OpinionSocialism: Trickle Up Poverty
      – DigitalBoss, 2009-08-24 at 17:34:10   (14 comments)

On 2009-08-24 at 17:37:40, DigitalBoss wrote...
Yes, that's the way to go. Bring everyone down to your level.
On 2009-08-24 at 17:42:40, Thelevellers wrote...
No, if done right NO-ONE ends up in poverty, we all end up equally able to stay alive, as opposed to the two opposite ends of malnutrition on display in the current world...
On 2009-08-24 at 20:55:21, DigitalBoss wrote...
yeah, if done right... I rest my case.
On 2009-08-26 at 12:56:33, DigitalBoss wrote...
Have you ever seen a malnourished US American?
On 2009-08-28 at 08:52:18, Lee J Haywood wrote...
I wouldn't say that the homeless are in the best of health, even if they manage to scrape together some food. Trickle-up poverty sounds good - it would certainly cut down on the excesses we currently have. We'd all be much better off if there were either less people in the US or they didn't have as much wealth. The economic 'crisis' is actually a blessing in this sense - it reduces the negative impacts of the US on the world as a whole, at least temporarily.
On 2009-08-28 at 10:39:29, Thelevellers wrote...
There are literally thousands of malnourished americans, both those that are too poor to be able to afford to feed themselves, and those that are too stupid to realise that just because they can afford to eat EVERYTHING, doesn't mean they should - malnourished beens badly nourished, obesity is malnourishment...
On 2009-08-28 at 13:02:37, DigitalBoss wrote...
I agree with the "Too stupid" part of that comment. I wish you would show me a starving US American. I have never seen one.
On 2009-08-28 at 15:29:42, Thelevellers wrote...
I doubt very much that many homeless people are well fed...
On 2009-08-28 at 15:34:20, DigitalBoss wrote...
Homeless means without a home, not starving.
On 2009-08-28 at 15:34:57, DigitalBoss wrote...
Still waiting for you to show me one starving US American.
On 2009-08-28 at 21:51:07, Thelevellers wrote...
Often homeless means no money, and no money usually means little/no food... I'll be honest, I (living in the UK, and being somewhat lazy of nature) am not in a place where I can go find a starving American. But that wasn;t actually my point anywhere in this topic - my point was that making the rich poorer is a good thing if it gets rid of the two opposite ends of malnourishment currently on display in the world. Of course, I can see that maybe you have a US centric view of life living there, but I'm sure you're smarter than to think the US is the entire world...
On 2009-08-29 at 03:53:14, BorgClown wrote...
Wow, couldn't find a single verifiable issue of starving USAians, except anorexic and addicts. Maybe illegal immigrants, as they cannot apply for any social program.
On 2009-08-29 at 03:55:30, BorgClown wrote...
OTOH, if there weren't for the communist programs that provide shelter and food, I'm sure there would be hungry people. After all, you already have extreme poverty there.
On 2009-08-29 at 03:56:40, BorgClown wrote...
Oh shit, I meant "If it wasn't". Fck.