• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Communism- Socialism

rjs330

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2015
28,438
9,141
65
✟435,169.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
Your complaints about Seattles issues appear to be a switch from your claims about the homeless squandering the homes, as the challenges are financial strain on the non-profits and not an issue with the beneficiaries.
You didn't read it all. The beneficiaries are causing a chunk of the problems.
Which speaks against your insistence that the claim several uberwealthy individuals have enough that they could single handedly solve homelessness is false,
Incorrect, read my post again. I didnt say that.
as the solution to homelessness is in large part affordable housing and affordable housing isn't sustainable because of artificial market pressures as corporations and wealthy individuals treat real estate as an investment.
These were city and state issues given to non-profits who are like you and think this is the answer only to find out its not.
You seem to be under the impression that housing programs involve simply putting them in a house and saying "have at it!" when that's not even close to how these programs work.

I am curious where you're getting your information from on the programs in LA, Denver, and San Francisco to support your claim that the housing has by and large been ruined, especially since your characterization of the Seattle program was principally a matter of the non-profits being overextended and unable to deal with the financial burden and nothing to do with the upkeep or successfulness of the program itself.
Getting it from Seattle, San Francisco and LA papers and investigative reporting. Overextended because the way its being done is insustainable. So far all you've done is argue with me over the FACTS of what IS occurring. You haven't provided any solutions except the ones that places have tried only to find out its not working.

Its obvious these places dont have staffing that is needed. With a 280% increase is overdoses, they aren't doing much good. With the crime that occurs in these places they aren't doing much good. They might as well be saying "have at it" because thats what is occurring. And when they find real problems nothing can be done because the government won't allow them to remove the problems.

This is all about "we want to feel like we are doing something" regardless if it that something is working or not.

Nope, these people need to be placed in a facility where they can't leave because they aren't capable of taking care of themselves and are a danger to the public.
 
Upvote 0

Fervent

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2020
6,725
2,928
45
San jacinto
✟208,234.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
These were city and state issues given to non-profits who are like you and think this is the answer only to find out its not.
Handing the issue to non-profits is the bigger issue, and no one says that this is "the answer" but that the other problems are exacerbated by the homelessness issue so providing housing is where to start while addressing other issues simultaneously.
Its obvious these places dont have staffing that is needed. With a 280% increase is overdoses, they aren't doing much good. With the crime that occurs in these places they aren't doing much good. They might as well be saying "have at it" because thats what is occurring. And when they find real problems nothing can be done because the government won't allow them to remove the problems.
Which is a question of funding, rather than an indictment of the approach itself. Complaining that understaffed, underfunded programs failed and justifying cutting funding on that basis doesn't really demonstrate that a properly funded and staffed program would have the same failures.
This is all about "we want to feel like we are doing something" regardless if it that something is working or not.
Not exactly, it's about finding a place to start that allows for other aspects to be addressed in ways that increase the chances of success. The failures you note seem to be about a lack of proper funding and not an issue with the underlying theory.
Nope, these people need to be placed in a facility where they can't leave because they aren't capable of taking care of themselves and are a danger to the public.
Perhaps some fall into that category, but you seem to be painting with a very broad and uncharitable brush.
 
Upvote 0

7thKeeper

Venture life, Burn your Dread
Jul 8, 2006
2,411
2,277
Finland
✟179,736.00
Country
Finland
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
In Relationship
Your complaints about Seattles issues appear to be a switch from your claims about the homeless squandering the homes, as the challenges are financial strain on the non-profits and not an issue with the beneficiaries. Which speaks against your insistence that the claim several uberwealthy individuals have enough that they could single handedly solve homelessness is false, as the solution to homelessness is in large part affordable housing and affordable housing isn't sustainable because of artificial market pressures as corporations and wealthy individuals treat real estate as an investment.

The attitude of "I paid for my house, so why do they get one for free" may be "valid", but it certainly isn't what I would consider Christian. And the programs aren't without strings, they require enrollment in sober living programs which include random drug screenings and participation in employment programs. And they're not a forever free situation, either. They're simply given the housing upfront and a timeline to begin paying once they've become established in their employment.
Sounds pretty much like the Housing First initiative in Finland, with perhaps a few more strings attached and lacking the government backed funding for the program.
 
Upvote 0

rjs330

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2015
28,438
9,141
65
✟435,169.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
so providing housing is where to start while addressing other issues simultaneously.
Thats what my plan does.
Which is a question of funding, rather than an indictment of the approach itself. Complaining that understaffed, underfunded programs failed and justifying cutting funding on that basis doesn't really demonstrate that a properly funded and staffed program would have the same failures.
Its an indictment of the approach. Based upon the failures of the arrested good feelings approach, combined with the problems of rhe people involved, there is no way to deal with this properly under the current attitude. Rhe STRUCTURE doesn't work. The money is ONLY for housing. As stated just maintaining the housing is nearly impossible. You cant have enough people in an UNCONTROLLED environment to deal with that. No matter how much money you spend. Seattle cant sustain it. Combine that with the homeless rhat COULD function on their own, but refuse to do so. The majority have addictions or mental illness. But there is another contingent rhat just dont want to live within the constraints of society, but still want the benefits.
Not exactly, it's about finding a place to start that allows for other aspects to be addressed in ways that increase the chances of success. The failures you note seem to be about a lack of proper funding and not an issue with the underlying theory.
A place to start is to address the underlying issues. Addiction and mental health. These are the things that create the conditions where they cannot function in society or care for themselves properly. Throwing money at housing for them has been PROVEN not to work. Because you cant provide enough money to keep them safe or keep society safe from them. As long as they are free to come and go as they please they are free to obtain the substances and create unsafe environments.

They need to be placed into a facility.
Perhaps some fall into that category, but you seem to be painting with a very broad and uncharitable brush.
Most chronically homeless fall into those categories. Thats why they are chronically homeless.
 
Upvote 0

Fervent

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2020
6,725
2,928
45
San jacinto
✟208,234.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Thats what my plan does.
Not really, at least from the sounds of it. Lock them up where they're no longer a visible blight doesn't address the humaniitarian issues involved.
Its an indictment of the approach. Based upon the failures of the arrested good feelings approach, combined with the problems of rhe people involved, there is no way to deal with this properly under the current attitude. Rhe STRUCTURE doesn't work. The money is ONLY for housing. As stated just maintaining the housing is nearly impossible. You cant have enough people in an UNCONTROLLED environment to deal with that. No matter how much money you spend. Seattle cant sustain it. Combine that with the homeless rhat COULD function on their own, but refuse to do so. The majority have addictions or mental illness. But there is another contingent rhat just dont want to live within the constraints of society, but still want the benefits.
Again, you're pointing out a funding issue that has nothing to do with the viability of these programs. Addressing the housing issue first allows for the addiction and mental health issues to be dealt with humanely and in a way that respects their autonomy.
A place to start is to address the underlying issues. Addiction and mental health. These are the things that create the conditions where they cannot function in society or care for themselves properly. Throwing money at housing for them has been PROVEN not to work. Because you cant provide enough money to keep them safe or keep society safe from them. As long as they are free to come and go as they please they are free to obtain the substances and create unsafe environments.
Addressing the underlying issues is nearly impossible prior to addressing the housing issues. It's like Maslow's hierarchy of needs, you can't expect someone to function in higher domains until you address their basic needs. Food and shelter are about as basic as they get, and addressing those allows for treatment plans to be tied in.
They need to be placed into a facility.
Lock em up, out of sight out of mind. Right?
Most chronically homeless fall into those categories. Thats why they are chronically homeless.
Addiction and mental illness, sure. But your characterization of those issues is what makes it uncharitable.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: DaisyDay
Upvote 0

rjs330

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2015
28,438
9,141
65
✟435,169.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
Not really, at least from the sounds of it. Lock them up where they're no longer a visible blight doesn't address the humaniitarian issues involved.

Again, you're pointing out a funding issue that has nothing to do with the viability of these programs. Addressing the housing issue first allows for the addiction and mental health issues to be dealt with humanely and in a way that respects their autonomy.

Addressing the underlying issues is nearly impossible prior to addressing the housing issues. It's like Maslow's hierarchy of needs, you can't expect someone to function in higher domains until you address their basic needs. Food and shelter are about as basic as they get, and addressing those allows for treatment plans to be tied in.

Lock em up, out of sight out of mind. Right?

Addiction and mental illness, sure. But your characterization of those issues is what makes it uncharitable.
Putting them is a facility IS providing for their needs. Not sure what you don't understand about that.

The addiction process cannot be fixed with freedom. Freedom is gained AFTER you are clean. And not even immediately. It would be incremental. In patient treatment rarely works upon immediate release.

Mental illness is what is preventing them from caring for themselves. Its what puts rhem on the street, wandering around dirty and smelly and talking to themselves and digging in garbage cans etc. How about a nice comfortable place where you can be clean and comfortable and stay off the street?

Anyway, I've said my piece. I'm sure in some other thread someone will twist my words to some effect that I dont care about hoconversation even though I've provided a way out for them at taxpayer expense. Thanks for the converaation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hentenza
Upvote 0

Learning always

Active Member
Nov 25, 2024
270
104
NSW
✟64,197.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
i'm less concerned with individuals property rights, than I am with alleviating the suffering of a significant portion of the population.

What would stop them from "holding onto it"? How would it be taken from them, in your imagined scenario?

Can you solve the problem of poverty by taking properties from the rich???

Modern problem of poverty in the US is likely due to the influences of music industry, Hollywood, etc. If decline of morality and virtue is not the root cause, what is it ???

It is a moral crisis, a moral solution is required.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
33,520
20,800
Orlando, Florida
✟1,520,311.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
I don’t have a lot of hope for America nor do I believe its citizens are in a position to undo what’s underway. I think the golden age we’ll enter won’t be to the majority’s liking and widening inequality and erosion of safety nets foretell a period of suffering and tumult. I think we’ll have less freedom, more restrictions and lots of monitoring. I expect our quality of life, happiness and mental health to experience similar blows.

When you don’t have many options the worst is better than none. If you’re hungry and they offer communism as a solution you’ll take it and the same applies to socialism.

~bella

Yes, the whole "communist" bogieman misses the point that the US is moving towards an anocracy, where the rule of law exists more in theory than in practice. There are ways for oligarchies to subvert democratic participation in society while keeping the appearance of civil rights, on paper.
 
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Site Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
42,239
22,810
US
✟1,741,697.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I don’t have a lot of hope for America nor do I believe its citizens are in a position to undo what’s underway. I think the golden age we’ll enter won’t be to the majority’s liking and widening inequality and erosion of safety nets foretell a period of suffering and tumult. I think we’ll have less freedom, more restrictions and lots of monitoring. I expect our quality of life, happiness and mental health to experience similar blows.

When you don’t have many options the worst is better than none. If you’re hungry and they offer communism as a solution you’ll take it and the same applies to socialism.

~bella
This is true.
Yes, the whole "communist" bogieman misses the point that the US is moving towards an anocracy, where the rule of law exists more in theory than in practice. There are ways for oligarchies to subvert democratic participation in society while keeping the appearance of civil rights, on paper.
This is also true.
 
Upvote 0

public hermit

social troglodyte
Site Supporter
Aug 20, 2019
12,653
13,488
East Coast
✟1,059,704.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Modern problem of poverty in the US is likely due to the influences of music industry, Hollywood, etc.

If only people had listened to the wisdom of Tipper Gore instead of the debauchery of Prince.
 
Upvote 0

7thKeeper

Venture life, Burn your Dread
Jul 8, 2006
2,411
2,277
Finland
✟179,736.00
Country
Finland
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
In Relationship
watching-popcorn.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: ViaCrucis
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
39,679
29,284
Pacific Northwest
✟818,552.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Can you solve the problem of poverty by taking properties from the rich???

Modern problem of poverty in the US is likely due to the influences of music industry, Hollywood, etc. If decline of morality and virtue is not the root cause, what is it ???

It is a moral crisis, a moral solution is required.

Poverty is certainly a moral issue; but it has nothing to do with music and movies.

The moral issue of poverty and economic injustice is one the Bible itself, and Christianity historically, has had a lot to say about.

Namely, the immorality of the hoarding of wealth by the few resulting the deprivation of means for the many. This is very much a moral issue, and thus a moral solution is required; redistributive methods is an example of a moral solution to the immorality of wealth hoarding; especially through structured and progressive taxation focusing on the rich having the chief tax burden; and providing social welfare for the those who are especially vulnerable.

The Biblical model instituted by God for ancient Israel involved wealth redistribution through methods such as tithing. While tithing has never been a commandment within the Church, the Church has always placed a great deal of stress on redistribution of wealth as a moral obligation upon Christian people, and through the condemnation of practices such as usury.

It is strange that, in the modern west, so many Christians have sided with the morally corrupt and economically unjust system of wealth-hoarding in the form of unregulated capitalism--and opposition to regulation, opposition to economic justice, and opposition to the moral refining of society by calling anything that does not look like neo-liberalism "Marxism".

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0

Hans Blaster

Raised by bees
Mar 11, 2017
22,196
16,686
55
USA
✟420,438.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
  • Like
Reactions: public hermit
Upvote 0

A2SG

Gumby
Jun 17, 2008
9,909
3,860
Massachusetts
✟173,176.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Can you solve the problem of poverty by taking properties from the rich???
Maybe, though some have tried to do so by taking properties from those who aren't rich.



Last remaining West End building:

Building_in_West_End_Boston.jpg


-- A2SG, I drive near that building often on my way to work...
 
Upvote 0

Hans Blaster

Raised by bees
Mar 11, 2017
22,196
16,686
55
USA
✟420,438.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
I prefer to party like it's 1699


-CryptoLutheran

I like Weird Al, but Prince was the one artist to refuse permission for a parody. (Though it wasn't needed, Al always asks first.) This song is OK, but Weird Al did once write a song matching how I feel about some of the posters on this board...

.. So I took your name out of my Rolodex...
 
Upvote 0

Gene2memE

Newbie
Oct 22, 2013
4,665
7,221
✟344,869.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Can you solve the problem of poverty by taking properties from the rich???

It seems to have worked in the period from roughly ~1938 to 1980, when there were substantially higher marginal and average income tax rates, along with higher headline and effective corporate tax rates. The effective rate of capital gains tax has also fallen by roughly half since the mid 1990s.

Since the end of the 1970s, the US poverty rate has essentially trended sideways. Roughly between a range of 11% and 16%.

At the same time, income inequality has increased by ~20-25%, to the highest it's been since before the Great Depression.

Compared to inflation the US federal minimum wage has fallen by 50% over the last 17 years (the longest it has gone without an upwards adjustment)

While average household income has grown, gains have not been even. The top ~10% of income earners have seen their incomes grow about 40% more quickly than the bottom 50% of earners.

Worker productivity has increased about 75% to 80% in the last 25 years, but workers wages are up only 25% to 30%. Similarly, workers share of income has fallen by about 10-15% since 1980, reaching recent record lows.

Modern problem of poverty in the US is likely due to the influences of music industry, Hollywood, etc. If decline of morality and virtue is not the root cause, what is it ???

How about the increasingly lopsided distribution of the income produced by capital?
How about an economic system that produces a 'race to the bottom' wages structure, particularly for lower skill and lower wage roles?
How about an economic system that is predicated on the presence of a permanent, insecure underclass?
How about an economic system that creates financial catastrophes and socialises losses while privatising profits?

It is a moral crisis, a moral solution is required.

The presence of poverty IS a moral failing. At least in a society that has the resources to eliminate poverty. However, the responsibility for the failing lies with those who are in a position to do something about it, not on the working poor themselves.

For instance, the US suffered an estimated $1 trillion in evaded taxes over the last financial year, including about $675 billion in evaded income taxes. The top 1% of income earners are estimated to account for about 20% of this tax evasion. The top 10% for about 40%. The bottom 50% of income earners are estimated to only account for about 15-16% of tax evasion.

In all actuality, the problem is somewhat larger than this - as legal tax avoidance due to accounting and jurisdictional loopholes are estimated to cost anywhere up to another $450 billion. And that's primarily the domain of the wealthy.



I'm not pro socialism, or pro communism. I happen to like private ownership, decentralised economies, open markets and I support profit as a driver of activity. However, I'm a firm believer that libertarian style capitalism produces terrible outcomes for ~90% of the population and that regulation is not only appropriate but necessary to redress the fundamental imbalance of outcomes that are inherent in modern modes of capitalism.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaisyDay
Upvote 0

Pommer

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic
Sep 13, 2008
22,777
14,061
Earth
✟247,871.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
Can you solve the problem of poverty by taking properties from the rich???
Let’s give that a try…once?
Maybe it won’t work very well, but less people will be “inconvenienced”.

Modern problem of poverty in the US is likely due to the influences of music industry, Hollywood, etc. If decline of morality and virtue is not the root cause, what is it ???
So the people who don’t have enough bread, get no circuses either?

It is a moral crisis, a moral solution is required.
Maybe don’t let wealth accumulate at the apex of the economic pyramid?
 
Upvote 0

ralliann

christian
Jun 27, 2007
8,230
2,592
✟275,585.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
Poverty is certainly a moral issue; but it has nothing to do with music and movies.

The moral issue of poverty and economic injustice is one the Bible itself, and Christianity historically, has had a lot to say about.

Namely, the immorality of the hoarding of wealth by the few resulting the deprivation of means for the many. This is very much a moral issue, and thus a moral solution is required; redistributive methods is an example of a moral solution to the immorality of wealth hoarding; especially through structured and progressive taxation focusing on the rich having the chief tax burden; and providing social welfare for the those who are especially vulnerable.

The Biblical model instituted by God for ancient Israel involved wealth redistribution through methods such as tithing. While tithing has never been a commandment within the Church, the Church has always placed a great deal of stress on redistribution of wealth as a moral obligation upon Christian people, and through the condemnation of practices such as usury.

It is strange that, in the modern west, so many Christians have sided with the morally corrupt and economically unjust system of wealth-hoarding in the form of unregulated capitalism--and opposition to regulation, opposition to economic justice, and opposition to the moral refining of society by calling anything that does not look like neo-liberalism "Marxism".

-CryptoLutheran
1. It is also immoral to not work, to support others (family). You do not take from the rich for that. It is also immoral to not care for those with disabilities unable to work, and those that are sick. The problem with marxism, communism., is allowing people to become "SICK", through drug abuse, and the mentally ill, to not be helped.
Wealth is not a problem in the scripture...

Gen 13:1 And Abram went up out of Egypt, he, and his wife, and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the south.
2 And Abram was very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold.



De 8:17 And thou say in thine heart, My power and the might of mine hand hath gotten me this wealth.
De 8:18 But thou shalt remember the LORD thy God: for it is he that giveth thee power to get wealth, that he may establish his covenant which he sware unto thy fathers,

2. Simple comparisons, rather than need. Good wages, become unfair and bad wages....

Hire early in the morning, an agreed wage.. Good to the laborers

1 ¶ For the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which went out early in the morning to hire labourers into his vineyard.
2 And when he had agreed with the labourers for a penny a day, he sent them into his vineyard.
3 And he went out about the third hour,
5 Again he went out about the sixth and ninth hour, and did likewise.
6 And about the eleventh hour
In the evening time for their pay..
8 So when even was come, the lord of the vineyard saith unto his steward, Call the labourers, and give them their hire, beginning from the last unto the first.
9 And when they came that were hired about the eleventh hour, they received every man a penny.
10 But when the first came, they supposed that they should have received more; and they likewise received every man a penny.
11 And when they had received it, they murmured against the goodman of the house,
12 Saying, These last have wrought but one hour, and thou hast made them equal unto us, which have borne the burden and heat of the day. {have wrought … : or, have continued one hour only }
13 But he answered one of them, and said, Friend, I do thee no wrong: didst not thou agree with me for a penny?
14 Take that thine is, and go thy way: I will give unto this last, even as unto thee.
15 Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0