Why Can't We Change The World?

[kpete]

Who creates poverty? The poor do not create poverty. Poverty is created by the system. The system we designed. The system we work with. That’s what creates poverty. It is not nature. It is the exact opposite. It is artificial. People have unlimited potential but we don’t go that way. All these policies and concepts that we promote (create poverty).

Why should financial institutions make up their mind they cannot do business with you? It doesn’t make sense. Let us now decide who is creditworthy.

One concept I try to explain in the book is the concept of business. One interpretation of business is profit maximization. We interpret human beings in such a narrow way, as if human beings are money making robots. Human beings are so much more than that. There is selfishness in us but we also have selflessness.

Why cannot we create another kind of business? A social business. A business where our goal is to change the world, not to make money. If we give money to charity the money goes and never comes back. With a social business the money recycles and with each iteration produces more benefit at every turn.

more:
http://prosperlending.blogspot.com/2009/02/muhammad-yunus-speaks-at-george.html

[HillbillyBob]

1. We might be able to if we can shut off the rpigs radio heads, the conduits

to the theft of our tax $ for the benefits of their murderous corpse war hos...

[defendandprotect]

2. The violent and those willing to do violence create poverty . . .

Answer how we control the few violent among us --- and we might have the answer.

Money of course translates to corrupt power.

Can we uninvent the dollar bill?

We can at least take an honest look at capitalism and understand its destructive

nature -- how it's been used all over the globe to move the wealth and natural

resources of nations from the many to the few. And then fold capitalism in favor

of economic democracy -- democractic socialism.

[glitch]

6. Good answer. nt

[OneGrassRoot]

3. I've been a proponent of social entrepreneurship for 20 years....

perhaps even spiritual (not religious) social entrepreneurship. It will be the norm if we can break through the current corporate stranglehold and usher in an age of authentic humanity. Any projects I dive into have a socio-spiritual (hey, I like that word!) entrepreneurial intent.

One can hope more can open up in this direction...and continue to strive for it. :)

[tom_paine]

4. I think it's pretty much interwoven ino the mammalian genome.

Specifically into the human genome.

Alpha males alphabetize, so to speak. The 6% of sociopaths who's sociopathy leads them to wealth and power, not prison, are the ones who have constructed the system, using increasingly sophisticated propaganda to increase and harness both the numbers and power of the historically illiterate, col, tired, hungry, but most especially the Authoritarian Followers who are always present and just waiting for the right climate to be harnessed by the sociopaths.

That's the short definition. here's a book describing two decades of research that fixes the science to it.

http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/

Beware. Reading this book can have the effect of taking the Red Pill in The Matrix. Understanding the long-term and dangerous threat this latest outbreak of authoritarian totalitarianism, seemingly undiminished by the Bushie Losses in 2006 or 2008, poses to us all will propel you abovethe trees to look at the forest.

It's not the most pleasant view, so to speak, but those that can see what's coming have an edge.

Look into the eyes of our demented foes, stretching back through nazi Germany and Medeval Europe and further. These are the Bushies of today, and they are capable, inthe long-run, of the most horrific atrocities you can imagine.

[Pharaoh]

5. Like the video I just posted..........

Our society is somewhat sick, Capitalism is the ultimate Ponzi/pyramid scheme.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x269508

We need to CHANGE the System, not try just to create more jobs to produce more crap people don't need. :hide: :rant:

[Tigress DEM]

7. How about re-engineering the system as a pre-paid credit society and use item specific vouchers?

We could test it as a beta version on the welfare system and once that worked move up to the working class poor etc... Instead of trying to assist people with the absolute minimum required and penalizing them whenever they go to work and make a little bit that COULD help them get off the system, institute a voucher system with a goal of helping them become self-sustaining.

Mom and/or Dad is working but not making enough for their family to survive. So they get some assistance at the bare minimal level, but what would be DIFFERENT is that the work paycheck would get taxed but the take home would go into a voucher account as once-taxed and no further tax penalties to be paid upon using the funds except applicable sales taxes.

A financial planner would work with the family to create a prudent reserve of vouchers for goods and services that would see them through 1 year after getting off assistance. If the parents could find childcare and both work the money would be accumulated faster, so people would spend less time on the system and could see as they worked where their money was going. Kind of like a goal getter bank account or lay-away. With that cushion, they could keep using the voucher system once off assistance and pay ahead for their next year's expenses rather than go back to bad financial habits.

So the planner would have a basic outline - vouchers for rent/mortgage, food, transportation (with extra incentive to use green alternatives), car insurance, work wardrobe, school tuition accounts, school expense accounts, clothing, utilities...etc but dependent on the individual needs. IE: Older person has a house that is paid for and only needs to save for taxes on the house, so some of that income allotment might be added to their health care vouchers where more money would be needed.

I envision something like our current health care reimbursement fund but it doesn't expire if not used. This would enable people to directly pay for basic health care like dental appointments and physicals and medication as needed. Each year any amount not used would continue to accumulate so that when people get older and need more medical care there is money there for them. If they are blessed with great health up to the very end it should be allowed to be willed to the survivors. Within 3 generations everyone should have some money to pay directly for their health care and each generation would rely less and less on the insurance system which would slowly go away when everyone had enough in our health care accounts to cover any medical situation.

We could move away from "credit" in this way because we'd basically be saving up for major purchases and businesses would know where the "money" is. If there is $6 million worth of transportation vouchers in a state, there's a solid market for cars or bikes etc... and the idea is to convince people yours is the best. We'd still be based in free market capitalism and we could smooth over this rough patch without mowing over the poor.

[TBF]

8. Or, maybe we go in this direction instead -

Nationalize the banks...

...and the defense industries
...and the energy companies
...and the "health" companies
...and use the trillion bucks to give a job to all 20 million unemployed (at $50,000 per person) tomorrow and decide what they should build later (next week)
...and dismantle 90% of the Defense budget and 100% of the intelligence agencies
...and let those three million people out of jail (and let real criminals take their place)
...and do something about this corrupt-as-hell-cynical-beyond-redemption political "system"
...and guarantee everybody a job, health-care, security in old age and disability, food, shelter

...and send all yuppies to "re-education" - perhaps as welders.

- anaxarchos

[Two Americas]

9. but, but, but

We are all "yuppies" here, or trying to be and hoping to be, and protecting and advancing our needs and desires is the whole purpose of liberalism and the Democratic party. People who make "bad choices" - like welding, yuck - are not our worry.

If we nationalize that stuff, then how can we get ahead and be "winners?" Under your system, just any old person could prosper, and then how could we feel superior and look down on people?

Besides, we have spent our entire lives figuring this system out, and defending it and apologizing for it, and now you are suggesting chucking it? Are you trying to say that our entire lives have been a waste? Look at my credentials, my degrees, and then try to tell me that I am not superior to 90% of the people out there. It isn't my fault that they are not clever the way that I am. Hey they made their choices, now they are suffering the consequences, and that is just the way life works.

Any system that rewards me, and the 10% or so of the population who are like me, and that gives me privilege and status and comfort must by definition be good, right? Besides, every other system has been tried.

The cream rises to the top, and we "progressives" are some of the creamiest people ever in history. Isn't it obvious how wonderful we are?

Those people in jail, without jobs, who can't afford the doctor, who made the stupid choice to get old - well, there is always going to be some collateral damage, and those people have no one to blame but themselves.


But these ideas of yours, as idealistic and romantic as they may sound - "to the barricades comrades!!" lol, what a joke - are never going to go anywhere. Why? Well, because people like me are going to fight to the death to make sure that no one even considers them, that is why.

We have heard all of this stuff before, and it always fails and never goes anywhere. For example, there were the Abolitionists. So angry. Such perfectionists. Nothing ever made them happy. All they did is moan and piss and whine and complain. They insisted that every slave should be free and wouldn't compromise. They just took angry extremist positions, and made the perfect the enemy of the good. And where did that get us?

The there were the labor organizers. They were off their rockers. Such shit disturbers. Sure, it sounded like a good idea and lots of low-information voters fell for their rhetoric, but where did they ever get with that? Losers. They just appealed to people's envy. The workers didn't like it that other people had more than they did, but they were no different than the owners - they wanted more too! Who doesn't? So get off your ass and go out and start your own business if you want more. Doh.

Then there were all of those unrealistic idealistic ideas - universal public education, Whew! Talk about utopian dreamers. Yeah, yeah, I have heard it all before - "every child will have an equal chance." Sounds wonderful, just like all of their crazy ideas. But nice ideas and reality are two different things, aren't they? I think I will love in reality and not in your dream world, thanks.

And then universal retirement benefits - oh yeah those loony leftists pushed that idea. Everyone would get a check every month after a certain age - for doing nothing! What kind of sense does that make? Fortunately that crazy idea went nowhere. Obviously, people need to make the right choices and invest and save for their retirement. Otherwise, hey, they lose. That is the way of the world and you can't change it. Don't get me wrong, I am not a monster and I feel sorry for those elderly people living out in the street. Life is hard.

Then, remember all of those ideas about "protecting public health?" The fanatics were proposing some sort of draconian regime where there would be inspections of food and water to make sure they were "safe." I work hard to be able to afford my organic produce and make other good choices about my personal life. Why can't others do the same? Too stupid? Too lazy? It is not my fault that I was born smarter than others. Why should I be punished for that? Why should just anyone get the better food and water, as though we owed that to them or something? Thankfully, that whole idea went nowhere.

Then there were the "child labor" hand wringers. Oh boo hoo, kids were working in factories. The activists whined and bitched and tried to play on people's sympathies. They love to complain, and are not happy unless they can find something to complain about. "Poor little kids." If the lazy worthless parents would provide for their kid, we would never have the problem. Arresting and jailing the parents is the obvious solution to that. Why should we be rewarding people's bad choices? That crazy idea of outlawing child labor failed miserably. Sorry purists - you lose again!

On and on and on, the dreamers and impractical idealists have tried to foist their goofy ideas on us, and again and again they have failed. They are nothing but losers, and I am sticking with the winners.

[blindpig]

12. (crickets)

n/t

[Two Americas]

13. heh

I half expected someone to think I was being serious and to agree with me.

[TBF]

14. You should post it as an OP. n/t

[leftstreet]

10. Sounds good to me

:thumbsup:

hehe.. 'yuppie welders'

[Two Americas]

17. think about that...

Take the trillion dollars and put every unemployed person to work immediately at $50,000 a year. Even if they didn't make anything, that would be no worse than what the Wall Street people are doing - better actually in many ways.

The economy would be stabilized, spending would start happening again, home values preserved, wages improved across the board - and the the party loyalists who are trying desperately to suppress dissent ought to like this - the Democrats would be in power for the next 50 years.

If the people out to work actually were making things, we would rebuild our industrial base, eliminate the trade deficit, and rebuild the country.

There is no downside.

People are so determined to kiss the asses of the right wing, so afraid of them, that they can't think clearly or do the math on this. That distorts all of our thinking, because it takes so much effort to prop up and defend Wall Street while at the same tome trying to be a Democrat or liberal. Their heads are going to explode.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

18. What about the ones that don't want to work?

I'm a Fire Captain and Paramedic with over 10 years in service in a medium sized city and I don't make $50,000 dollars a year. I'm just playing devil's advocate here but I hope you see my point.

David

[Two Americas]

19. most always will

There will be some who cannot and will not work. We can't use that as an excuse for crippling all of the rest of us.

The more fair the system, the more opportunities, the fewer there will be who will not work.

Most people - 88% according to a recent Pew Research survey - do not work primarily because they have to nor for money. As a fire fighter and a paramedic, you are among those motivated by a desire to serve others, to take on challenges and risks, and to do a job that needs to be done. You would do what you needed to do if you came across an emergency and could pitch in and help even when you were not on the clock, I would guess. I think teachers, farmers, fire fighters, paramedics, nurses are among those doing the most valuable and essential work. Ironically, those motivated the least by money are the ones we should be valuing and rewarding the most. That is one of the main reasons that things must change, and change radically.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

21. I don't believe that statistic, if I didn't need the money or have to go to work I wouldn't.

I like my job but if I didn't have to work I'd be on the golf course or fishing or taking care of my dogs. Maybe I'm just burnt out. I heard about an office sign I'd like to get it says, "Before you ask your question you should know I'm about 30 seconds away from being on the roof with an automatic weapon."

David

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

23. Oh wait I'm going golfing in the morning instead of going to work.

Actually I'm going to work for a couple of hours then I'm going golfing.

David

[Two Americas]

25. that is a shame

Sorry to hear that.

Can you no longer imagine it any other way?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

26. I'm looking very forward to my retirement in 15 years.

Maybe I could if I was in such chronic pain from two on the job injuries and if I didn't have to deal with jackasses all day, every day. Maybe my attitude will improve when I get done training my current class, who knows miracles can happen.

David

[Two Americas]

27. understood

That isn't really the work you hate, it is the awful circumstances. To have to continue to work in pain, from job related injures, is just not right.

Maybe your attitude is not wrong. Maybe it is a sane response to the situation?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

28. I think sane left the room a long time ago.

Just kidding. Maybe they'll come up with a decent back surgery instead of fusing the disks and I'll be good as new. That would help my attitude.

David

[Two Americas]

29. I will pull for you on that

Chronic pain wears you down. Hope you can get some serious relief.

[Two Americas]

20. one other thing Dave

Raising wages anywhere tends to raise them everywhere.

Lowering wages anywhere tends to lower them everywhere.

Back in the day when I was working in the auto plant and the tool and die shops back in Detroit, not all shops were Union. But the Union set the pay scale for everyone. People were working. People were productive. The economy was booming. The Union was not crippling business or hurting the economy - the exact opposite was happening. The more the wealth was shared, the more there was for everyone.

So it is easy to say "hey how come he gets more than me?" and the Republicans love to fan the flames of resentment. But what goes around comes around, and if your neighbor starts making more it won't be long before you do as well. On the other hand, buy into the Republicans' arguments and resent the other guy getting a job or fair pay, and sooner or later your job security, pay, and benefits will suffer as well.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

22. That was the devil's advocate part.

Clearly there is a line though. If that was the case in every sense we would just raise the minimum wage to $40.00 a hour.

David

[LeftAlone]

11. How many psychologsts does it take to change a lightbulb?

Only 1, but the lightbulb has to want to change.

[Deja Q]

15. The light bulb has to realize it's burnt out before it can change. Ironic.

The burnout out bulb has to light up to realize it's burnt out.

:think:

[Two Americas]

16. we need to see the bees we wish to change

Who are the drones, and who are the workers?

Bees by Dimitri Pisarev

Introduction by anaxarchos,
who also provided the text file.
Thanks to autorank for hosting this.

It would be hard to name another who is simultaneously as obscure and as significant as Dimitri Pisarev (1840-1868). Generally acknowledged to be the most talented of a host of Russian radical writers who appeared in the mid-19th century, a giant among titans, Pisarev left an enduring legacy for Russian youth but nearly no mark in our own times. Nadezhda Krupskaya, wrote that, "Lenin was of the generation that grew up under the influence of Pisarev". Lenin himself, commenting on Pisarev's description of himself as a "dreamer", wrote, "Of this kind of dreaming there is unfortunately too little in our movement."

Journalist, revolutionary, philosopher, materialist, the prototype "nihilist", Pisarev spent most of his life in prison (without ever being charged) and died, in mysterious circumstances, immediately after his release at the obscene age of 28. In that short life, his works were encyclopedic and his ideas so important that the Catholic Church still feels the need to produce polemics against him.

As far as I know, this is the only English translation of Pisarev's remarkable essay, Bees on the internet. About this essay, Pisarev himself wrote, "We have not the good fortune to be doctrinarians, we have neither the ability nor the desire; we frankly confess that we have the weakness to be interested in real life, on however tiny a scale it is manifested, and not to be in the least interested in the barren productions of doctrinarian minds, whatever high-sounding phrases they may be clothed in. On these grounds we intend to talk to our readers, not on the theory of divine law or the law of historic progression, but simply on the domestic and social life of bees."

anaxarchos

It is not out of place to note that the stock of honey accumulated in the hive belongs to the worker bees, who defend their property with might and main and allow nobody to take possession of their economic supplies. Nobody makes up his mind to do so as long as the surrounding meadows are covered with flowers; the drones then go to breakfast and dinner outside the hive. But as autumn sets in, such a way of life becomes impossible; the worker bees themselves often return with an empty stomach and no honey or pollen on their legs; the noble drones, who are heavy on the wing and do not like to be away from their home in the hive for a long time, find nothing to feed on, and after circling over the yellow grass, they return hungry and dissatisfied. Then there is agitation in the hive the meaning of which can be most palpably conveyed in the form of a conference and negotiations between representatives of the different classes, parties and views in the hive.

The drones assemble in groups and hum querulously as they convey to one another discomforting reports on the sterility of the surrounding meadows and still more discomforting opinions of the starvation they can expect in the circumstances.

"We are the privileged estate," one of them exclaims, proudly preening his wings, "we enjoy the high favors of our gracious sovereign. The workers must show concern for our situation. That is their explicit duty; during the summer they collected a large quantity of honey, and we should have our share of it. We have by birth the right to profit by the wealth of society. Now, most unfortunately, we see how the uneducated mob doubts our right. The worker bees think the stock belongs to them alone, because they alone gathered it and stored it in the cells. They are obviously turning the very foundations of logic and right upside down. Those stocks belong to society, and our bee state has the right to dispose of them according to its discretion to cover its essential needs. And must not the maintenance of our life and welfare always be considered an essential requirement of the state? Can a hive exist without drones, with out a governing estate? The stocks are ours, ours first and foremost. Once our existence is guaranteed we shall be willing to give part of the excess to the poor hungry workers, but we must first appease our hunger and assure ourselves food for the future. Let us go to the queen, expound our wishes to her and submit our declaration of rights to her consideration."

The enterprising orator's speech pleases the audience: it conforms to the needs of the time, it provides a satisfactory settlement for the terrible problem set by circumstances: to eat or not to eat? and it consequently meets unanimous support.

The deputies from the noble estate of drones go to the queen and she, far from devouring them as the inhabitants of the Sandwich Islands devoured the European parliamentarians, is very gracious towards them and listens to their most humble petition with great attention. Then she answers in such a strain that the lord drones could wish for no better.

"I have always been convinced," she says, casting a glance of good-will on all present, "that the stability and prosperity of the state requires that there should be a hereditary estate of peers; if that estate is eliminated, all the governmental foundations of society will fall to ruin. You have served me faithfully, you have shown devotion to my person, and your valor fully entitles you to a reward. There can be no doubt that you, before anybody else, have a right to enjoy the stores that have been accumulated. As your sovereign, I give you my word of honor: your interests will in no way suffer from the calamity that has befallen us. Do not heed the murmurs of the worker bees; their function is to work, and as long as they carry out their duty with the appropriate assiduity I shall maintain my gracious attitude towards them. But you, my peers, must not he concerned about your food; you have a higher and more noble calling; do not forget that; leave the petty worry about your daily bread to the lower beings who are less ennobled than you by the gifts of nature. To conclude I express my sincere gratitude to you, my lords, for applying with such confidence to your queen."

The drones jubilate and glorify the grandeur, magnanimity and statesmanship of their sovereign.

Meanwhile the proletarians, alarmed by the withering flowers, likewise gather in groups to confer.


http://www.electionfraudnews.com/Articles/Bees.htm

[LSdemocrat]

24. Umm, isn't a "social business" precisely what government is supposed to be?

Collect tax revenues to provide services that benefit society as a whole, but do not necessarily produce immediate, direct profits and therefore would generally not be performed, or performed well, by the private sector.

Am I missing something here?