The poor are getting paid more, however the cost of living is rising. For a simplification of the situation, imagine you can make double what you make now, if you move. And you think "wow, great idea." Then you get there and after a few months you realize you have less money going to savings than before. You crunch the numbers to find things here cost about 3x as much on average. That's basically what has happened to the poorest class of Americans over the last 50 years. While inflation still effects the rich, often less so. Especially if the rich person in question has been able to make 5x as much as before. Which, is not necessarily unrealistic. In general we are producing more goods per person, so some people must be getting more than before. Meanwhile we know that people at the bottom struggle with bills more than ever before.
Some may have to do will irresponsible spending. But even with good budgeting I've personally seen many struggle.
@scatmandingo the motivation for my comment was a sense of balance, and perhaps defence of capitalism as a concept
It seems that this meme and perhaps @anthracite 's comment were anti-capitalist in sentiment
BTW I wasn't actually defending the wealthy, technically
Most people do not understand that the standard of living is increasing at an incredible rate
Especially in so-called third world countries
According to a report by the World Bank, over the last 25 years, over a billion people have been lifted out of extreme poverty
it doesnt provide opportunity. There is a point of wealth where opportunity exists. Anything below that point progresses linearly up at a set rate/effort system and relies totally on luck to get above the line within a lifetime.
anything above the line has the possibility of either increasing faster linearly with hard work or exponentially with extreme tactics and bending the rules.
that line continues to rise faster than the wealth average does.
I disagree. I think the very reason people stay below the line is they believe it's all luck.
.
There is some luck involved in everything but financial gain has much more to do with decision making and work ethic.
I disagree completely. Everything from what school you went to to what internships are available to you has a lot to do with luck. A tiny handful of people who are both very smart or talented and very hard working can overcome some of these disadvantages through things like scholarships. But few people get significant scholarships. Small ones are common, but they don't get you very far.
And getting a scholarship at all usually involves working hard in school, maybe in sports or on some kind of art, but definitely takes hard work that isn't directly profitable. And that's fine for kids who don't need to work, but that's not everyone. Many kids need to work a least part time. And people do actually need social interactions and doing fun things for a healthy psyche too.
Also, many mental disorders are hereditary, or at least have hereditary components. And even when triggered by situation, these situations are often a matter of luck. Getting and keeping a job at all becomes...
... a lot harder when you have a mental disorder of any kind, harder with some that others. And that's not to speak on other medical conditions. I know a woman with epilepsy who wants to work and works hard when allowed to work, and has a job, but can only get a couple hours a week, and it's not werid for her to be called off because they don't need her. She is looking for something else but has had very little luck. She gets such few hours because they won't let her bus tables, the thing she was hired for, after she had a seizure on the floor one day. I don't even blame her employer here, but it's not her fault either. She just was given really bad luck.
I think its important to own our own actions. I think everyone benefits from striving to be better than they are. And failure to take accountability for ones one actions is undeniably a factor in why some people are where they are. However, saying financial gain has more to do with hard work than luck is not giving luck credit.
Fair enough. It could be luck or it could be effort, every situation is different, and answer can never really be solved.....
.
Given the options, I will choose to believe that success is a result of effort. Every time. The reason is that its the only option that I have control over.
.
I'd much rather take my power back and choose my future vs give up my power and complain about all the things my unlucky life handed me.
That's a fair approach, and certainly a useful one for self motivation. The problem is when this approach is used to justify policy which takes funding away from unlucky people who need assistance.
I think as a society we get disproportionately offended by the unwilling when compared to compassionate to the needful. Think about your personal opinion on what the line is where the price is too high to save a child from starving. If, in reality, it only costs 1/10 of that number would you still be willing to save the child if you had to also give the same amount to two layabouts that are simply lazy?
Scatmandingo, Your post made me think. Thank you!
.
I'd save the child without hesitation. But that doesn't make freeloading on good people's compassion any more acceptable.
.
It's not a matter of will, it's a matter of principal.
The best thing we can do to combat freeloading as a problem is to give assistance in the forms of housing, medicine, and food rather than money. And ideally, universal healthcare and universal government subsidies on food and housing. Then tax everyone more. It means no one benefits from not getting a job.
There is an unfortunate area where people don't make enough money but don't qualify for programs. Getting past this hurdle to the other side is ideal, but getting there often means you will spend weeks or months without health insurance and adequate food. You may also default on rent, car insurance, car payments, ect. If you lose your car you will almost certainly lose your job.
Staying on the government aid side of the line is safer. And giving basic assistance to everyone would solve this problem. And well the rich would still lose money, they would also have government health insurance and food assistance. In fact, requiring all people to have the same health insurance...
Requiring all people to have the same insurance would almost guarantee it would become good?
.
So you're suggesting that paying out of pocket for better care would have to be stopped entirely?
There’s an interesting philosophical question there. Why shouldn’t everyone get the same excellent healthcare? Why do those with more money deserve better in this aspect of life? Nicer houses, cars, etc, sure but why better health?
It's not about health in itself, it's about another person's labor and resources. Why shouldn't more skilled laborers with better facilities get more money?
I understand that. But why should something as basic as professional healthcare be in the luxury category. People with more money don’t get better laws or better rights so there is some limit.
Healthcare isn't a law or a right. It's a trade that people dedicate decades of their lives to learning, practicing, and relearning to practice some more. All for terrible hours, extreme stress, and an extraordinarily higher burnout and suicide rate.
All people are still equal before the law, but the rich will always have their two-toned custom Colt .45 with custom rifling, a hair trigger, and night sights, while the poor will have to make do with the stock Hi-Point in 9mm.
But what is a law or right is arbitrary. If one day we decided to add the right to healthcare to the constitution then it would all of a sudden be both. What I’m saying is that look at it for what it is. Health is of equal concern and an equal factor among all people. If a person of wealth can get a treatment then shouldn’t it be available to everyone who needs that treatment?
It is available. For a price. Just like every other service there is.
You can't entitle people to other's services constitutionally. Slavery's been outlawed.
The oaths you're referring to are voluntary.
You are not entitled the service of the military as our oath is to our officers and the President, and even they are secondary to the Constitution of the United States.
Lastly, many medical professionals do not swear the hippocratic oath.
Famousone is correct in why healthcare cannot be a right.
.
A right has to be something that cannot infringe on itself or other rights. They have to be fundamentally true. Services don't qualify, I'll give you an example:
.
Imagine if everyone in healthcare decided to quit. How does someone's supposed right to healthcare work now? Should the government force people to become doctors against their will so that you can make use of your right to have someone take care of you?
.
If healthcare is a right, shouldn't a safe warm space to live be a right too? How about food? Should farmers and construction workers be public survents? Where does it end?
.
A right is an guaranteed opportunity that you can take if you choose to. It cannot be a guaranteed gift or transfer of goods or services as that would infringe on other peoples opportunities.
No one is suggesting we shouldn't pay doctors. Doctors should just be paid from tax dollars like teachers or military are. And no one is even suggesting doctors be required to continue to work as a doctor if they should decide to quit. Being a medical professional would still be voluntary. That's pretty far from slavery for many reasons.
And young men are still legally required to register for the draft in the United States. And there are pretty serious consequences for evading the draft. The draft hasn't been used in a while, but this is largely due to high rates of military volunteers. So actually, the laws of the United States are founded on ideas which include "It is acceptable to force someone to do a service for the greater good, in times of crisis"
Also, by this logic we shouldn't have a right to an education. And weather it not we should is less important than the fact that we are given free public education until we are out of high school. And this is good for everyone, not just the poor. Healthcare should be the same way. Providing everyone healthcare is valuable, especially with things like vaccines which benefit from herd immunity, but also with things like antibiotics, which can limit the spead of bacteria.
You want to pay doctors like me? Or public school faculty? You mean in this era where we suffer both from a lack of teachers and military volunteers because the pay and job is so shitty? Based on local taxes just teachers too?
Learn about how these systems work before you advocate for them, you'l only fuck over dedicated medical professionals and the poor both.
No, I want higher taxes and better pay for public service officials. And we don't have a problem with too few military personnel. If we did, we would see the draft go into effect. They have raised the criteria for joining the military more than once over the last decade due to an ability to require better standards due to a surplus of volunteers.
If we could incentivize teaching and medical professionals in the same way, this would be excellent.
Medical professionals have their incentives, it's money and control over their practice. Taxes don't need to be higher, they're already too damn high, it's the bureaucracy, the invasive and restrictive regulations, the bylaws and liability issues.
And we haven't raised standards. We're lowering them. Waivers for convictions, behavioral issues, low test scores, failing drug screening.
A draft wouldn't even help because people are too fat, stupid, or lazy to be shaped up in a timely manner. It's not an incentive, it's a barrier to entry.
So you think everyone's taxes should go up so that someone other than the individual citizen can decide what kind of health care they receive?
Why not let the individuals keep this tax hike and spend it on the health care of their choice?
for the majority of people the amount they save from the taxes not going up wont pay for a 1/4th of the healthcare that they would be getting from the tax increase
Not what she said. Or meant. Due to the distribution of wealth, most people would get more health coverage by higher taxation than they could by spending saved tax dollars on healthcare.
Also, yes. Higher taxes would not be a problem if our needs were being meet by government programs. Pure socialism does not work due to human selfishness. However, higher taxes and socialist programs can still be extremely good for a country so long as there is still a significant benefit to working hard.
And the fact is that sooner or later countries which fail to adopt socialist programs will start to lag behind internationally. Pure capitalism begins to break down when the highest classes have so much of the wealth that profit gains are to longer possible. Capitalism in its purest form demands constant growth. Investors will stop investing if it's not profitable to do so, and to do that requires a company to continue to grow every quarter....
... At some point, there is just literally no way to grow your profit. You have all the possible customers buying as much as they can afford. Companies who stop making enough profits get bought by companies who do. The ultimate would be one mega company who cannot grow because they already have all the everything in ng possible. However, more realistically, as this point approaches for too great a number of companies, exploitive measures will become more extreme, and more short term. We can see these effects pretty clearly in the video game industry right now. However, this happening on a large scale with industries we need for survival, such as food, will result in more protests, riots, and ultimately revolution.
We can put this off by utilizing more things like anti-poverty propaganda and robot labor. However sooner or later the sheer number of people in poverty will mean rebellion.
Yeah, no. There's no universal or finite metric or resource involved. People will want different things at different times and be willing to spend more or less money while themselves having more or less money. That's the way it's been forever.
The government is not meant to provide for anyone's anything. It's a necessary evil that we accept because not having one leads to terrible things.
Capitalism is the absolute worst system ever devised in history, except for everything else.
When Churchill said that he may have been right but the idea that the same systems and philosophies remain consistently relevant as time goes on is a little naive. Healthcare within the last couple of generations used to be provided by the town doctor who was not highly paid. As medical technology progresses and we become accustomed to a higher life expectancy we have to re-evaluate how our society handles the change. This is only one example of course but @thekaylapup is exactly right. Pure anything doesn’t work in a growlingly complex world. Colony and frontier American ideals of grab your plot of land and defend it to the death just don’t apply the way they used to. They are perpetuated by a fallacy.
Namely, those who have more valuable skills or work harder are the most rewarded. If you look around in real life it frankly isn’t true. The highly skilled workers make more than those other workers with fewer or a lesser skills for the most part but the true rewards aren’t going to the workers at all. Those who put together the companies and gather the workers together are the ones who become ultra-rich. And for the most part who gets to be in that pay band was decided decades ago. The days of working your way from the mail room to the CEO are long gone. We need to stop thinking that way and really look around and observe what’s happening. Then we figure out how to proceed from there in terms of society and law. The world progresses even if we don’t want it to but being “progressive” is somehow negative. It should be the common sense approach.
Some may have to do will irresponsible spending. But even with good budgeting I've personally seen many struggle.
It seems that this meme and perhaps @anthracite 's comment were anti-capitalist in sentiment
BTW I wasn't actually defending the wealthy, technically
Most people do not understand that the standard of living is increasing at an incredible rate
Especially in so-called third world countries
According to a report by the World Bank, over the last 25 years, over a billion people have been lifted out of extreme poverty
I dont defend the wealthy, i defend a system that provides opportunity, and reward for success.
anything above the line has the possibility of either increasing faster linearly with hard work or exponentially with extreme tactics and bending the rules.
that line continues to rise faster than the wealth average does.
.
There is some luck involved in everything but financial gain has much more to do with decision making and work ethic.
And getting a scholarship at all usually involves working hard in school, maybe in sports or on some kind of art, but definitely takes hard work that isn't directly profitable. And that's fine for kids who don't need to work, but that's not everyone. Many kids need to work a least part time. And people do actually need social interactions and doing fun things for a healthy psyche too.
Also, many mental disorders are hereditary, or at least have hereditary components. And even when triggered by situation, these situations are often a matter of luck. Getting and keeping a job at all becomes...
I think its important to own our own actions. I think everyone benefits from striving to be better than they are. And failure to take accountability for ones one actions is undeniably a factor in why some people are where they are. However, saying financial gain has more to do with hard work than luck is not giving luck credit.
.
Given the options, I will choose to believe that success is a result of effort. Every time. The reason is that its the only option that I have control over.
.
I'd much rather take my power back and choose my future vs give up my power and complain about all the things my unlucky life handed me.
.
I'd save the child without hesitation. But that doesn't make freeloading on good people's compassion any more acceptable.
.
It's not a matter of will, it's a matter of principal.
There is an unfortunate area where people don't make enough money but don't qualify for programs. Getting past this hurdle to the other side is ideal, but getting there often means you will spend weeks or months without health insurance and adequate food. You may also default on rent, car insurance, car payments, ect. If you lose your car you will almost certainly lose your job.
Staying on the government aid side of the line is safer. And giving basic assistance to everyone would solve this problem. And well the rich would still lose money, they would also have government health insurance and food assistance. In fact, requiring all people to have the same health insurance...
.
So you're suggesting that paying out of pocket for better care would have to be stopped entirely?
All people are still equal before the law, but the rich will always have their two-toned custom Colt .45 with custom rifling, a hair trigger, and night sights, while the poor will have to make do with the stock Hi-Point in 9mm.
You can't entitle people to other's services constitutionally. Slavery's been outlawed.
You are not entitled the service of the military as our oath is to our officers and the President, and even they are secondary to the Constitution of the United States.
Lastly, many medical professionals do not swear the hippocratic oath.
.
A right has to be something that cannot infringe on itself or other rights. They have to be fundamentally true. Services don't qualify, I'll give you an example:
.
Imagine if everyone in healthcare decided to quit. How does someone's supposed right to healthcare work now? Should the government force people to become doctors against their will so that you can make use of your right to have someone take care of you?
.
If healthcare is a right, shouldn't a safe warm space to live be a right too? How about food? Should farmers and construction workers be public survents? Where does it end?
.
A right is an guaranteed opportunity that you can take if you choose to. It cannot be a guaranteed gift or transfer of goods or services as that would infringe on other peoples opportunities.
And young men are still legally required to register for the draft in the United States. And there are pretty serious consequences for evading the draft. The draft hasn't been used in a while, but this is largely due to high rates of military volunteers. So actually, the laws of the United States are founded on ideas which include "It is acceptable to force someone to do a service for the greater good, in times of crisis"
Learn about how these systems work before you advocate for them, you'l only fuck over dedicated medical professionals and the poor both.
If we could incentivize teaching and medical professionals in the same way, this would be excellent.
And we haven't raised standards. We're lowering them. Waivers for convictions, behavioral issues, low test scores, failing drug screening.
A draft wouldn't even help because people are too fat, stupid, or lazy to be shaped up in a timely manner. It's not an incentive, it's a barrier to entry.
Why not let the individuals keep this tax hike and spend it on the health care of their choice?
Also, yes. Higher taxes would not be a problem if our needs were being meet by government programs. Pure socialism does not work due to human selfishness. However, higher taxes and socialist programs can still be extremely good for a country so long as there is still a significant benefit to working hard.
And the fact is that sooner or later countries which fail to adopt socialist programs will start to lag behind internationally. Pure capitalism begins to break down when the highest classes have so much of the wealth that profit gains are to longer possible. Capitalism in its purest form demands constant growth. Investors will stop investing if it's not profitable to do so, and to do that requires a company to continue to grow every quarter....
We can put this off by utilizing more things like anti-poverty propaganda and robot labor. However sooner or later the sheer number of people in poverty will mean rebellion.
The government is not meant to provide for anyone's anything. It's a necessary evil that we accept because not having one leads to terrible things.
Capitalism is the absolute worst system ever devised in history, except for everything else.