The rich and middle class to blame in the Covid Crisis?

muichimotsu · Nov 29, 2021

Rachel20 said:
How would we know it gets to the poor? Can't others just come in behind and grab it up? If we donate to charities, can't they take 90 cents off the dollar for "administrative costs" and then just pass the dime to another charity that will take their cut too? Same thing if we donate at the PED prompts, or pay taxes for social safety nets - how do we know it really gets to those in need? Giving alms in Biblical times didn't have this problem - it was done directly with no middle men. I really wish there was a way we could help people directly again. Maybe you can come up with an idea.

Globalization already limits that in the sense of sheer scale and capitalistic pursuits are going to add those charges regardless of who you use in terms of donations, I'd bet. Biblical times was far smaller in scale and that was what made it easier to accomplish, to say nothing of industrialization and advancement of corporate interests legally, so they have power through money and lobbying politicians, among other aspects.

Ophiolite · Nov 29, 2021

timewerx said:
We might be able to enforce some kind of one "Purchasing ID" per household. This ID sets purchasing limit per week in "necessity items" including medicines and fuel to prevent hoarding.

It is called rationing. Perhaps you are to young to have heard of it. It would be immensely popular with the mafia. (Other organised crime groups are available.)

timewerx · Nov 29, 2021

Ophiolite said:
It is called rationing. Perhaps you are to young to have heard of it. It would be immensely popular with the mafia. (Other organised crime groups are available.)

No need to associate measures to help the less fortunate with crime.

Things have improved slightly today like better equality and protection for women in the work place against harassment, better treatment for non-whites, less crime generally, less wars. So no, I don't live in the past.

Clizby WampusCat · Nov 30, 2021

timewerx said:
They seem to be greatly responsible in two things that made the crisis far more severe:

- Unnecessary travels (leisure mostly, sometimes even business travels that could have been avoided) which helped spread the virus all over the world rapidly which also facilitated its rapid mutation rates.

....And to add insult to injury.....

- Hoarding necessities causing supply shortages and price spikes, leading to great inconvenience and further difficulties to the poor.

In both cases, the poor as always, the worst affected.

If you want to say these things contributed to the spread then ok. But to say any one group of people is to blame is not helpful. What about all the people coming across the US border from around the world? Are they to blame as well? I really don't think the spread could have been stopped, it was inevitable. We have a choice to live with the virus or to ruin the worlds economies by shutting them down. Which is worse for poor people?

muichimotsu · Nov 30, 2021

Clizby WampusCat said:
If you want to say these things contributed to the spread then ok. But to say any one group of people is to blame is not helpful. What about all the people coming across the US border from around the world? Are they to blame as well? I really don't think the spread could have been stopped, it was inevitable. We have a choice to live with the virus or to ruin the worlds economies by shutting them down. Which is worse for poor people?

The world's economies are so exploitative in their uber capitalist nature that the poor suffer regardless when the underlying biases that favor the affluent, the haves, and disregard the impoverished, the have nots.

Living with a virus that is deadly and/or debilitating should not have to be a matter of people asserting their "freedom", yet the supposed best country in the world that continues to police international affairs by threats of nuclear winter and mutually assured destruction can't even progress to decent herd immunity in the scale of time where we've had the vaccine well over half a year and maybe had early hiccups in distribution or access. Yet here we are at maybe 59% fully vaxxed and 68% with one shot (and probably not bothering with the second, depending on their mentality), and Japan tops the G-7 afaik at 76% fully vaxxed (even though I'd heard there were concerns about pockets of misinformation and resistance)

Clizby WampusCat · Nov 30, 2021

muichimotsu said:
The world's economies are so exploitative in their uber capitalist nature that the poor suffer regardless when the underlying biases that favor the affluent, the haves, and disregard the impoverished, the have nots.

The surest way to not help the poor people is to destroy the good economies. If no one has anything then no one gets help. Lets fix the problems with the world rather than destroy the means to solving them.

Living with a virus that is deadly and/or debilitating should not have to be a matter of people asserting their "freedom", yet the supposed best country in the world that continues to police international affairs by threats of nuclear winter and mutually assured destruction can't even progress to decent herd immunity in the scale of time where we've had the vaccine well over half a year and maybe had early hiccups in distribution or access. Yet here we are at maybe 59% fully vaxxed and 68% with one shot (and probably not bothering with the second, depending on their mentality), and Japan tops the G-7 afaik at 76% fully vaxxed (even though I'd heard there were concerns about pockets of misinformation and resistance)

Do you favor forced vaccination? You can complain all you want about how people use their freedom. I am vaccinated, but I support the right to not be vaccinated. I will still be there defending you when there is something you don't want to do to your body.

muichimotsu · Dec 1, 2021

The surest way to not help the poor people is to destroy the good economies. If no one has anything then no one gets help. Lets fix the problems with the world rather than destroy the means to solving them.

And if some people have way more than others and don't do anything but hoard it, the problem is pretty blatant that just having stuff should not be the goal of society, especially not in the sense of seeming magnanimous by deigning to "share" your wealth when it's convenient and then using tax shelters and loopholes to keep your grubby mitts on most of it anyway

What constitutes a good economy is hardly that simple if you just reduce it to numbers and not a pattern of diminishing returns and shrinking middle class.

Do you favor forced vaccination? You can complain all you want about how people use their freedom. I am vaccinated, but I support the right to not be vaccinated. I will still be there defending you when there is something you don't want to do to your body.

Nice split thinking there. I can support the mandated protocol, that's not the same thing as forcing it because there are simple social consequences and those related to private businesses or even state owned ones under a neutral principle of public health are not some oppressive thing like people will claim

So you support the right to endanger others with a communicable disease that continues to mutate and behave in ways that aren't as predictable as we thought? Delta variant come to mind with the demographics the previous strains didn't affect nearly as much? The expression about the right to punch someone stopping at their face comes to mind and a choice like not getting vaccinated when you have no legitimate medical exemption does not happen in a vacuum

partinobodycular · Dec 1, 2021

timewerx said:
They seem to be greatly responsible in two things that made the crisis far more severe:

- Unnecessary travels (leisure mostly, sometimes even business travels that could have been avoided) which helped spread the virus all over the world rapidly which also facilitated its rapid mutation rates.

....And to add insult to injury.....

- Hoarding necessities causing supply shortages and price spikes, leading to great inconvenience and further difficulties to the poor.

In both cases, the poor as always, the worst affected.

People have an innate need to find someone to blame. Be it the rich, or the poor, or the government, or corporations, or liberals, or conservatives, or minorities, or immigrants, or the Jews, or the Muslims, and on and on and on. When the truth is that the one creating the problems, and the one creating the monsters responsible for those problems...is the person in the mirror.

Hoarding isn't the problem. Greed, be it personal or corporate, isn't the problem. The problem is people's need to create monsters. To find someone to blame when life isn't fair.

Somehow people just don't take to heart the words "Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us."

Those words aren't a request, they're a fact of life.

timewerx · Dec 1, 2021

partinobodycular said:
Hoarding isn't the problem. Greed, be it personal or corporate, isn't the problem. The problem is people's need to create monsters. To find someone to blame when life isn't fair.

We solve our problems by pretending it's not real? I'm not sure that strategy works.

Google two words, "rich" and "hoarding" together. It is a real problem in society in times of difficulties.

Somehow people just don't take to heart the words "Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us."

Forgiveness and working out problems are two different things.

Petros2015 · Dec 1, 2021

I would limit (or focus) blame to deliberate campaigns of disinformation. Anything else is choice based on what's available to you... but you can't make the right choice based on the wrong information. Those campaigns have roots and then they branch out to sweep people into them. But the roots are deliberate choices, and the ax will fall in the next life if not this one.

timewerx · Dec 2, 2021

Petros2015 said:
I would limit (or focus) blame to deliberate campaigns of disinformation. Anything else is choice based on what's available to you... but you can't make the right choice based on the wrong information. Those campaigns have roots and then they branch out to sweep people into them. But the roots are deliberate choices, and the ax will fall in the next life if not this one.

Except that it is real and in many cases, prolonging the Covid Crisis:

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/07/who...y-hoarding-covid-treatments-and-vaccines.html

Petros2015 · Dec 2, 2021

timewerx said:
Except that it is real and in many cases, prolonging the Covid Crisis:

I was not referring to your hypothesis I was referring to, as an extreme example, people like this
Alex Jones - Wikipedia
Who falls into your category I suppose, I just feel it's a bit broader than mine.
Perhaps you prefer a spotlight

I would prefer a laser.

timewerx · Dec 2, 2021

Petros2015 said:
I was not referring to your hypothesis I was referring to, as an extreme example, people like this
Alex Jones - Wikipedia
Who falls into your category I suppose, I just feel it's a bit broader than mine.
Perhaps you prefer a spotlight

I would prefer a laser.

I tend to avoid discussions on conspiracy theories or theorists. They only bring confusion.

Things are simply unfolding as a product of basic human nature, no conspiracies involved. Just people who can't control their spending habits even if there are times it is probably bad to practice uninhibited consumerism.

Rachel20 · Dec 4, 2021

timewerx said:
Off my mind is an app that connects donors and poor families directly completely online so you can donate to families directly, eliminating the middleman. Donors and families who enroll in this app is background checked.

Something like a dating site with family making their profile page and their needs but is one-way for the protection of donors. App is self-revenue generating via ads.

So the app doesn't take any money from you but simply makes it possible for to directly donate necessities to families like ordering from online stores and sending it directly to their address.

I suppose the app can also recommend you online stores, nearer to the family to save you on shipping costs. The app should also be able to accept transaction and tracking info from the purchase for recording purposes so we know who's getting some and who's getting none.

This app exists already or is this your idea? I think it's excellent - please give me the name if exists already.

Strathos · Dec 4, 2021

If we had to list everyone to blame for it, it would be a very long list.

timewerx · Dec 4, 2021

Rachel20 said:
This app exists already or is this your idea? I think it's excellent - please give me the name if exists already.

Only quick idea, I'm not sure if one actually exist, would be cool if it did, sadly, I can't develop apps yet.

Ken-1122 · Dec 4, 2021

timewerx said:
We might be able to enforce some kind of one "Purchasing ID" per household. This ID sets purchasing limit per week in "necessity items" including medicines and fuel to prevent hoarding.

It reeks of Russian socialism but NO, you're still paying for your own purchase, you're just not allowed to take as many as you think you need. It helps keep supplies sustainable for everyone and avoid price spikes/inflation.

Although consumerism can help create jobs, it can make paying the bills harder for the poor due to consumerism-driven inflation. You may have saved them with jobs but made the lives harder, what good is that? Higher profit margins and consumerism together, just hurt the poor.

Get rid of consumerism and you destroy the economy. Destroy the economy, and the poor are left to fend for themselves.

Rachel20 · Dec 4, 2021

timewerx said:
Only quick idea, I'm not sure if one actually exist, would be cool if it did, sadly, I can't develop apps yet.

I'm a programmer, but with a fossil degree & only C/C++ in windows/unix strength at this point And given current responsibilities, would just have no time to come up to speed. Maybe you have friends that could do it instead. Your idea just seems too good to let it go to waste.

timewerx · Dec 4, 2021

Ken-1122 said:
Get rid of consumerism and you destroy the economy. Destroy the economy, and the poor are left to fend for themselves.

I don't want the economy destroyed either.

But here's a food for thought, if we give everyone in the world free 100k per year salary under one condition they did not quit their jobs (unless they are no longer capable of working due to health or age reasons), we can all live good quality and comfortable lives...

Or could we?? Can the world's production and resources sustain it if we all decide to spend our money as the average 100k salary professionals do now?

partinobodycular · Dec 4, 2021

timewerx said:
Off my mind is an app that connects donors and poor families directly completely online so you can donate to families directly, eliminating the middleman. Donors and families who enroll in this app is background checked.

The only world in which this would work is a world in which it wasn't needed.

The rich and middle class to blame in the Covid Crisis?

I Spit On Perfection

Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape

the village i--o--t--

Well-Known Member

I Spit On Perfection

Well-Known Member

I Spit On Perfection

Well-Known Member

the village i--o--t--

Well-Known Member

the village i--o--t--

Well-Known Member

the village i--o--t--

Well-Known Member

No one important

the village i--o--t--

Newbie

Well-Known Member

the village i--o--t--

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency