what happened to the days when the democratic party cared about working people?

[JSojourner]

Most of the religious simply cluck their tongues and say, "Ah well, the poor we will always have with us.  How is my 401-K doing?"

Until energy is (basically) free and robots can do most menial labor* (or we lose +75% of our species), we will always have poor people....even in the best of scenarios (shy of some sort of supernatural worldwide mind farking).





*both are plausible in the next several decades

Absolutely right, Dead.  I don't dispute the veracity of the statement, only the morality of it.  We will always have disease of some sort, but that should never discourage us from trying to work for better treatments and even cures.

[Franzl]

Most of the religious simply cluck their tongues and say, "Ah well, the poor we will always have with us.  How is my 401-K doing?"

Until energy is (basically) free and robots can do most menial labor* (or we lose +75% of our species), we will always have poor people....even in the best of scenarios (shy of some sort of supernatural worldwide mind farking).





*both are plausible in the next several decades

Absolutely right, Dead.  I don't dispute the veracity of the statement, only the morality of it.  We will always have disease of some sort, but that should never discourage us from trying to work for better treatments and even cures.

We'll always have poor people in a capitalist system (although usually fewer than in a socialist system), but there are ways to avoid extreme and massive poverty in market economies, which is usually refered to as the welfare state.

At the same time, we need to increase competitiveness, such as through further investments in education, to decrease the number of people that actually become dependent on welfare.

Such things also include guaranteed healthcare, which is a perfectly legitimate idea to someone like me that doesn't like government all that much.


So yeah, while there will always be poor people, you're very right that it should always be society's goal to decrease poverty and make living conditions for poor people better.

[JSojourner]

Most of the religious simply cluck their tongues and say, "Ah well, the poor we will always have with us.  How is my 401-K doing?"

Until energy is (basically) free and robots can do most menial labor* (or we lose +75% of our species), we will always have poor people....even in the best of scenarios (shy of some sort of supernatural worldwide mind farking).





*both are plausible in the next several decades

Absolutely right, Dead.  I don't dispute the veracity of the statement, only the morality of it.  We will always have disease of some sort, but that should never discourage us from trying to work for better treatments and even cures.

We'll always have poor people in a capitalist system (although usually fewer than in a socialist system),

Franzl,

The "Socialists" in Europe, Japan, New Zealand and Canada seem to have far fewer poors than we do. Of course, the success of their socialism is probably due to their willingness to restrain their socialism with capitalist impulses.  I've always said that...I don't care if a country is capitalist or socialist as both systems have merit and flaw.  But the wise nation tracks one way, but does not abandon the best principles and ideas flowing the other direction and permits or encourages those principles to act as a restraint or a balance.

This is my beef with American capitalism today.  Not that capitalism is evil.  Only that unbridled, unrestrained capitalism is.  The opposite is true of socialism without capitalist restraint. Since Reagan, we've been dismantling every single socialist impulse that exists in this country.  Because a few shreds of social safety net remain, clever but disingenuous talkers equate that with some fairy story about socialism run amok.  Bah-loney. 

Sorry for the rant.  I actually agree with you about competetiveness, education and so on.  But be careful.  You might need government money to do some of that.  And if you support it, you'll be branded a socialist.      You know...like Torie.  That commie pinko.

[Franzl]

The countries you mentioned, JS, are still capitalist countries, albeit with highly developed and effective welfare states.

I don't consider them socialist countries. I was thinking more about real communism

[JSojourner]

The countries you mentioned, JS, are still capitalist countries, albeit with highly developed and effective welfare states.

I don't consider them socialist countries. I was thinking more about real communism

Oh, then right you are.  Perhaps I have fallen prey to so much conservative chatter that I really believe Norway is socialist.  But either way, we agree.  Communism is a repugnant and vile form of oppression (you cannot even call it government) that impovershes people...and not just economically.