Mocking The Poor

[thesometimesaint]

Charity is voluntarily.  Taxes are not voluntarily.  Charity is given with a cheerful heart.  Taxes are paid out of duty or simply taken out of our paychecks because we have no control over it.  When I purchase things from the store, I am forced to pay sales tax.  I don't get to ask for the amount to be removed. 

 

I volunteered to join the US Air Force to support and defend the Constitution, including the parts about taxes. I voluntarily served in county government agreeing to support and defend the Constitution. I voluntarily vote for my representatives in all levels of my government. I voluntarily use the roads bridges, highways, infrastructure those taxes provide. I voluntarily use teachers, librarians, policemen, fireman, the military for the promotion of the general welfare and the provide for the common defense not only for my own needs but for the needs of others in my country. I use the policemen, courts of law, to enforce the laws I live under. When necessary I even use the prisons to detain and hold those whom will not abide by the law. Paying taxes just part of the dues I owe and pay to live in a civilization. I and you voluntarily stay in this country.

[MorningStar]

I volunteered to join the US Air Force to support and defend the Constitution, including the parts about taxes. I voluntarily served in county government agreeing to support and defend the Constitution. I voluntarily vote for my representatives in all levels of my government. I voluntarily use the roads bridges, highways, infrastructure those taxes provide. I voluntarily use teachers, librarians, policemen, fireman, the military for the promotion of the general welfare and the provide for the common defense not only for my own needs but for the needs of others in my country. I use the policemen, courts of law, to enforce the laws I live under. When necessary I even use the prisons to detain and hold those whom will not abide by the law. Paying taxes just part of the dues I owe and pay to live in a civilization. I and you voluntarily stay in this country.

Were you voluntarily born here?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

 I and you voluntarily stay in this country.

....

[The Nehor]

Were you voluntarily born here?

 

If some people's theories about the PreMortal world are true then yes. I know I chose the United States.

[MorningStar]

If some people's theories about the PreMortal world are true then yes. I know I chose the United States.

I can just imagine us in the Spirit World.  "I can't wait to make charitable contributions through taxes after I refuse to do it on my own!"

[bcuzbcuz]

There is a problem with this thread. Although many of you may not realize this but this thread is centered on the anglo-saxon model of capitalism. Such an ideology is dominating the way people are thinking about economics and poverty. I know that this may be difficult to believe but before the fall of the soviet union, the world was shaped by many types of capitalisms, each with its particular form of values. For example, the nordic welfare model, centered in the north of europe. These countries had a particular type of capitalism where cooperative values were the norm. Then we have the welfare states of europe, each with their own particular form of capitalisms. Then we had the capitalisms that were formed in asia, mainly in japan.

 

So, in the past we had many forms of capitalisms. Now, these capitalisms have disappeared. We now have one form of capitalism that is dominating the way people view life: the anglo-saxon model. I see the values of this capitalism in many of the posts on this thread. It is very American centered in its values and attitudes when it comes to the poor and economics. I think that we need to see the ideology that frames our way of thinking and maybe attach ourselves to a different way of viewing the world. We need to take a step outside our comfort zones and see the world anew.

I enjoy reading your many posts to this particular thread. I'm pleased that this "political" discussion has not been closed down.

I live in one of the countries you define as "nordic welfare model". That model has collapsed for the most part. School administration has been allowed to pass into the private sector. A number of businesses make considerable profits by receiving government money to run schools. Money, from taxes, meant to pay for teacher salaries, books, school supplies, student lunches, building maintenance, new construction and administration costs is combed off the top, like cream from whole milk, to line the pockets of investors. We're talking millions and millions of dollars in a country of just 9 million people. Meanwhile, the quality of education in Sweden has declined rapidly, as measured by PISA, Program for International Student Assessment.

Sweden's Minister of Education, Björklund, has pushed for reforms to make the Swedish school system more and more similar to the American system. Not the best model to follow, in my opinion, as a teacher, having taught 20 years in Sweden and 20 years in North America.

Sweden's welfare system, although not collapsed, is only a shadow of its former self. The youth programs, that were once, rightfully, the pride of Sweden have totally collapsed. Drug and alcohol problems abound, amongst the youth and the society in general.

I agree with your assessment that the form of capitalism, that previously existed in northern Europe, has been replaced with a model approved of by the IMF and modelled after the American system.

[bcuzbcuz]

As many political science academics will tell you democracy has many meaning depending on the belief what a democracy is. You must be more exact why you think you live in a democracy. One vote does not matter, especially if the major political parties are more or less the same in ideology. No matter where one lives, this is more the case nowadays. One can live in a democracy when there are honest alternatives to chose from: more than one ideology to chose from.

 

Now my above statement may be different from yours. This is why the word democracy is so difficult. Too many definitions.

Good point. The democracy I currently live in has a seven party system covering the gamut from the left, the old communist party, to the far right, the rapidly expanding new-nazi party.. I currently live in Sweden but have spent half my adult life living in the democracy of Canada and 5 years in the two party system of the US. My wife wants to move back, and we probably will, to her home country, the relatively recent democracy of Chilé.

The current economic atmosphere in Europe and internationally, has made a mockery of democracies here and around the world. We get to vote every 4 years but the control stops there. Big business and international monetary policies have stripped many local realms of decision making of any bite and turned them into lap dogs to international concerns. Greece and Portugal are prime examples. These countries are nominally democracies but decision making has moved outside their borders.

[bcuzbcuz]

Since people have ignored my beginning post on this thread I will post this for discussion. Notice where the anglo-saxon model is attached to poverty.

 

and Seeleib-Kaiser 2011).^[41]

Esping-Andersen (1990) constructed the welfare regime typology in acknowledgment of the ideational importance and power of the three dominant political movements of the long 20th century in Western Europe and North America; namely, Social Democracy, Christian Democracy (conservatism) and Liberalism (Stephens 1979; Korpi 1983; Van Kersbergen 1995; Ferragina and Seeleib-Kaiser 2011; Vrooman 2012).

• The ideal social-democratic welfare state is based on the principle of universalism, granting access to benefits and services based on citizenship. Such a welfare state is said to provide a relatively high degree of autonomy, limiting the reliance of family and market (Ferragina and Seeleib-Kaiser 2011).^[42] In this context, social policies are perceived as 'politics against the market' (Esping-Andersen 1985).
• Christian-democratic welfare states are based on the principle of subsidiarity and the dominance of social insurance schemes, offering a medium level of decommodification and permitting a high degree of social stratification.
• The liberal regime is based on market dominance and private provision; ideally, the state only interferes to ameliorate poverty and provide for basic needs, largely on a means-tested basis. Hence, the decommodification potential of state benefits is assumed to be low and social stratification high (Ferragina and Seeleib-Kaiser 2011).^[42]

Based on the decommodification index, Esping-Andersen divided 18 OECD countries into the following groups (Esping-Andersen 1990: 71):

• Social Democratic: Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden
• Christian Democratic: Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Spain and Italy;
• Liberal: Australia, Canada, Japan, Switzerland and the US;
• Not clearly classified: Ireland, New Zealand and the United Kingdom.

 

Please check out the link and see the chart. The anglosaxon model is the worst when dealing with poverty.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_state

 

From the link:

 

Effects on poverty

Main article: Welfare's effect on poverty

Empirical evidence suggests that taxes and transfers considerably reduce poverty in most countries, whose welfare states commonly constitute at least a fifth of GDP.^[46][47] Most "welfare states" have considerably lower poverty rates than they had before the implementation of welfare programs.

Since the Esping-Andersen evaluation is somewhat dated I would profer the opinion that Sweden no longer lists amongst the social- democracies. Sweden could once boast of no ghettos, social equality and a well dimensioned welfare net. That is no longer true.

[The Nehor]

I can just imagine us in the Spirit World.  "I can't wait to make charitable contributions through taxes after I refuse to do it on my own!"

 

It is not a forced charitable contribution. It is a wealth transfer.

 

I don't think anyone in the PreMortal World cared about money at all. I imagine the whole thing looks pretty petty to them.

[Calm]

. Enough to survive on if you are VERY frugal.

. What about those who choose not to be frugal and end up not having enough money at the end of the month to pay rent or even eat?

[Calm]

If some people's theories about the PreMortal world are true then yes. I know I chose the United States.

And for those who don't see that as one of the things we did agree to?

TSS,

And for those who would leave if they could, but can't afford to? Have no way to legally get a long term visa so they can legally work in another country? Are you suggesting that as long as they don't illegally leave the country, they are here voluntarily?

[Calm]

bcuz, very interesting getting you experience. Why do you believe that this was allowed to happen, that people in a country didn't speak up to stop it and if they did, why didn't it work?

[The Nehor]

. What about those who choose not to be frugal and end up not having enough money at the end of the month to pay rent or even eat?

 

Panhandling.

 

 

And for those who don't see that as one of the things we did agree to?

 

No idea. I know I agreed to it. No idea if anyone else did. A better question to ask would probably be: Would you rather have been born somewhere else?

[bcuzbcuz]

bcuz, very interesting getting you experience. Why do you believe that this was allowed to happen, that people in a country didn't speak up to stop it and if they did, why didn't it work?

My personal opinion is that too many people bought into the idea of having more money into their own pockets and thought the social programs they liked would be maintained and that the excesses they didn't like would be cut. But losses in tax revenue meant that huge cuts were needed to balance the budget.

I also believe there has been a very radical change in the mindset of most Swedes. When I first came to Sweden more than 40 years ago, there existed a defined sense of community wherein Swedes felt a genuine concern for their fellow citizens and were very engaged in world politics. That sense of community is tattered and torn. It is more "every man for himself" in the country now. Security has turned to the more selfish insecurity and mistrust. A prime factor in the rise of the new-nazi politics and their anti-immigration and anti-foreigner policies.

I can't help but feel that Sweden took a turn for the worse when the Prime Minister Olof Palme was assassinated in 1986.

[thesometimesaint]

And for those who don't see that as one of the things we did agree to?

TSS,

And for those who would leave if they could, but can't afford to? Have no way to legally get a long term visa so they can legally work in another country? Are you suggesting that as long as they don't illegally leave the country, they are here voluntarily?

 

Legality another question. I don't recommend anyone violate any laws within their own country or a country to which they would like to emigrate to. The simple fact is that people have been traveling from one place to another since man first appeared in central Africa some 200,000 to 250,000 years ago. I choose to remain in the US because of many factors including that I like having my say in what my country does. I don't have to like everything my country does.

 

Ps; http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/10/opinion/krugman-the-war-over-poverty.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&_r=0

Edited January 11, 2014 by thesometimesaint

[mercyngrace]

In trying to keep up with the various arguments, I have a couple of comments. Some are spawned by specific posts other are just my synapses firing randomly...

 

Regarding choosing mortal circumstances in the pre-mortal life:

I'm not sure what difference it makes whether we chose to be born in a particular nation or circumstance or not. LDS doctrine is clear that where much is given much is required. (D&C 82:3) Whether or not you chose before birth to have been given "much" is irrelevant, your obligation remains. Now, whether you feel that the Lord's requirement is best met by individual charity or through a combination of institutional and individual charity is obviously, open to discussion. 

 

Regarding taxation as a "wealth transfer":

I think this is good language and correlates well with some of Paul's atonement analogies. 2 Corinthians 8:9, for example, reads "For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor , that ye through his poverty might be rich." What makes Christ's "wealth transfer" a transformative act in the lives of His followers is the fact that it was done willingly with the specific purpose of taking a world full of poor beggars and making them joint-heirs with the Son of God. Giving, whether through taxes or a sense of religious obligation, if done without the same purposeful self-sacrifice loses the luster of true charity, the pure love of Christ. I'm convinced that taxes, taken under threat of punishment and given begrudgingly, do not have the transformative power required to save either giver or receiver.

 

My experience is that it's a comfortable thought for those of us who condemn the government misuse of funds or who begrudge "forced" charity to think, "If the government left me more of my own money, I could be more charitable." The premise remains unproven as long as we have the government (or its mismanagement of tax monies and programs) to fault for our lack of giving. Perhaps the only evidence we can offer in our own defense is in how we spend what we do have as surplus income. At what point can I comfortably look into the Savior's eyes and say, "Yes. I gave enough." 

 

Regarding Christ as the new Abel:

The Lord has been called the "second Adam" as His resurrection ushered in a new creation, new life, and reconnected ties severed in the Garden. He could also be compared to Abel. The obedient son, Abel offered an honorable sacrifice and was slain. Abel is the anti-Cain. The son who understood his father's heart. The son, who would never have responded self-servingly "Am I my brother's keeper?" Christ, the second Abel answered affirmatively the question time and again through parable and ultimately with His own flesh and blood. I AM! I am my brother's keeper! If this is His answer, how can I respond to the question with anything less. 

[thesometimesaint]

Are you saying that employees making the current minimum wage ($7.65) and hour can't financially afford a $.99 burger?

What do you think the odds are that they could afford a far more expensive cell phone?

 

 

 

 

I didn't make that claim.  Instead, I have said, "most of them are middle-class teens." I also said, "the majority of people CURRENTLY making minimum wage and below, are under the age of 25, the vast percentage of which are teenagers." Note that the word "vast" is used in relation to MW workers under the age of 25, and not the entire population of MW workers. And, both of of my statement are supported by the cited Government statistics.

 

 

 

 

I will have to research this further.  However, preliminary findings seem to be against me--at least regarding in more recent times. (See HERE and HERE)

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

 

thought you might like this. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/30/costco-profits_n_3359033.html?utm_hp_ref=business

[why me]

Since the Esping-Andersen evaluation is somewhat dated I would profer the opinion that Sweden no longer lists amongst the social- democracies. Sweden could once boast of no ghettos, social equality and a well dimensioned welfare net. That is no longer true.

I know that very well. But the past is the past and in the past, with the nordic model, poverty was almost non-existent. But now the nordic countries are attempting to put the anglosaxon model of Friedman into their everyday life. And poverty has returned. However, the rooted americans on this thread just don't seem to understand why poverty exists in the way it does in the particular system that governs them. Charities do nothing but support the system that creates the poverty.

[why me]

Sweden's welfare system, although not collapsed, is only a shadow of its former self. The youth programs, that were once, rightfully, the pride of Sweden have totally collapsed. Drug and alcohol problems abound, amongst the youth and the society in general.

I agree with your assessment that the form of capitalism, that previously existed in northern Europe, has been replaced with a model approved of by the IMF and modelled after the American system.

It is sad. I remember Olaf Palme very well. He was a great guy and true blue democratic socialist. It was a sad day when he was murdered on the streets of stockholm. That sweden of economic justice and social equality murdered with him. I am afraid that your neighbor to the east Finland has followed the example of sweden. And poverty has returned to that country too.

 

And you are correct about the IMF. All this happened in 1989 when eastern europe was shedding its communist ideology  and Thatcher's 'no alternative' took root in the mainland of europe. No alternative to market capitalism. And thus, poverty and marginalization, soup kitchens have returned.

[why me]

I enjoy reading your many posts to this particular thread. I'm pleased that this "political" discussion has not been closed down.

I live in one of the countries you define as "nordic welfare model". That model has collapsed for the most part. School administration has been allowed to pass into the private sector. A number of businesses make considerable profits by receiving government money to run schools. Money, from taxes, meant to pay for teacher salaries, books, school supplies, student lunches, building maintenance, new construction and administration costs is combed off the top, like cream from whole milk, to line the pockets of investors. We're talking millions and millions of dollars in a country of just 9 million people. Meanwhile, the quality of education in Sweden has declined rapidly, as measured by PISA, Program for International Student Assessment.

 

The people have been beaten into submission. The school system is focused on teaching children to be entrepreneurs and not socially minded and informed citizens. Individualism at the expense of cooperativism. Such is what brought poverty to sweden, as people support the injustice of the system. And this is why the discussion so far which is american centered seems to mock the poor because they allow the poor to be poor.

Edited January 12, 2014 by why me

[Calm]

Legality another question. I don't recommend anyone violate any laws within their own country or a country to which they would like to emigrate to. The simple fact is that people have been traveling from one place to another since man first appeared in central Africa some 200,000 to 250,000 years ago. I choose to remain in the US because of many factors including that I like having my say in what my country does. I don't have to like everything my country does.

 

Ps; http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/10/opinion/krugman-the-war-over-poverty.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&_r=0

You still have not addressed unless I have missed it in your many claims of your own choice to stay...those people who do not have the ability to choose...have those who are unable to immigrate to other countries also "volunteered to stay" in this one? If they have,how have they? By not committing suicide or going to jail?

[Calm]

The people have been beaten into submission. The school system is focused on teaching children to be entrepreneurs and not socially minded and informed citizens. Individualism at the expense of cooperativism. Such is what brought poverty to america, as people support the injustice of the system. And this is why the discussion so far which is american centered seems to mock the poor because they allow the poor to be poor.

Well, you got a point off of me when I was trying to quote you, you deserve it for enough interesting comments in the thread, but not this one IMO.

If the system if focused on teaching them to be entrepreneurs, it is not going about it the right way. I would really love to know where you are getting this idea from.

[The Nehor]

You still have not addressed unless I have missed it in your many claims of your own choice to stay...those people who do not have the ability to choose...have those who are unable to immigrate to other countries also "volunteered to stay" in this one? If they have,how have they? By not committing suicide or going to jail?

 

It's easy to emigrate. Just denounce America and move to North Korea. They love defectors from evil capitalist oppression.

 

Or if you hate governments in general I highly recommend Somalia. Just look at this video highlighting its benefits:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QDv4sYwjO0

Edited January 11, 2014 by The Nehor

[why me]

Well, you got a point off of me when I was trying to quote you, you deserve it for enough interesting comments in the thread, but not this one IMO.

If the system if focused on teaching them to be entrepreneurs, it is not going about it the right way. I would really love to know where you are getting this idea from.

I made a mistake. I should have written sweden. I was referring to sweden. But I put america instead. I changed it in my original post. Sorry.

 

The nordic countries had an educational system that emphasized social justice and social equality. The educational system supported the nordic welfare model in outlook. Now, however, it is has changed into a neoliberal model and such concepts as justice and equality have disappeared. The system is becoming much more american in tone and philosophy inside the education system.

 

http://www.jceps.com/?pageID=article&articleID=5

 

You can read the last paragraph about the new winner take all educational system in Finland but this also applies to Sweden etc.

Edited January 12, 2014 by why me

[why me]

It's easy to emigrate. Just denounce America and move to North Korea. They love defectors from evil capitalist oppression.

 

Or if you hate governments in general I highly recommend Somalia. Just look at this video highlighting its benefits:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QDv4sYwjO0

Basically this is a straw man comparison. There are many ways to improve society without resorting to extreme comparisons. What you need to understand is the capitalism has many isms. There isn't just one capitalism. True, there seems to be a lack of choice now in capitalisms. Many countries have been forced into the american brand through the IMF, WTO, World Bank, OECD etc. But in the past there were capitalisms sprouting up that had a much more human face where people were somewhat near the center of the ideology. Now...it is profit, competition, individualism etc that rules the waves. And the poor have sprouted up here and there in places where not many were sprouting, such in western europe.

 

From the very beginning, I said that the poor are helped when a system is created that prevents people from being poor, especially people who become poor because of structural changes in economic policies and in the economy.