Top | Newest First | Oldest First
luckranger71 · 51-55, M
Poverty in the US has significantly decreased over the last 90 years due to the New Deal and Great Society safety net, particularly among the elderly due to Medicare. But it really applies to all demographic groups to varying degrees.
It can never be fully eradicated, but I think the lack of historical memory of what things were like almost a century ago gives people the wrong idea about steps to reducing poverty.
It can never be fully eradicated, but I think the lack of historical memory of what things were like almost a century ago gives people the wrong idea about steps to reducing poverty.
marciamom · F
It is a foolish idea. If you give everyone $100, some people will save it and some will spend it on candy. Some will give it to others. By the end of the day, who is rich? One has money but no candy. One has candy but no money. Some would argue that the person that gave his money to another in need is the truly rich one. The idea is propagated by people that are trying to get votes from those enticed by the idea of "free stuff." If you are an adult, you realize that nothing is free. Calling it free just means that someone else is paying.
bijouxbroussard · F
@marciamom It’s idealistic, but what is foolish is that in a land where individuals possess more money than they could spend in several lifetimes, anyone is starving and homeless. Nobody who calls him or herself “Christian” should be okay with that. 🙁
marciamom · F
@bijouxbroussard There is a difference between supporting the poor as a charity and creating a society that dictates who can earn what. Communism failed because it didn't take the Russian farmers long to figure it out: if he produces 100 bushels and the government gives him ten to live on but the farmer that makes 20 bushels also gets 10 to live on, there isn't much incentive to be productive. Of course every religion demands supporting the needy. That's a different discission
bijouxbroussard · F
@marciamom Communism perhaps, but certain tenets of socialism have been quietly workable in many Western countries. Ironically, many of those countries are secular.
It does tie in because one would think that in theocratic countries if the teachings are to share, there would be fewer destitute. Not how it works, alas.
It does tie in because one would think that in theocratic countries if the teachings are to share, there would be fewer destitute. Not how it works, alas.
MrAboo · 36-40, M
There’s always some one down on their luck and those who don’t want to better themselves and would rather just beg for money or those who are either not mentally able to hold a job.
Elevatorpitches · F
@MrAboo that would never be you
MrAboo · 36-40, M
@Elevatorpitches no, it could be one day. And it could be you one day as well how you deal with the situation depends on the outcome
Elevatorpitches · F
@MrAboo well actually
I think its how u deal with the situation and a whole bunch of luck too
that determines the outcome.
I think its how u deal with the situation and a whole bunch of luck too
that determines the outcome.
megrose · 56-60, F
When money is sent to a place to help impoverished people has to go through the hands of dishonest people, it rarely gets to where it was intended. There are enough resources but too many corrupt leaders
curiosi · 61-69, F
We have spent more on the war on poverty then all the foreign wars combined and nothing has changed!
SW-User
Some are poor by choice, so no. Some have no control over their spendings.
InOtterWords · F
Are you talking about global poverty or local? Where do you begin, how do you measure?
Is it about eradicating it by redistributing wealth or giving everyone gainful employment?
Is it about eradicating it by redistributing wealth or giving everyone gainful employment?
Gangstress · 41-45, F
It could if people wanted it to. The will is not yet there globally.
ginnyfromtheblock · 26-30, F
man i hope some of y’all answering this never have to be poor lmao
MiserableAtBest · 22-25, F
I think we have the resources to end extreme poverty.
But the real question here is, do we have the political will and courage to make the necessary changes?
The answer is no
But the real question here is, do we have the political will and courage to make the necessary changes?
The answer is no
Elevatorpitches · F
@MiserableAtBest who is "we"?
DarkCrazyArtistGeekGamer · 31-35, F
Or just be proud to be poor & get things for free :)
Shengyen · 26-30, M
@DarkCrazyArtistGeekGamer interesting from where
cycleman · 61-69, M
No way!
Can you eradicate Greed?
Can you eradicate Greed?
Elevatorpitches · F
Substitute the word, "possibly"...
ginnyfromtheblock · 26-30, F
no, but we should try
DDonde · 31-35, M
You can raise the standard of living for those at the bottom.
There may always be gaps in wealth, but that's not to say that they can't be made smaller.
There may always be gaps in wealth, but that's not to say that they can't be made smaller.
Elevatorpitches · F
@DDonde Who in "power" wants to do that though?
basilfawlty89 · 31-35, M
You can. But it would need a different economic system.
TheLordOfHell · 41-45
Sure can, if we eradicate money