed their greed to the point of being able to sleep perfectly well at night while starving the children of their working classes to death.

I cannot support that.....nor will I ever be convinced to support that.

JO
That has been the point for the ages, JO. Why else would Charles Dickens have written A Christmas Carol? It's been no secret that the rich, and not all rich people, could care less about anyone else but themselves and their deep pockets. It's just showing more right now because they feel empowered. They have ALEC 'educating' politicians in what laws they should enact. Trust me, if allowed it will get even worse.
 

justoffal

Senator
People who live below a certain subsistence level, represent a cost to society. They're dirty and smelly, and/or society has to cover some of their costs. The Swiss (the ulitimate capitalists) seem to understand that any functioning society will have its lowest caste.

So..this measure seems to be suggesting that IF a "Swisster" (or whatever they're called!) wants to do his capitalist thing in Switzerland and wants to engage the lowest caste, he'll have to pay them at a subsistence minimum, rather than foisting those costs off on the rest of society....socialist style.
There is a slippery slope there however and we have defined it here in the US.
Subsistence becomes a career instead of a transition...that too is wrong.

JO
 
Top