|
Poverty
Jun 24, 2004 17:24:26 GMT -5
Post by JOEBIALEK on Jun 24, 2004 17:24:26 GMT -5
With all the debate recently for amending the United States Constitution in favor of recognizing marriage as a union between a man and woman, perhaps a more appropriate amendment should guarantee each citizen of the United States the right to food, clothing, shelter and medical care. Poverty is defined as the condition of being poor or lacking the necessary means of support to live or meet needs. Today we read of enormous corporate tax breaks, outsourcing of jobs overseas and outrageous salaries "earned" by athletes/entertainers. More recently came the revelation of the $200 billion dollars spent by the U.S. on the war in Iraq. In the meantime, the number of those in poverty continues to increase. The Old Testament of the Bible often makes references to the promised land flowing with milk and honey. All one has to do in this country is take a trip to the grocery story or department store and bear witness to the fact that if anywhere was close to exhibiting the characteristics of "the promised land", this country is it. Yet somehow we are still unable to meet the four basic needs every citizen has. Some would argue that this proposal is an extension of Socialism/Communism. Nothing could be further from the truth. Socialism/Communism is a political or economic theory in which community members own all property, resources, and the means of production, and control the distribution of goods. No one is suggesting the replacement of Capitalism; an economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately owned, and prices are chiefly determined by open competition in a free market. What is being suggested is that in this land of surplus "milk and honey", there is absolutely no reason why the four basic needs of every U.S. citizen cannot be met. Some would argue that food stamps, thrift stores, public housing and medicaid already meet these needs but in the words of President John F. Kennedy, "this country is divided between those who have never had it so good and those who know we can do better". I think we can do better. Resolved, it shall be the right of every United States citizen (in order to further guarantee the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness) to receive food, clothing, shelter and medical care that is adequate to meet their basic needs.
|
|
|
Poverty
Jun 27, 2004 18:17:23 GMT -5
Post by AuntieSocial on Jun 27, 2004 18:17:23 GMT -5
I absolutely agree, every citizen should have access to the very things that help sustain life. I would take it one step further and add education to the list of basic needs. In a world that is so dependant on technology, it is essential that every citizen be provided with equal access to the training that will help them become productive members of society.
|
|
|
Poverty
Jun 28, 2004 4:49:01 GMT -5
Post by vertigo on Jun 28, 2004 4:49:01 GMT -5
I categorically disagree. Farmers have to work hard to produce food. Any commodity that must be produced can't be granted as a 'right'. Farmers produce food because there is a need for it. If the farmer charges too much, people buy from other farmers. If the food is too expensive, the worker tells his boss that his pay must be adjusted to suit.
People's productivity is not slave to other's needs.
|
|
|
Poverty
Aug 22, 2004 1:31:15 GMT -5
Post by Theodore Doxford on Aug 22, 2004 1:31:15 GMT -5
I categorically disagree. Farmers have to work hard to produce food. Any commodity that must be produced can't be granted as a 'right'. Farmers produce food because there is a need for it. If the farmer charges too much, people buy from other farmers. If the food is too expensive, the worker tells his boss that his pay must be adjusted to suit. People's productivity is not slave to other's needs. I have heard that the subsidies that the USA gives it's producers is harming the thirld world farmers......So is it right to support American farmers in a way that stops third world farmers, from gaining access to your markets? I accept that the European governments are doing exactly the same thing
|
|
|
Poverty
Aug 22, 2004 2:36:22 GMT -5
Post by BaalShemRa on Aug 22, 2004 2:36:22 GMT -5
Joe, how about sticking around so we can talk? I like the topics you post but your total lack of response kind of diminishes the appeal of replying.
Vertigo,
Surely you noticed the part where Joe said: "No one is suggesting the replacement of Capitalism; an economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately owned, and prices are chiefly determined by open competition in a free market."
Perhaps a guaranteed minimum income and/or more/broader basic needs stamps and/or bigger EITC could ensure all have access to the two first stages of Maslow's pyramid ( minus sex, plus education ).
It is possible that there is a contradiction in Bialek's post. The end makes it sounds as if the government will distribute the goods. Earlier he says that Capitalism ( which he doesn't want to replace ) includes the private distribution of good. A little generosity in reading his post could lead us to think that Bialek is proposing that instead of providing the basic goods, the government could provide the money to buy the basic goods from private sources at market prices. No kolkohz here.
|
|