All over the world most poor people want "redistribution of wealth", in one form or another, no matter what... the greater the gap, the greater the animosity and the least concern for the consequences.
And every person gets an equal vote. If the have-nots far outnumber the ones who have something, the climate is ripe for populism of the worst kind.
Be it Sweden or Liberia.
I don't have any good suggestions for you. Best I can muster for you is - Take what marketable skills you have and start applying to jobs elsewhere. Then when you get something and the visas are started, start selling everything of value and buy one way tickets out.Originally Posted by BigT
Teaching English is always a skill needed in many parts of the world. One does not necessarily have to leave for a developed country. Going to a developing country where at least the political climate isn't actively hostile towards you, is a step in the right direction.
But this underscores why refugee status is an important thing to be able to attain. If you're (universal you) being actively displaced by war or your own government then becoming a refugee may be the only alternative you have. The slower the bureaucracy is in processing your claims, the longer you have to become a victim of your own countrymen.
Truer words have yet to be written in this thread. If there is anything that is a true potential force against radical left or right wing policies of wealth "redistribution" it is a healthy middle class mixed with opportunity. For millennia we have seen that the nature of mankind creates inequality in any society, this will never change, but the severity, the degree, of the inequality can be limited by (and only by) a healthy and large middle class and by limited government.
Right now what we're seeing in the U.S. the true existential threat to our society here - is that more of our population is becoming poorer, not richer. As a result disparity is growing rapidly and thus so is the internal animosity. The conceptual idea that the government can fix this problem will be the final straw on this camel. Because our government has too much power and too many resources to use wisely as it is. Right now, all other "existential" threats to our society are simply distractions from the elephant in the room. I fear increasingly that our post-apocalyptic society in the US will look more like "The Purge" than "Judge Dredd".
Last edited by RevolverRob; 08-14-2018 at 10:55 AM.
I'd like to see data that supports this.
Being too lazy to go looking, I'd bet the data shows all people getting richer, with a widening gap between the richest and those in the middle to lower economic classes.
I don't want to live in a country with anything resembling a guarantee of equal outcomes.
1. Remove government subsidies for doing nothing.
2. Leave that job to charity.
(I know... fat chance)
/drift.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." - Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776
Rob: Does your university know that not only you are a gun owner but in favor of a healthy and large middle class (gasp) and limited government (ten-fold gasp)? Those views would have been heresy 40 years ago when I was in school, but today, can't you expect to be dragged out into the quad, fitted with a dunce cap and a large-characters board denouncing your sins and turned into an example pour encourager les autres?
(By the way, it really isn't correct that Western governments spent billions on colonialism, except perhaps on an inflation-adjusted basis. They were just doing what pretty much all countries in human history had always done, and did so pretty much on the cheap.)
Fuck no. I maybe stupid, inane, and an asshole, but I'm not crazy.
As a general rule, I don't talk politics in the office. Or money in the office. Or cultural norms in the office. Or hobbies in the office. In fact, I tend to not talk at the office (shocking as that may be). I'm seen as a bit "anti-social", because I don't mix business and personal life very much (ironically, the very thing we advocated for, for a long time in this country). I'm okay with this, because I get my business done and my excuse for not going out and drinking on Friday nights is, "I'm old and married." - Both of which are true particularly when compared to the 22-23 year old first year grad students (who also like to go drinking four of the other six nights of the week too), I'm 10-years their senior and prefer to sit at home drinking a glass of bourbon and watching LivePD on A&E with my wife and the dog.
I’m probably tilting at windmills posting this here-but at least I can put my business degree to use here.
In many countries like South Africa and our own US of A, racial segregation went beyond just social behaviors. It also applied to economic opportunity. Removing the racial segregation from the law is a lot faster of a process then removing those preexisting structural economic biases . If you don’t address those economic biases , then lasting discontent and unrest is assured when people realize their economic opportunities are blocked.
Now , economically speaking a blind land grab isn’t a good idea. Nor is unconstitutional government behavior. But if your nations history of economic racism means 10% of your population controls more then 50% of the wealth, it’s a problem which needs to be intelligently solved.
The Minority Marksman.
"When you meet a swordsman, draw your sword: Do not recite poetry to one who is not a poet."
-a Ch'an Buddhist axiom.
You can succeed using government force to undo bad government force (ex: Plessy v Ferguson).
You won't succeed using government force to change people's minds.
I'd argue that there are few government-erected economic barriers still in place that prevent people from moving up the economic ladder.
#1 on my list is poorly run public schools, #2 is welfare regulation that incentivizes negative outcomes. Neither of these is solved by MORE government.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." - Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776
It’s not really about changing minds, but ensuring everyone of all genders and races and backgrounds have the same opportunities ( read, not the same OUTCOMES) to work hard and succeed. That’s a hard economic challenge when you don’t have decades of legislated racism built in beforehand.
The Minority Marksman.
"When you meet a swordsman, draw your sword: Do not recite poetry to one who is not a poet."
-a Ch'an Buddhist axiom.
How do you make people BELIEVE they have the opportunities? How do you get them to change their actions?
How do you cause them to make the long-term investment in their futures, even when the playing field is exactly level?
-- You don't fix a 30-somethings lot in life by fixing public education.
-- You don't change their immediate economic, social, living, situation by providing an unbiased marketplace.
-- You can't fix multi-generational mindset by legislation. (you can fix bad incentives! but economic change takes time).
Is a marketplace that's biased towards "righting wrongs" (rather than "equal opportunity) necessary? How far should the marketplace be biased to induce desired behaviors?
What negative behaviors does such a biased economic marketplace induce?
How much "perfection is the enemy of progress" do we tolerate and what do we do about the expectation of immediacy of results (expectation setting)?
IMO, we've come much farther along in removing institutional barriers than we have in achieving real economic results . Where would you look to fix this?
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." - Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776
No easy answer to your questions, imho. I won't even begin to talk about the problems of another country, culture and society.
Looking strictly at ourselves...we've legislated most inequality away in one fashion or another. Attempted affirmative action as a solution to move things along...
...but it seems for every good intention there's an equal and opposite reaction.
Give preference to minorities, the disadvantaged or inner city youth and those who do not fit those parameters but otherwise meet the qualifications (save for a large pocketbook) find themselves resentful for being passed over. (The wealthy can more easily find other routes to their destination.)
The minority or otherwise disadvantaged individual who makes it through the gauntlet of neighborhood, decaying public school and eventually through the university system feels resentful for being passed over for a position he or she is qualified for because those in charge of hiring don't feel comfortable selecting them (for any number or real or imagined reasons...unless it's to the company's benefit).
I'm painting with a broad brush. But it's the way it is. When I was coming up, it was Vietnam Vets and minorities who got favored status for LE or gov't positions. There was occasionally resentment and frustration involved. On the other hand, I've seen the same obstacles being faced by qualified individuals on the other side of the ledger.
I don't know how these things can be "fixed" except by fiat or legislation which requires certain actions...and we've seen how well that works out.
So, in the end I think the struggle goes through something akin to the oft referenced Hegelian swings from thesis to antithesis to synthesis.
It's gonna take better minds (and angels) than mine to come up with a solution.
Last edited by blues; 08-14-2018 at 01:56 PM.
There's nothing civil about this war.
Reply With Quote
