K.Snyder;977987 wrote: You have that right except your missing about half of it...
I have a problem with people being rich upon any way they've received it because I feel the worth of a dollar is not limitless...I feel that each job should have a set amount one is allowed to make and upon a 0% poverty rate being achieved then and only then do I feel allowing a peoples to make "riches" above necessity...
Obviously inheritance in this system would be non existent...
The system would consist of businesses being exempt of revenue sharing by virtue of merit...That's to say that a business to whom has invested in another business venture from which is benefiting the cause to achieve a 0% poverty rate would only be subject to the shared revenue sanction in retrospect to all of said businesses' entities...
And as I've said the point above the 0% poverty rate would see all businesses keep their profits without being sanctioned above said achievement...
OK--------------
Maybe we should have discussed POVERTY at the outset. What's your definition of poverty? One person's poverty can be another person's wealth depending on where you live.
Redistribution of Wealth
Redistribution of Wealth
Lon;978232 wrote: OK--------------
Maybe we should have discussed POVERTY at the outset. What's your definition of poverty? One person's poverty can be another person's wealth depending on where you live.
Dependent on where they live would obviously be the start...
I'll use the United States of America to start...But also what needs to be taken into account is not only local economy but local crime, local job opportunities and local health administration(Health care is the biggest business in the world and will remain so forever. Even in an ideal society. Think about it.)...I'd expect someone born homeless next to great fishing opportunities than someone born in the Arizona dessert would have a better life wouldn't you?...
Ohio -
I personally feel given todays' economy that anyone to whom does not take in more than $6,000/yr in the state of Ohio without the benefit of payed insurance with poor residential constructions would be someone in the middle echelons of poverty in the United States...This gives you a somewhat broad perspective of my opinion...
What is your idea of poverty?...
Maybe we should have discussed POVERTY at the outset. What's your definition of poverty? One person's poverty can be another person's wealth depending on where you live.
Dependent on where they live would obviously be the start...
I'll use the United States of America to start...But also what needs to be taken into account is not only local economy but local crime, local job opportunities and local health administration(Health care is the biggest business in the world and will remain so forever. Even in an ideal society. Think about it.)...I'd expect someone born homeless next to great fishing opportunities than someone born in the Arizona dessert would have a better life wouldn't you?...
Ohio -
I personally feel given todays' economy that anyone to whom does not take in more than $6,000/yr in the state of Ohio without the benefit of payed insurance with poor residential constructions would be someone in the middle echelons of poverty in the United States...This gives you a somewhat broad perspective of my opinion...
What is your idea of poverty?...
Redistribution of Wealth
K.Snyder;978981 wrote: Dependent on where they live would obviously be the start...
I'll use the United States of America to start...But also what needs to be taken into account is not only local economy but local crime, local job opportunities and local health administration(Health care is the biggest business in the world and will remain so forever. Even in an ideal society. Think about it.)...I'd expect someone born homeless next to great fishing opportunities than someone born in the Arizona dessert wouldn't you?...
Ohio -
I personally feel given todays' economy that anyone to whom does not take in more than $6,000 in the state of Ohio without the benefit of payed insurance with poor residential constructions would be someone in the middle echelons of poverty in the United States...This gives you a somewhat broad perspective of my opinion...
What is your idea of poverty?...
You are right on about Health Care, it's huge and will get bigger. Not sure I follow what you are saying about the fishing ---dessert comparison.
Without putting a dollar figure on it I think of poverty as not having adequate clothing to protect one's self from the elements, not having sufficient food to sustain one's body. not having sufficient shelter from the elements. That's a far cry from poverty as defined by the U.S. government.
I'll use the United States of America to start...But also what needs to be taken into account is not only local economy but local crime, local job opportunities and local health administration(Health care is the biggest business in the world and will remain so forever. Even in an ideal society. Think about it.)...I'd expect someone born homeless next to great fishing opportunities than someone born in the Arizona dessert wouldn't you?...
Ohio -
I personally feel given todays' economy that anyone to whom does not take in more than $6,000 in the state of Ohio without the benefit of payed insurance with poor residential constructions would be someone in the middle echelons of poverty in the United States...This gives you a somewhat broad perspective of my opinion...
What is your idea of poverty?...
You are right on about Health Care, it's huge and will get bigger. Not sure I follow what you are saying about the fishing ---dessert comparison.
Without putting a dollar figure on it I think of poverty as not having adequate clothing to protect one's self from the elements, not having sufficient food to sustain one's body. not having sufficient shelter from the elements. That's a far cry from poverty as defined by the U.S. government.
Redistribution of Wealth
Lon;978989 wrote: You are right on about Health Care, it's huge and will get bigger. Not sure I follow what you are saying about the fishing ---dessert comparison.
Without putting a dollar figure on it I think of poverty as not having adequate clothing to protect one's self from the elements, not having sufficient food to sustain one's body. not having sufficient shelter from the elements. That's a far cry from poverty as defined by the U.S. government.
Well,..when you have outrageous real estate prices(From which anyone to whom claims land of EARTH to be theirs simply because they were their first, or stronger, is my enemy!!!) then poverty can only be defined as such within that type of society...
And the Dessert - Fishing comparison is just the emphasizing of how important it is to associate "poverty" with as many details as innately possible...To say "poverty" in association with a gradient as large as "The United States of America" is uneducated and unmotivated...
Without putting a dollar figure on it I think of poverty as not having adequate clothing to protect one's self from the elements, not having sufficient food to sustain one's body. not having sufficient shelter from the elements. That's a far cry from poverty as defined by the U.S. government.
Well,..when you have outrageous real estate prices(From which anyone to whom claims land of EARTH to be theirs simply because they were their first, or stronger, is my enemy!!!) then poverty can only be defined as such within that type of society...
And the Dessert - Fishing comparison is just the emphasizing of how important it is to associate "poverty" with as many details as innately possible...To say "poverty" in association with a gradient as large as "The United States of America" is uneducated and unmotivated...
Redistribution of Wealth
K.Snyder;979002 wrote: Well,..when you have outrageous real estate prices(From which anyone to whom claims land of EARTH to be theirs simply because they were their first, or stronger, is my enemy!!!) then poverty can only be defined as such within that type of society...
And the Dessert - Fishing comparison is just the emphasizing of how important it is to associate "poverty" with as many details as innately possible...To say "poverty" in association with a gradient as large as "The United States of America" is uneducated and unmotivated...
Hey K. S.------no offense, but have you been drinking?
And the Dessert - Fishing comparison is just the emphasizing of how important it is to associate "poverty" with as many details as innately possible...To say "poverty" in association with a gradient as large as "The United States of America" is uneducated and unmotivated...
Hey K. S.------no offense, but have you been drinking?
Redistribution of Wealth
Lon;979040 wrote: Hey K. S.------no offense, but have you been drinking?
No.
And no offense taken.
No.
And no offense taken.