Lockout Casualty Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 Just now, thejazz97 said: Should probably apologize for all the arguments I got into with you, Sharpshooter, Buddhas Hand... Not at all. It was all in good fun and clearly worth it. One of us! One of us! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ItsAllOursBoys Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 NDP.... always easier to spend some else's money! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 47 minutes ago, ItsAllOursBoys said: NDP.... always easier to spend some else's money! don't kid yourself, they all like to spend our money and all have put us into more debt. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckistani Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 9 hours ago, Miler said: Really? I doubt it. Plastic pollution has been happening since WWII era. Asia did not produce half the plastic of North america till the mid 1990s and did not overtake it till the mid 2000s. Do the math. 9 hours ago, Miler said: No. It's because we wont provide our raw materials to the world. We don't need to build our own crap. ? So we wont provide raw materials, nor build your own crap but still wonder why rest of the world is developing faster than us. Amazing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miler Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 (edited) 46 minutes ago, canuckistani said: Plastic pollution has been happening since WWII era. Asia did not produce half the plastic of North america till the mid 1990s and did not overtake it till the mid 2000s You consider using plastic to be plastic pollution? I'm quite happy with plastic buried in a secure landfill. Better than the current option, cutting down forests. Quote . Do the math. Dont be lazy. You do the math. Quote ? So we wont provide raw materials, nor build your own crap but still wonder why rest of the world is developing faster than us. Amazing. No, I don't wonder why the rest of the world is developing faster. It's because we refuse to export our natural resources. Rich people like us don't need to waste our time building trinkets. We can just sit back, export our resources, and let the money flow in. But we were so rich we thought we could stop doing so and still maintain our luxurious status. Edited June 2, 2019 by Miler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckistani Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 31 minutes ago, Miler said: You consider using plastic to be plastic pollution? I'm quite happy with plastic buried in a secure landfill. Better than the current option, cutting down forests. Dont be lazy. You do the math. Land pollution is still pollution, mate. We are not shooting plastic down active volcanic cones and incinerating them, we are stuffing them under few feet of soil or throwing them in the water systems. North America has by far the largest plastic pollution contribution of mankind in the entire history of plastic usage. 31 minutes ago, Miler said: No, I don't wonder why the rest of the world is developing faster. It's because we refuse to export our natural resources. Its because we refuse to support heavy industries. Resource exporting does not garantee one a good economy ( look at venezuela or Nigeria) but expertese in heavy industries does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 6 hours ago, thejazz97 said: See, but a lot of people are set at a disadvantage in the first place by being born into poverty or poor conditions. But that doesn't mean you are stuck in poverty, it's extremely easy to leave poverty without any form of gov't assistance. The victim mentality doesn't make you stronger, it holds you back and keeps you in a cycle of poverty. Quote Right, but it doesn't even have to be "the needy" getting "handouts". It can be investments into health, education, roads and highways, supports for people in poverty, supports for young families, or anything else. The "needy" vary from situation to situation. But as I pointed out earlier. Alberta already spends a ton of money on healthcare and doesn't see the results. Competition creates the most efficient practices, as it becomes, improve your competitive advantage or fall behind. I'm for helping out people but that line is very short, the more you give gov't control the more that line grows, grows and grows. Quote If that happens, new businesses will generally take their place. It might take a couple years, but generally, if there's a role that needs to be filled, the market will fill it. See, if businesses were ethical, I could believe that. But businesses will generally only be ethical if it helps their profit margin to do so. Oil companies have known about climate change since the 80s, but they buried it because they could make money off it. Philip Morris International has sued entire countries for trying to cut down on smoking, and now they're promoting a smoke-free planet. That's a very pessimistic view on things and unfortunately it's quite wrong. It must be a sad and depressing world to walk into your local business and think owners are evil and only looking to screw you over for an extra buck. Are their unethical businesses? sure there are, but the denominator isn't business/corporations = evil. The denominator is humans and last time I checked humans are also in charge of the gov't. The benefit of business power, is when people have the freedom and ability to choose alternative options those business either need to adapt and change or they go under. Flip that statement, if governments were ethical, you'd so some better example of socialism succeeding. You some aspects that have worked but that's about it. Quote It really just depends on what kind of society you're trying to create - if all you're caring about is growing society, then less government interference is better. That being said, you'll have more people in poverty, and that causes systemic issues. If you're wanting to maintain a stable society, then you raise taxes on those who can afford it, and provide adequate benefits for those who need it. Again, who determines what is the level of "can afford it". That's such a messed up way of thinking look around the world, you are in the top 1% of the world. How much of your income do you give to starving kids in Africa? Because i'll tell you that 99% of the think you have they would they would tell you, you could live without. Quote This provides a stronger safety net and an overall healthier society. However, it provides less growth. For this reason, among others - and this was found by the Saskatchewan courts - the federal carbon tax is a regulation. And having regulations in place forces businesses to innovate. I'm aware of biodiesel semis - this move forces change into that direction. Anyone that wants a stagnant "stable" society isn't very forward thinking. Imagine where this world would be without that driver of success that creates innovation. IF you think gov't regulations is driver of innovation you might need to rethink that one. Quote Now, obviously, the goal is to provide balance. You don't want to have growth at the expense of the least wealthy (looking at you, Sask Party), and you don't want to have higher taxes with no growth (looking at you, Sask NDP). The goal is to meet somewhere in the middle. But businesses do need to be taxed and they do need to be regulated - corporations, at the very least. I'm in favour of less taxes on agriculture and small businesses. But balance removes freedom. Not to side track this but line of thinking is very similar to any AI movie you see where the robots want to take control. Is that really what you want? Quote Government is supposed to be by the people, for the people. If they get involved, it's in the interest of the people to do so. Now- I do say supposed. Obviously, given the effect lobbying has, we don't get the government always acting in the best interests of the people. At the same time, what's in the interest of the majority isn't in the interest of all the people. But government does have to set a direction for the way they want the country to go, and if businesses aren't following it on their own free will, then that route has to be set for them. But gov't don't speak for the majority. They take power with 30-35%, that is not the majority. And then we are starting to see the power of media who's learnt that the louder you speak the more influence you have on those decisions. Quote People have cried that the abolition of slavery and child labour would affect businesses so much they'd have to move or close. Maybe some did, but business is still around in a big way. People have cried that the creation of weekends would shutter businesses. Maybe some did, but business is still around in a big way. People have cried that the institution of a minimum wage and various other labour laws would be the end of business. It wasn't and isn't. Point is, businesses evolve and adapt to match the conditions of where they are (unless you go to pure, unbridled communism - which we shouldn't ) Businesses evolve because they are after the goal of having financial success. Take away that benefit, focus on equal outcome and you lose the driving factor. This idea that equal outcome is what's fair is honestly just pure stupidity, fair to whom...... 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sam13371337 Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 Canada needs to stop putting itself down. Canada is not perfect. Canada's education system is not developed in a way to maximize effiency and pump out robots. But Canada is still better then most other countries when taken as a whole overall. this self hate we see from leftists and new immigrants is disgusting. no place on earth is perfect. every place has issues and problems. If you become obsessed with comparing every micro things Canada supposedly does wrong and compare to micro things that country X does right in comparison (while ignoring all the other things Canada does better then them) is not the way to go.... Canada needs to start looking out for its own interest, and the interests of its own citizens. not become world saving virtue signallers and make it a open door for masses of people who love Canada's benefits, but hate Canadas guts in everything else. just sickening 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 11 minutes ago, sam13371337 said: Canada needs to stop putting itself down. Canada is not perfect. Canada's education system is not developed in a way to maximize effiency and pump out robots. But Canada is still better then most other countries when taken as a whole overall. this self hate we see from leftists and new immigrants is disgusting. no place on earth is perfect. every place has issues and problems. If you become obsessed with comparing every micro things Canada supposedly does wrong and compare to micro things that country X does right in comparison (while ignoring all the other things Canada does better then them) is not the way to go.... Canada needs to start looking out for its own interest, and the interests of its own citizens. not become world saving virtue signallers and make it a open door for masses of people who love Canada's benefits, but hate Canadas guts in everything else. just sickening Totally agree. We are at the top, so let’s celebrate our perch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: But that doesn't mean you are stuck in poverty, it's extremely easy to leave poverty without any form of gov't assistance. The victim mentality doesn't make you stronger, it holds you back and keeps you in a cycle of poverty. What a complete and utter load of crap....... sorry but your dismissive attitude towards the major hurdles some people have in life is really disturbing...... I have complete respect for the battle that many less fortunate people put in each and every day to make their families better off... many days are successful and also many days less so... but these families battle hard. Your attitude about how simple it should be for all of them to exit the poverty cycle shows how little experience in life you have. Edited June 2, 2019 by kingofsurrey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lock Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 1 hour ago, kingofsurrey said: What a complete and utter load of crap....... sorry but your dismissive attitude towards the major hurdles some people have in life is really disturbing...... I have complete respect for the battle that many less fortunate people put in each and every day to make their families better off... many days are successful and also many days less so... but these families battle hard. Your attitude about how simple it should be for all of them to exit the poverty cycle shows how little experience in life you have. While I don't agree with his notion of "easy" entirely, I do agree with him on the "playing victim just holds one back". What helps is mentality. For someone who wants to get out of things, it's important to take charge of that change. It helps to be positive about even the smallest of victories that mean something to that person and build things up from there. Playing victim does the opposite of this. It encourages the person to blame others rather than to stand up for themselves. Major hurdles are major because that's what people are told. Even calling them major hurdles implies there's a giant monster in between that person and their goals; yet, wouldn't it be much more productive if that monster didn't seem so big after all through encouragement? It's a battle, but one can get out of it as long as they own up to themselves and be honest about what they want and how to get there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thejazz97 Posted June 2, 2019 Author Share Posted June 2, 2019 1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: But that doesn't mean you are stuck in poverty, it's extremely easy to leave poverty without any form of gov't assistance. The victim mentality doesn't make you stronger, it holds you back and keeps you in a cycle of poverty. Easy to tell other ther people to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps. Much harder to do in practice. Minimum wage in Saskatchewan is roughly $11. Say you luck out, and find a job for $11/hr at 40 hrs a week. That's $880 biweekly, and subtract taxes, union dues (if any), and you're looking at roughly $770/paycheque. We'll say $1600/month, to be generous. Rent? You'll be lucky to find a place that's less than $500, so we'll use that as a generous baseline. Car? $110/mo for licensing. Gas? We'll put it at a generous $40/mo. Phone? $75 after taxes, if you're incredibly lucky. Nearly everywhere requires you to have a phone and/or email address. Food? Let's be conservative. Our example isn't eating healthy. $100/mo. Heating? Electric? Water? Combined, it's $200/mo. I think that's dipping by a little bit, but we'll assume they cut down on everything - showering, flushing the toilet, brushing teeth to save money. This is a person who's never taken sick time, place of living and car functions perfectly with nothing ever breaking (assuming they found their car for free as well), never needs an oil change for their car, haven't counted wifi, clothes, they don't have family, kids, doesn't have depression or anxiety from not being able to do anything, doesn't need to spend money on education, dental, medication, has perfect insurance on everything, perfect eyesight, and never goes anywhere or does anything to actually live life outside of work. Now, I've used extremely conservative estimates for spending and a higher estimate for wage. Now, this person does have roughly $600 to spend on extra food, higher rent, clothes, wifi, emergency money, medication, and whatnot. I've overestimated wages by $60, and a lot of places will only give 37.5 hours a week. That's $100/mo. So now you're down to $440. That's $220/paycheque, and we still haven't counted education (if that's a factor), wifi, higher rent, clothes, or emergencies, or having friends. If they can get another job, that's great, but that's likely going to increase their price of gas, or if they take the bus, in which case we can slash a conservative $150/mo, but add in the bus passes, decrease sleeping time, which decreases energy, which decreases productiveness, which decreases scheduling - assuming it's a similar minimum wage job with less hours. This is assuming that they're able to get to get a job in the first place, as well. 1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: But as I pointed out earlier. Alberta already spends a ton of money on healthcare and doesn't see the results. Competition creates the most efficient practices, as it becomes, improve your competitive advantage or fall behind. I'm for helping out people but that line is very short, the more you give gov't control the more that line grows, grows and grows. I'm not against opening up healthcare to private competition, as long as socialized healthcare remains in place with the same cost to the public as it is now. If Alberta isn't seeing results in healthcare - as this isn't a subject I'm well-versed in - then that sounds like a systemic issue passed on from government to government, rather than the fault of any one specific mandate. But again, I don't know. 1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: That's a very pessimistic view on things and unfortunately it's quite wrong. It must be a sad and depressing world to walk into your local business and think owners are evil and only looking to screw you over for an extra buck. Are their unethical businesses? sure there are, but the denominator isn't business/corporations = evil. The denominator is humans and last time I checked humans are also in charge of the gov't. The benefit of business power, is when people have the freedom and ability to choose alternative options those business either need to adapt and change or they go under. Flip that statement, if governments were ethical, you'd so some better example of socialism succeeding. You some aspects that have worked but that's about it. Your mom-&-pop shop is just looking to make a living. Local businesses are not the enemy. While I may have unintentionally included them when I said "businesses", notice how I've never attacked small businesses directly - it's the opposite, I think we need to support small businesses, absolutely. Corporations, especially national corporations and MNCs, are ultimately swayed by profit. Look at SNC-Lavalin. Look at Bombardier. Look at Amazon. Do you think these companies care about ethics over profit? No, they'll only do what's ethical or benefits society when it's profitable. How many companies supported gay rights before it was legalized? How many companies stood up against climate change 20-30 years ago? A small percentage. Now? Commonplace. And I do agree. Governments are not normally ethical. But they aren't working for a profit, and that takes money out of the equation. Want to ban lobbying? Great, let's do it. Increase penalties for bribery, sure. And yes, I'm aware of the Trudeau-Aga Khan incident. 1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: Again, who determines what is the level of "can afford it". That's such a messed up way of thinking look around the world, you are in the top 1% of the world. How much of your income do you give to starving kids in Africa? Because i'll tell you that 99% of the think you have they would they would tell you, you could live without. We're speaking on Canada, no? Why do we talk about Africa? And if you say they think we could live without it, why do you cry out when someone says we need higher taxes on the richer people in the country? 1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: Anyone that wants a stagnant "stable" society isn't very forward thinking. Imagine where this world would be without that driver of success that creates innovation. IF you think gov't regulations is driver of innovation you might need to rethink that one. It's almost like someone didn't read what I wrote later on you need to do both. Find the middle ground, where you can both have a stable society and one which is forced to innovate. 1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: But balance removes freedom. Not to side track this but line of thinking is very similar to any AI movie you see where the robots want to take control. Is that really what you want? I'm not looking for the country to become Harrison Bergeron'd, and we have the best civil rights in the world. And it's not freedom. People who are born into poverty will most likely stay there. And that's not because of a poverty mindset. It's because working your way out of it, while better than in America, is still insanely tough. 1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: But gov't don't speak for the majority. They take power with 30-35%, that is not the majority. And then we are starting to see the power of media who's learnt that the louder you speak the more influence you have on those decisions. Then there's an issue we can both agree on - we need proportional representation. Governments can tell pretty quickly when there's backlash - take Doug Ford's PCs, for instance. Elected with ~40% of the vote, formed a majority, and started finding "inefficiencies", proposing to slash things like anaesthesia for colonoscopies and funding for children with autism. Sam Oosterhoff, who's the massive idiot I'd probably be if I was the same person I was five years ago, found out pretty quickly that women didn't want their reproductive rights taken away. As well, if a government still won't listen to the people, there's always the ballot boxes every ~4 years. 1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: Businesses evolve because they are after the goal of having financial success. Take away that benefit, focus on equal outcome and you lose the driving factor. This idea that equal outcome is what's fair is honestly just pure stupidity, fair to whom...... Oh, so they are about the money. Seems pessimistic I'm not looking for dead equal, and I think anyone who is is dumb, because again, Harrison Bergeron, but somewhat closer to equal would be better. We agree on equal opportunity, but lots of people still aren't even given that to begin with. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted June 3, 2019 Share Posted June 3, 2019 22 hours ago, canuckistani said: Saying i am right about something that can be objectively measured, is not ego, its a statement of fact. Someone who says the sun appears orange-ish yellow isnt being egotistic either. . Your Spock and i claim the prize..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted June 3, 2019 Share Posted June 3, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, The Lock said: While I don't agree with his notion of "easy" entirely, I do agree with him on the "playing victim just holds one back". Victim shaming ? Does he also blame women that were sexually assaulted........ ? I can't stand people that totally blame poverty victims for their situations... many of them have many other issues / history that impacted their current lifestyles...... Things that many of us never had to experience in our childhoods... We are fortunate if that is the case. Blaming them is classless. Edited June 3, 2019 by kingofsurrey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lock Posted June 3, 2019 Share Posted June 3, 2019 1 minute ago, kingofsurrey said: Victim shaming ? Does he also blame women that were sexually assaulted........ ? I can't stand people that totally blame poverty victims for their situations... many of them have many other issues / history that impacted their current lifestyles...... Things that many of us never had to experience in our childhoods... We are fortunate if that is the case. Blaming them is classless. I guess I just didn't really interpret him saying poverty victims are due to their situations. Perhaps you're overthinking things a bit? "Playing victim" does not equate to "victim shaming". I don't see that at all. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted June 3, 2019 Share Posted June 3, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, thejazz97 said: Easy to tell other ther people to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps. Much harder to do in practice. Been there done it, all my siblings have done so, including my old man who grew up even poorer in small town Alberta, my Grampa was a simple farm hand with nothing to call his own. Wife's been there and done it as well and she did it raised completely by a single mother (her dad took off before she was born and they never got a cent of help from him). My brother in law also been there and done it, he was raised by his two Korean immigrants parents, that barely spoke any english. Quote Minimum wage in Saskatchewan is roughly $11. Say you luck out, and find a job for $11/hr at 40 hrs a week. That's $880 biweekly, and subtract taxes, union dues (if any), and you're looking at roughly $770/paycheque. We'll say $1600/month, to be generous. Rent? You'll be lucky to find a place that's less than $500, so we'll use that as a generous baseline. Car? $110/mo for licensing. Gas? We'll put it at a generous $40/mo. Phone? $75 after taxes, if you're incredibly lucky. Nearly everywhere requires you to have a phone and/or email address. Food? Let's be conservative. Our example isn't eating healthy. $100/mo. Heating? Electric? Water? Combined, it's $200/mo. I think that's dipping by a little bit, but we'll assume they cut down on everything - showering, flushing the toilet, brushing teeth to save money. 1600 (500-110-40-75-100-200), that leaves you with $600 a month (7200 a year) in savings. In a year or two if you work hard you will be getting a raise and building up your value. Perhaps you get a GF and you two decide to move in to a nicer $800 per month place and she pays half which saves you even more money. And that's the start, it takes hard work and some dedication but people need to build themselves up. Then perhaps at the end of 50+ years they retire and have some money and good life experience to share with their kids. Quote This is a person who's never taken sick time, place of living and car functions perfectly with nothing ever breaking (assuming they found their car for free as well), never needs an oil change for their car, haven't counted wifi, clothes, they don't have family, kids, doesn't have depression or anxiety from not being able to do anything, doesn't need to spend money on education, dental, medication, has perfect insurance on everything, perfect eyesight, and never goes anywhere or does anything to actually live life outside of work. See this is one thing i don't emphasize for. Outside of being raped, no one forced you to have kids. My wife and I waited 7 years before we were more financially secure before we even thought about trying for kids. Mean while I have a friend that is on there 4th kid who've they've set up a go fund me for to help support them. Quote Now, I've used extremely conservative estimates for spending and a higher estimate for wage. Now, this person does have roughly $600 to spend on extra food, higher rent, clothes, wifi, emergency money, medication, and whatnot. I've overestimated wages by $60, and a lot of places will only give 37.5 hours a week. That's $100/mo. So now you're down to $440. That's $220/paycheque, and we still haven't counted education (if that's a factor), wifi, higher rent, clothes, or emergencies, or having friends. $220 is still 3k a year. But let's be real that's simply starting out wage and people with limited skillsets, Once you The majority of these people are under 25 and still living with their parents. Also when you are starting off you need to have sacrifice, no one gets to the top without putting in some effort. Also 37.5 is nothing. I'm still working 50-60 hours per week, it's sacrifice and a choice i'm willing to make for the betterment of my family and hopefully in the next couple of month it pays off with a new venture i'm working on. Many of my friends at 18 moved away to go up north and make big money working on the rigs. They gave up 2-4 years of their lives but came back with a huge financial boost. Or heck family member of mine decided to go into optometry and take on a huge loan, that's 8 years of non stop schooling, a huge debt and zero life. That's a lot of sacrifice but in the end, after another 5- 10 years of hard work and starting up a practice of his own, he now would be labelled in the "rich" group. That's a lot of sacrifice people did to get to where they are and now you are telling them. "Sorry, you have more than you need. Those same kids that you graduated with who decided to party their life away and make bad financial choices... yeah you need to give them a chunk of your hard earned money." Quote I'm not against opening up healthcare to private competition, as long as socialized healthcare remains in place with the same cost to the public as it is now. I'm open to that. We're already seeing a large amount of albertans heading across the boarder south to beat the wait line even though it costed a lot more up front Quote Your mom-&-pop shop is just looking to make a living. Local businesses are not the enemy. While I may have unintentionally included them when I said "businesses", notice how I've never attacked small businesses directly - it's the opposite, I think we need to support small businesses, absolutely. Corporations, especially national corporations and MNCs, are ultimately swayed by profit. Most businesses even local businesses are incorporated, profit is was keeps companies afloat but it also doesn't mean they become unethical, that's a big generalization. With media being so powerful companies are walking on eggshells making sure they don't do something wrong or something that can be construed as negative. I look at a company like WestJet that just bought out and media comes out with made up lies on there opinion piece articles that talk about how the transaction with Onex is negative. Quote Look at SNC-Lavalin. Look at Bombardier. Look at Amazon. Do you think these companies care about ethics over profit? No, they'll only do what's ethical or benefits society when it's profitable. How many companies supported gay rights before it was legalized? How many companies stood up against climate change 20-30 years ago? A small percentage. Now? Commonplace. There's hundreds of thousands of big companies, sure some walk the line of bad intensions but again that's a big generalization. How many people stood up for those top points 20-30 years ago. Times change, you can't hold something against a company because the worlds morals have changed, how many CEO's have changed in that same time frame? Quote And I do agree. Governments are not normally ethical. But they aren't working for a profit, and that takes money out of the equation. Want to ban lobbying? Great, let's do it. Increase penalties for bribery, sure. And yes, I'm aware of the Trudeau-Aga Khan incident. We're speaking on Canada, no? Why do we talk about Africa? Because this is a discussion of helping out poverty and how rich people have more than they deserve, enough to give away to those who need it. Do starving kids in Africa have less value? Quote And if you say they think we could live without it, why do you cry out when someone says we need higher taxes on the richer people in the country? Because, I think regardless someone you or someone else having the opinion that others of "have more than needed", it's still no reason to take/steal from that person earned wealth. Quote It's almost like someone didn't read what I wrote later on you need to do both. Find the middle ground, where you can both have a stable society and one which is forced to innovate. A claim for equality of material position can be met only by a government with totalitarian powers. - Friedrich A. Hayek Quote And it's not freedom. People who are born into poverty will most likely stay there. And that's not because of a poverty mindset. It's because working your way out of it, while better than in America, is still insanely tough. Life isn't easy, this goes back to the entitlement mentality. Just because you are born doesn't mean IF you want to leave poverty make some smart life choices. Start with, Working full-time, graduated high school. and wait until you are married and at least 21 to have a child. https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/three-simple-rules-poor-teens-should-follow-to-join-the-middle-class/ Quote Then there's an issue we can both agree on - we need proportional representation. Governments can tell pretty quickly when there's backlash - take Doug Ford's PCs, for instance. Elected with ~40% of the vote, formed a majority, and started finding "inefficiencies", proposing to slash things like anaesthesia for colonoscopies and funding for children with autism. Sam Oosterhoff, who's the massive idiot I'd probably be if I was the same person I was five years ago, found out pretty quickly that women didn't want their reproductive rights taken away. As well, if a government still won't listen to the people, there's always the ballot boxes every ~4 years. Oh, so they are about the money. Seems pessimistic Sure they are because money makes the world go round. The world isn't some fantasy land where everyone does things out of the good of there hearts, it's funny you no longer believe in god because religion is really the only other factor that makes people have drive in something, and that something tends to be helping out others. Quote I'm not looking for dead equal, and I think anyone who is is dumb, because again, Harrison Bergeron, but somewhat closer to equal would be better. We agree on equal opportunity, but lots of people still aren't even given that to begin with. Regardless of your opinion on Prager, this vid does a pretty good job sums up my thoughts. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfE_BrnP5fg Edited June 3, 2019 by ForsbergTheGreat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted June 3, 2019 Share Posted June 3, 2019 (edited) 58 minutes ago, The Lock said: I guess I just didn't really interpret him saying poverty victims are due to their situations. Perhaps you're overthinking things a bit? "Playing victim" does not equate to "victim shaming". I don't see that at all. You do realize that many people in poverty may have all kinds of problems.... including learning disabilities, special needs, disabilities, abusive relationship and / abusive upbringing, MENTAL health issues ( all kinds ) and addiction...... Tell them they need to suck it up and work harder is disrespectul, abusive and really just blame Ignorant. But heh, you can go ahead and agree with him all you want. Do you also blame female sexual assault victims for how they dress or... they should have just fought back harder...... wow..... I wonder if either of you has any kind of experience working in the community with the poor / or with mentally challenged adults.... Edited June 3, 2019 by kingofsurrey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thejazz97 Posted June 3, 2019 Author Share Posted June 3, 2019 5 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: Been there done it, all my siblings have done so as well including my old man who grew up even poorer in small town Alberta Wife's been there and done it as well and she did it raised completely by a single mother. Brother in law also been there and done it and he was raised by two immigrants that barely speak english. 1600 (500-110-40-75-100-200), that leaves you with $600 a month (7200 a year) in savings. In a year or two if you work hard you will be getting a raise and building up your value. Perhaps you get a GF and you two decide to move in to a nicer $800 per month place and she pays half which saves you even more money. And that's the start, it takes hard work and some dedication but people need to build themselves up. Then perhaps at the end of 50+ years they retire and have some money and good life experience to share with their kids. Quote See this is one thing i don't emphasize for. Outside of being raped, no one forced you to have kids. My wife and I waited 7 years before we were more financially secure before we even thought about trying for kids. Mean while I have a friend that is on there 4th kid who've they've set up a go fund me for to help support them. $220 is still 3k a year. But let's be real that's simply starting out wage and people with limited skillsets, Once you The majority of these people are under 25 and still living with their parents. Also when you are starting off you need to have sacrifice, no one gets to the top without putting in some effort. Also 37.5 is nothing. I'm still working 50-60 hours per week, it's sacrifice and a choice i'm willing to make for the betterment of my family and hopefully in the next couple of month it pays off with a new venture i'm working on. Many of my friends at 18 moved away to go up north and make big money working on the rigs. They gave up 2-4 years of their lives but came back with a huge financial boost. Or heck family members of mine decided to go into optometry and take on a huge loan, that's 8 years of non stop schooling and a huge debt, that's a lot of sacrifice but in the end after another 5- 10 years of hard work they are in the "rich" group, That's a lot of sacrifice people did to get to where they are and now you are telling them. "Sorry, you have more than you need. Those kids that you graduated with, who decided to party their life away, make bad financial choices... yeah you need to give them a chunk of your hard earned money." Congrats, that's good. I'd like to see more people do the same. Not everybody in poverty gets to that though, and I wouldn't chalk it up to only mentality holding people back. And it's less that "they have more than they need" and more "let's make it so others don't have to struggle as much to get there". I'm sure you would agree that an easier path out of poverty is for the best for everyone. Quote I'm open to that. We're already seeing a large amount of albertans heading across the boarder south to beat the wait line even though it costed a lot more up front It would free up a bunch of space in the social health sector as well. We agree here. Not sure much more needs to be said Quote Most businesses even local businesses are incorporated, profit is was keeps companies afloat but it also doesn't mean they become unethical, that's a big generalization. With media being so powerful companies are walking on eggshells making sure they don't do something wrong or something that can be construed as negative. I look at a company like WestJet that just bought out and media comes out with made up lies on there opinion piece articles that talk about how the transaction with Onex is negative. There's hundreds of thousands of big companies, sure some walk the line of bad intensions but again that's a big generalization. How many people stood up for those top points 20-30 years ago. Times change, you can't hold something against a company because the worlds morals have changed, how many CEO's have changed in that same time frame? I pretty sure I didn't say businesses were unethical. They don't automatically go against ethics. They just follow the money, is all. You can't expect more from them, but it's still disappointing. At the very least - and you may agree - incentivizing businesses to follow the trend that the people want to see (ie, fighting climate change, pollution, engaging in corporate social responsibility) is not a bad thing. Quote Because this is a discussion of helping out poverty and how rich people have more than they deserve, enough to give away to those who need it. Do starving kids in Africa have less value? Because, I think regardless someone you or someone else having the opinion that others of "have more than needed", it's still no reason to take/steal from that person earned wealth. I mean, we could attempt to do that on a global scale, if you'd be interested. Say each country chips in, on average, $1b over a period of five years ($200m/yr, on average). Now you've got nearly $200b to use in Africa on programs through the UN or each individual African country to reduce extreme poverty. Would that help? Because if so, I'm okay with having my taxes raised for the betterment of the planet. Being global citizens and all. Quote A claim for equality of material position can be met only by a government with totalitarian powers. - Friedrich A. Hayek I could see a claim that socialism is authoritarian to a certain extent. Can't see totalitarian, unless the specific instance legitimately is totalitarian. Quote Life isn't easy, this goes back to the entitlement mentality. Just because you are born doesn't mean No, but we can alleviate some of the bad circumstances people are born into. Quote IF you want to leave poverty make some smart life choices. Start with, Working full-time, graduated high school. and wait until you are married and at least 21 to have a child. https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/three-simple-rules-poor-teens-should-follow-to-join-the-middle-class/ A lot of people don't get told that and have to figure it out themselves. Kudos to the ones that do, but those of us who live in relative luxury can do better for the rest. Quote Sure they are because money makes the world go round. The world isn't some fantasy land where everyone does things out of the good of there hearts, it's funny you no longer believe in god because religion is really the only other factor that makes people have drive in something, and that something tends to be helping out others. Religion is a two-pronged beast, with betterment and fear being the major players. If we're just greedy savages, then fine, let's go with unbridled capitalism. Everything comes out of pocket. No restrictions on business. People survive because they have to. Quote Regardless of your opinion on Prager, this vid does a pretty good job sums up my thoughts. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfE_BrnP5fg I think we can both agree, throwing money at the situation doesn't do a good job. Easier access to healthcare, education, housing, and job opportunities is the best start we can do, and options include partially or fully subsidized healthcare (which we have) and education, subsidized housing, and things currently employed such as the Canada summer job grants. A higher tax return is never going to make much of a permanent difference for people in poverty, and I'm sorry if that's what you've taken as my argument this whole time! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lock Posted June 3, 2019 Share Posted June 3, 2019 (edited) 24 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said: You do realize that many people in poverty may have all kinds of problems.... including learning disabilities, special needs, disabilities, abusive relationship and / abusive upbringing, MENTAL health issues ( all kinds ) and addiction...... Tell them they need to suck it up and work harder is disrespectul, abusive and really just blame Ignorant. But heh, you can go ahead and agree with him all you want. Do you also blame female sexual assault victims for how they dress or... they should have just fought back harder...... wow..... I wonder if either of you has any kind of experience working in the community with the poor / or with mentally challenged adults.... Of course I realise people in poverty can have all kinds of problems. I'm speaking at you from experience even and I can tell you first hand that blaming others (playing the "victim") got me nowhere. However, when I realised I have control over my life, it helped. A lot. I got out of things. I've made something of myself. Obviously, there are different situations for different people. Some people can get out of things easier than others. Some might not physically be able to at all. Immediately, you see a phrase and interpret it as the worst possible thing someone can say. Instead of this, how about you try and actually look at all of the possible meaning things could have? Do you not realise there is hope for some people? Do you not realise some of these people can actually overcome their burdens? Yet, here you are, offended. Offended because people CAN get out of their problems. It may not be all of them, but some of them, absolutely they can. All it takes is a change of mentality and, if you treat all of them like they are the victim, they'll just stay where they are. Edited June 3, 2019 by The Lock 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted June 3, 2019 Share Posted June 3, 2019 3 minutes ago, The Lock said: ] Yet, here you are, offended. Offended because people CAN get out of their problems. It may not be all of them, but some of them, absolutely they can. All it takes is a change of mentality and, if you treat all of them like they are the victim, they'll just stay where they are. Absolutely people can escape poverty.... People do every day. The issue is saying that all poor people just need the right mentality and they will be fine. The fact is that if you have a mental disablitity or suffer from schizophrenia ...... having a positive outlook may not move you up to a middle class life...... Victim shaming / blaming is disgusting and typically done by people that simply have no experience working with at risk youth and adults.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now