The End Of Poverty Is Never Coming!

[Tony C]

I can sum up most of the posts in this thread!

"Its not their fault!!!!"

Poverty is hereditary. You get it from your parents or in most cases Parent (singular).
If the person who raised you has no ambition, Craves instant Gratification and fails to accept responibility for their actions odds are you will be a poor schmuck also.
If the person who raised you believes that Sammy didn't cheat, That you shouldn't have to pay for electricity and that the Goverment should provide a job and an income for you then you will be another poor drain on society also.

I am dying to hear the psuedo-intellectual ideas that are soon to follow!

 

[Tordok]

Tony C,
Your argument has some validity, in the sense that such things as cycles of poverty do exist. That is nothing new.

It is a pretty well established fact that it is a lot harder to get out of poverty if you are born into it. BTW, it is also a lot easier to be wealthy if you are born into that. But that argument alone does not explain every case.

Since it seems that you find science and facts difficult to understand I'll skip the part where I was going to elaborate on your faulty definitions and logic.

But I must mention that your vague references to the myth of wealth accumulation as the material success of an isolated, solitary effort is wrong.

You might want to balance out that misleading factoid by
acknowledging that prosperous honest people get their wealth, in large part, due to things beyond their individual control, which is obvious to any objective observer but studiously ignored by those with a cut-social-spending political agenda.

- Tordok
Ignorance is bliss...and righteous.

 

[deelt]

Wish I had more time to get into this debate...

Tordok,

Yes, balance is key. I couldn't agree with you more. I am more of the Peter Evans and Amartya Sen ideology of "development is a process." I think here you and I may agree. The problem is that while capacity building (and its gradations) sound sexy and righteous in practice it is viewed as a threat.

It's been a while since I recalled Fukuyama's work, but I think his take on it is wishful thinking at best. While nature is a great teacher, human behavior can often be spontaneous and unpredictable. Rather than following consistent behavior, humans tend to expouse extremes and then find compromises. (I guess you can argue that this in itself is inherently consistent, but my take is that the outcome still remains unpredictable).

Communism, as practiced, is not a pure reflection of what Marx proposed.
Can a "pure" (how I hate that word) form of communism ever be applied? I do not think so since our natural human instincts is to protect our interests. Marx actually calls for a balance that can never be achieved IMO. Among the major players left is China which basically runs on a market-based system that sits under the cloud of so-called communism.

Again, I wish I had more time to flush out things and refresh on some of the literature references, but time stops for no one. Til another day, another thread.

Blessings,
D

Some capitalist intellectuals (Francis Fukuyama, the most obvious one with his book The End of History) have argued that with the demise of the communist empires those historical struggles between ideologies as we've known them had ended. Statism, as in soviet communism was doomed for failure as it went against the natural instincts of our species to be free. And i agree that equality cannot be forced and sooner or later such systems implode.
- Tordok

 

[Tony C]

Tony C,
Your argument has some validity, in the sense that such things as cycles of poverty do exist. That is nothing new.

It is a pretty well established fact that it is a lot harder to get out of poverty if you are born into it. BTW, it is also a lot easier to be wealthy if you are born into that. But that argument alone does not explain every case.

Since it seems that you find science and facts difficult to understand I'll skip the part where I was going to elaborate on your faulty definitions and logic.

But I must mention that your vague references to the myth of wealth accumulation as the material success of an isolated, solitary effort is wrong.

You might want to balance out that misleading factoid by
acknowledging that prosperous honest people get their wealth, in large part, due to things beyond their individual control, which is obvious to any objective observer but studiously ignored by those with a cut-social-spending political agenda.

- Tordok
Ignorance is bliss...and righteous.

See what I mean? It's not their fault it is the US, Corporation, Rich People's fault!

Tordok...Making money is easy. Keeping it is the hard part. Did you ever stop and think that maybe it is because "Rich" people better educate their youth? And that leads to the next generations success?

I really doubt that all of the poor people in this world have never heard that it just might be better to work/Save/Accept responsiblity. The problem is people like you who tell them it is not their fault, it is a conspiracy and that they need help from the Goverment.

As long as one poor person works hard and becomes a success it destroys all of you theories!

Tony C.
Rex Mundi

 

[deelt]

I'm sure Tordok can defend himself

But, Tony C, I can't resist. Dude where are you coming from on this?
You really think that a child with parents with NO education will be able to relay the same quality education as a child living with parents who both possess grad school degrees? How about the fact that in some of the cases there may not even be SCHOOLS available. Has that ever factored into your equation? I am all for saving and accepting of responsibility when the playing field is LEVELED. In some cases it is not.

I am your case study. While I have been very fortunate to have taken advantage of some small programs I recognize that I was only one of a few that could have entered into some of the programs I did. This was while in HS. It gave me the advantage I needed because I WAS NOT GETTING IT IN SCHOOL OR AT HOME. There programs that provided the extra help are not available to all the children that need them. There were also many things that were out of my control.

Interestingly, I heard an amazing story not to long ago from a friend who is a COO of a company in my area. He had an amazing teacher in Junior HS that saw some potential among the mire of the 'hood. He mysteriously obtained a full scholarship to an exclusive board school and to an Ivy league. He later found out it was this teacher that saw this potential in him. Not all kids have this opportunity and not all teachers can do this for all kids. He could just as quickly have become a statistic.

You have to recognize that there are too many grays in your black & white world.

Tordok...Making money is easy. Keeping it is the hard part. Did you ever stop and think that maybe it is because "Rich" people better educate their youth? And that leads to the next generations success?

I really doubt that all of the poor people in this world have never heard that it just might be better to work/Save/Accept responsiblity. The problem is people like you who tell them it is not their fault, it is a conspiracy and that they need help from the Goverment.

As long as one poor person works hard and becomes a success it destroys all of you theories!

Tony C.
Rex Mundi

 

[Texas Bill]

Deelt-you have just described---

But, Tony C, I can't resist. Dude where are you coming from on this?
You really think that a child with parents with NO education will be able to relay the same quality education as a child living with parents who both possess grad school degrees? How about the fact that in some of the cases there may not even be SCHOOLS available. Has that ever factored into your equation? I am all for saving and accepting of responsibility when the playing field is LEVELED. In some cases it is not.

I am your case study. While I have been very fortunate to have taken advantage of some small programs I recognize that I was only one of a few that could have entered into some of the programs I did. This was while in HS. It gave me the advantage I needed because I WAS NOT GETTING IT IN SCHOOL OR AT HOME. There programs that provided the extra help are not available to all the children that need them. There were also many things that were out of my control.

Interestingly, I heard an amazing story not to long ago from a friend who is a COO of a company in my area. He had an amazing teacher in Junior HS that saw some potential among the mire of the 'hood. He mysteriously obtained a full scholarship to an exclusive board school and to an Ivy league. He later found out it was this teacher that saw this potential in him. Not all kids have this opportunity and not all teachers can do this for all kids. He could just as quickly have become a statistic.

You have to recognize that there are too many grays in your black & white world.

what many on this board have been saying!

Where the individual takes advantage of the opportunities available, they will succeed through THEIR OWN EFFORTS!

It is those who do not, or ignore, those opportunities that will forever remain in the milieu of poverty and it's constituency.

An in depth study of welfare programs in the US and their insidious undermining of natural survival instincts should turn on the light for you. It wasn't until those people in those programs were forced to begin work or lose their welfare that the welfare population quit expanding exponentially.
I grew up during the Great Depression in the US and lookig back realize that there was a segment of the population who benefited greatly from the WPA, CCC, AAA, NRA and like programs. However there were those who became dependent on those programs and similar one forever---including their children.

Social programs are, in and of themselves, nothing but a stop-gap measure, designed to accomodate temporary situations. Unfortunately, these temporary measures tend to become self-perpetuating and in the long run tend to destroy that indefinable element of ambition we are all initially endowed with. The results are two dis-enchanted segments of society which resent the other and smoke screen the elements originally creating the problem.

Then there are those who will not ever recognize opportunity no matter how loudly it knocks. They haven't the mental capacity to do so and therefore will forever remain stuck in poverty and non-production socially and economically.

Texas Bill

 

[xamaicano]

what many on this board have been saying!

Where the individual takes advantage of the opportunities available, they will succeed through THEIR OWN EFFORTS!

It is those who do not, or ignore, those opportunities that will forever remain in the milieu of poverty and it's constituency.

An in depth study of welfare programs in the US and their insidious undermining of natural survival instincts should turn on the light for you. It wasn't until those people in those programs were forced to begin work or lose their welfare that the welfare population quit expanding exponentially.
I grew up during the Great Depression in the US and lookig back realize that there was a segment of the population who benefited greatly from the WPA, CCC, AAA, NRA and like programs. However there were those who became dependent on those programs and similar one forever---including their children.

Social programs are, in and of themselves, nothing but a stop-gap measure, designed to accomodate temporary situations. Unfortunately, these temporary measures tend to become self-perpetuating and in the long run tend to destroy that indefinable element of ambition we are all initially endowed with. The results are two dis-enchanted segments of society which resent the other and smoke screen the elements originally creating the problem.

Then there are those who will not ever recognize opportunity no matter how loudly it knocks. They haven't the mental capacity to do so and therefore will forever remain stuck in poverty and non-production socially and economically.

Texas Bill

I really don't think this is fair. In U.S., we have many resources and opportunities to facilitate success. However, there a people in this world who are poor and will forever be poor despite their best efforts. A kid born in a trash heap in Guatemala to illiterate parents who can barely afford to feed him is not going to benefit from the latest Tony Robbins CD. The reality is, a Dominican at lowest end of social ladder would have to work really hard to bring his standard of living up to a U.S. welfare recipient.

 

[Texas Bill]

Obviously, none of you---

I really don't think this is fair. In U.S., we have many resources and opportunities to facilitate success. However, there a people in this world who are poor and will forever be poor despite their best efforts. A kid born in a trash heap in Guatemala to illiterate parents who can barely afford to feed him is not going to benefit from the latest Tony Robbins CD. The reality is, a Dominican at lowest end of social ladder would have to work really hard to bring his standard of living up to a U.S. welfare recipient.

have given cognizance to what you are so blithly writing about. You seem to think that merely identifying the problem of world poverty will sead to a solution.

I ask you, in all seriousness, do you have ANY idea of the scope of the problem, as you se it, that you are/have been discussing??? I truly think not. It seem to me that you're just babbling to hear and view your own words and elevate yourselves in the eyes of the readers. You are complaining about something that has been a part of the human equation since the human race first dropped out of the trees and started walking upright.
We have, in large part, contributed to this problem by advances in agriculture, broadened economic bases, provided relief (on a temporary basis) and have devised international programs toward poverty elimination. Vertually no man made efforts have been effective; and we interrupt natures leveller of famine and epidemics. That's a brutal and cynical way to put it, but true. Le's face it, the human race is multiplying itself into world wide poverty and there is very little we can do about it.
Many of you are implying that the solution is merely a matter of the 'rich' nations giving their wealth to the 'poor' nations. You know that won't work. Even the economic middle class, who normally support charitble contributions, would balk at such a venture.

For my part, and I say this without any reservations, I'll let the poor in poverty remain there and sink or swim by their own efforts. Been there, done that, except that I took advantage of every single opportunity that came my way and made a few on my own. I set a goal for myself and attained it through pure and simple stick-to-it-veness (now there's a coined phrase for you). I had a lot of disappointments, but I also had a lot of successes. I didn't make any excuses for my failures, but put my nose back to the grindstone and continued to do what I had to do to succeed. That's the formula---

I live comfortably now because of a combination military and civilian career that have given me a reasonable retirement income.

I say that anyone can drag themselves out of where ever they are/born into and make their way in the world if they will but concentrate on that objective and not let ANYTHING stand in their way.

I know you will have negative comments, and thats OK. I just know better.

Texas Bill

 

[xamaicano]

have given cognizance to what you are so blithly writing about. You seem to think that merely identifying the problem of world poverty will sead to a solution.

I ask you, in all seriousness, do you have ANY idea of the scope of the problem, as you se it, that you are/have been discussing??? I truly think not. It seem to me that you're just babbling to hear and view your own words and elevate yourselves in the eyes of the readers. You are complaining about something that has been a part of the human equation since the human race first dropped out of the trees and started walking upright.
We have, in large part, contributed to this problem by advances in agriculture, broadened economic bases, provided relief (on a temporary basis) and have devised international programs toward poverty elimination. Vertually no man made efforts have been effective; and we interrupt natures leveller of famine and epidemics. That's a brutal and cynical way to put it, but true. Le's face it, the human race is multiplying itself into world wide poverty and there is very little we can do about it.
Many of you are implying that the solution is merely a matter of the 'rich' nations giving their wealth to the 'poor' nations. You know that won't work. Even the economic middle class, who normally support charitble contributions, would balk at such a venture.

For my part, and I say this without any reservations, I'll let the poor in poverty remain there and sink or swim by their own efforts. Been there, done that, except that I took advantage of every single opportunity that came my way and made a few on my own. I set a goal for myself and attained it through pure and simple stick-to-it-veness (now there's a coined phrase for you). I had a lot of disappointments, but I also had a lot of successes. I didn't make any excuses for my failures, but put my nose back to the grindstone and continued to do what I had to do to succeed. That's the formula---

I live comfortably now because of a combination military and civilian career that have given me a reasonable retirement income.

I say that anyone can drag themselves out of where ever they are/born into and make their way in the world if they will but concentrate on that objective and not let ANYTHING stand in their way.

I know you will have negative comments, and thats OK. I just know better.

Texas Bill

I'm sorry but what in my post warranted such a pissy little response. It is quite possible to get your point across without being so snotty. I was merely pointing out that some people do not and will never have enough resources to simple pull themselves up by their bootstraps and become prosperous. I mean, it really doesn't take an intellectual giant to grasp that overcoming poverty in U.S. is a lot easier than most places in the world, which was the only point of my post. I said nothing about rich nations giving anything to poor nations or half things you are blathering about. But I guess you needed your daily dose of telling off some young whippersnapper off.

 

[Tony C]

I really don't think this is fair. In U.S., we have many resources and opportunities to facilitate success. However, there a people in this world who are poor and will forever be poor despite their best efforts. A kid born in a trash heap in Guatemala to illiterate parents who can barely afford to feed him is not going to benefit from the latest Tony Robbins CD. The reality is, a Dominican at lowest end of social ladder would have to work really hard to bring his standard of living up to a U.S. welfare recipient.

Excuse me?
Did I say it was easy? All I said was that it can be done! The DR(and any other country for that matter) is full of stories of people who had nothing and then became sucessful through hard work, perserverance and responsiblity.

 

[xamaicano]

Excuse me?
Did I say it was easy? All I said was that it can be done! The DR(and any other country for that matter) is full of stories of people who had nothing and then became sucessful through hard work, perserverance and responsiblity.

I understand that and I agree. I simply took exception with comparing overcoming poverty in the U.S. (relatively not that difficult) to doing it in a thirld world country (a whole different ball game). We've seen time and time again that people who manage to escape their meager existence in their own country, thrive in the U.S. within a short time. So obviously, these people were capable of hard work, perseverance and responsibility to succeed, they simply lacked the opportunity. In U.S. there is an effort (some effective and not so effective), whether it be by the government, private organizations or individuals to provide resources for success and it only a matter of the individual to take advantage of these resources. In some countries, these resources doesn't exist and in others there is even an concerted effort by the ruling class to make access to such resources difficult. For instance, in some countries if I have right government connections I can crush any competing businesses no matter how hard they work. If the mechanisms are not in place to accomodate social mobility, outside of crime it, it becomes extremely difficult.

 

[Texas Bill]

I'm sorry but what in my post warranted such a pissy little response. It is quite possible to get your point across without being so snotty. I was merely pointing out that some people do not and will never have enough resources to simple pull themselves up by their bootstraps and become prosperous. I mean, it really doesn't take an intellectual giant to grasp that overcoming poverty in U.S. is a lot easier than most places in the world, which was the only point of my post. I said nothing about rich nations giving anything to poor nations or half things you are blathering about. But I guess you needed your daily dose of telling off some young whippersnapper off.

And I'm sorry you took my post as a direct attack on you! That wasn't the intention at all, much less 'telling some yourng whippersnapper off'!
My post was directed primarily at those who give verbal support to world-wide relief of poverty when such an endeavor just isn't possible given the financial cost of such. These same people are continually lambasting the 'rich' nations, without just cause, in an effort to place the blame upon those nations for something that is endemic to the human population.
And, YES, i agree with you that not all nations offer the same opportunities, from an economic platform, for their inhabitants to 'better' themselves economically. I don't know what the answer is and I have studied the problem indepth since my college days of the middle 40's. The only solution I have been able to embrace with conviction is one of reducing the world's population. No nation will long survive when consumption outstrips production. It must seek outside imports of foodstuffs to survive and the 3rd world just doessn't have the recources for that.
Africa, India and China are the most populated areas of this globe. The first two have made some progress in succcessfuly stiffling their population growth because of government intervention and education. The latter has been so disrupted so much and so often with civil disturbances and genocede so as to neutralize any effective programs toward that end by individual governments and the UN. So, what is one to do? Just wait it out and hope for the best. We just must realize that the dream of an 'El Dorado' is just that, a dream.

My apologies for offending you; it wasn't intentional.

Texas Bill

 

[Texas Bill]

I understand that and I agree. I simply took exception with comparing overcoming poverty in the U.S. (relatively not that difficult) to doing it in a thirld world country (a whole different ball game). We've seen time and time again that people who manage to escape their meager existence in their own country, thrive in the U.S. within a short time. So obviously, these people were capable of hard work, perseverance and responsibility to succeed, they simply lacked the opportunity. In U.S. there is an effort (some effective and not so effective), whether it be by the government, private organizations or individuals to provide resources for success and it only a matter of the individual to take advantage of these resources. In some countries, these resources doesn't exist and in others there is even an concerted effort by the ruling class to make access to such resources difficult. For instance, in some countries if I have right government connections I can crush any competing businesses no matter how hard they work. If the mechanisms are not in place to accomodate social mobility, outside of crime it, it becomes extremely difficult.

I agree with you 100% in your summation of the deterrents to individual progress under SOME governments.
That scenario is fairly prevelent amoung the 3rd world nations. Monopolism is the way they do business. None of them like competition and the 'haves' are very afraid of the 'have nots' to the point of overt supression of opportunity in any endeavors. That's the character (or lack of it) of the class.

Texas Bill

 

[Tordok]

See what I mean? It's not their fault it is the US, Corporation, Rich People's fault!

Tordok...Making money is easy. Keeping it is the hard part. Did you ever stop and think that maybe it is because "Rich" people better educate their youth? And that leads to the next generations success?

I really doubt that all of the poor people in this world have never heard that it just might be better to work/Save/Accept responsiblity. The problem is people like you who tell them it is not their fault, it is a conspiracy and that they need help from the Goverment.

As long as one poor person works hard and becomes a success it destroys all of you theories!

Tony C.
Rex Mundi

Hey Rex Mundi,
I do understand your argument, and do not entirely disagree with it. I have not favored giving anything to poor people just for the sake of throwing money into wasteful programs and bureucracies. But I do believe that free societies need to INVEST in their populations, including and especially in those among the less privileged. It is perfectly a rational capitalist concept to invest in people.

Those investments should come in all shapes and forms, with direct welfare as most extremely rare, but instead in improving schools, effective police crime-control policies, access to healthcare (especially mental health care), entrepeneurial lending, civics, substance abuse prevention, etc..
Businnesses, communities and governments can choose how to invest in their constituency of labor, consumers, and tax-paying citizens. Things can improve if the right balance is achieved. Over-involvement from government is not warranted nor desirable. But they have an obligation to design policies and the monitoring/enforcement of those.

Every individual should and must be accountable for all of their actions, the good and the bad ones. There are some inexcusable cases of perennial poverty, crime, and disease from folks with sociopathic tendencies, but these are a minority that will always exist in every society. Look no further than your local jailhouse. But most of the poor are misfortuned decent, hard-working families.

Texas Bill,

Please read below an excerpt from one my previous posts on this thread. I do not single out in blame of "rich" nations only. It is clear that most poorer nations have failed in their responsibilities and without fixing their chronic corruption mentality they are doomed. Complicated problems will always require complicated solutions. I'm not sure of any definitive solutions, but I tend to be an optimist-pragmatist , and can see the wisdom in trying to do something to help reduce or eradicate poverty rather than just watch misery pass me by.

I am not letting you guys label me one thing or the other. I am not a pollyanish-pinkie nor an I-know-it-all right-wing-evangelical-zealot type.
I am an independently minded individual but I am open to ideas from all corners of human experience. You and Tony C, reject certain concepts purely on the basis that they might seem ideological to you, rather than the simply logical efforts that they are.

cheers,

- Tordok

At a global level a similar argument can be made, but only after major political and social reforms are put into place. Economic tribalism is predatory and it remains prevalent around the world. So poor countries are at fault. The wealthy countries and its multinationals have a grip on the control panel and thus they are also at fault. If they were to practise globally what they have accomplished nationally, then chances of eradicating poverty might have a chance.
- Tordok

 

[Tordok]

Tordok,

Yes, balance is key. I couldn't agree with you more. I am more of the Peter Evans and Amartya Sen ideology of "development is a process." I think here you and I may agree. The problem is that while capacity building (and its gradations) sound sexy and righteous in practice it is viewed as a threat.

It's been a while since I recalled Fukuyama's work, but I think his take on it is wishful thinking at best. While nature is a great teacher, human behavior can often be spontaneous and unpredictable. Rather than following consistent behavior, humans tend to expouse extremes and then find compromises. (I guess you can argue that this in itself is inherently consistent, but my take is that the outcome still remains unpredictable).

Communism, as practiced, is not a pure reflection of what Marx proposed.
Can a "pure" (how I hate that word) form of communism ever be applied? I do not think so since our natural human instincts is to protect our interests. Marx actually calls for a balance that can never be achieved IMO. Among the major players left is China which basically runs on a market-based system that sits under the cloud of so-called communism.

Again, I wish I had more time to flush out things and refresh on some of the literature references, but time stops for no one. Til another day, another thread.

Blessings,
D

Howdy Deelt,
Thank you for the review of my comments. Absolute balance would seem predetermined by nature not to be achievable. This should hold true under any kind of socio-economic system. I happen to disagree with Marxism even on a theoretical basis, and even more so in its experience. But the constant striving towards accomplishing that balance is what moves humanity. Poverty is pernicious and has a growth tendency. Different methods to fix our problems can be used, from the right, the left, or anywhere in between. Sometimes we might have the technical solutions but lack the political dynamics or structures that can make them happen.

Regardless of the ideological source of the proposed remedies, at least they are responding to a perceived big problem. Unfortunately some people apparently still choose not to see poverty as "their" problem.

But I can assure them that these are indeed problems for everyone. As long as we all share the same real estate (Earth) the problems of one are the problems of all. It is inevitable that our fates are interconnected, the poor and the rich, the virtuous and the criminal, the sane and the insane, the conservatives and the liberals. Just because I have the privileges of education and baseline advantageous social position does not eliminate my sense of human resposibility and concern for those who perish in miserable conditions in Santo Domingo and elsewhere. I could say "is-not-my-fault-and-I-can't do-anything-about-it". That would accomplish nothing, and at the end of the day we all still have a big problem.
cheers,

- Tordok

 

[NALs]

Poverty, its not going away...

Discussion about inequalities and poverty have been circulating among the different social circles of the different societies of our world for centuries. In the past, it was the difference between the nobles and the sefs, then it was the difference between the colonialist and the slaves, today its the differences between the rich and the poor.

In all those cases, but in different timeperiod the bottom line was this: society will always consist of haves and have nots. A country with haves and have more (like Saudi Arabia) will have trouble in properly developing its economy. Saudi Arabia (and some other sorrounding nations) actually import people to do the menial jobs, not because its cheaper to import, but because no Saudi will clean his/her own mess.

In the complete opposite stands the Dominican Republic. DR has an over abundance of unskilled people. So, how can the DR bring economic benefits to these people? Well, one of the following:

1) Develop Free Trade Financial Centers (like Zona Francas, but these will be either a collection of office towers in central areas of SDQ and STG and office parks in other smaller towns). The same rules as in Zona Francas apply here, with no taxes levied on the companies within the Zone, etc. The gov should then invite major multinational corporations to move their most expensive headquarters operations from the first world to the DR to cut down on cost. Then, the DR should make it extremely easy (almost hassle free) the flow of highly skilled workers from countries like Mexico, India, Thailand, etc. These workers would have to be employed by the multinational before they migrate to the DR, and then, the DR would grant them a special no hassle visa to come and live in the DR while they are working for the company that brought them here. Also, the companies will be required to set up recruitment centers in the most important universities in the DR so that Dominican University graduates could also benefit from this source of new jobs.

This will help the unskilled workers because the companies are going to need to maintain the buildings, the grounds, the infrastructure. Every single genator, electrician, etc. must be a Dominican national. Depending on the size of the Free Trade Financial Zone, there is potential to increase the level of employment a good percentage.

The DR could also offer other incentives for companies that encourage the Dominican employees who are parents to emphasize the importance of education and doing good in school. This should penetrate into the parents psychological scheme of things and in return, will influence their childrens attitude towards studying and might make them stick it all the way through.

2) The DR government could send interest groups to major economies of the world and economies who are desperate for low skilled workers (Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, etc) to import more and more Dominicans. That should aleviate some of the pressure of the poor in the DR, free up more resources to be distributed in better quantity among the poor since their numbers will decline a bit, and also allow for more remittances to be sent from abroad, further helping the DR in the short term.

Which ever plan the DR chooses, or if both are implemented, simultaneously the DR would have to increase its spending on educational institutions, law enforcement institutions, tax evaders, and other institutions that are in disrepair. The DR should restructure the taxes by imposing personal income tax and eliminating the ITBIS, since ITBIS taxes everyone at the same percentage, but that percentage could mean a lot to a poor person. 25% of 100,000 dollars is has a totally different impact from 25% of 1,000 dollars when the cost of living is relatively higher for the person with 1,000 dollars than for the person with 100,000 dollars in terms of percentage of income devoted to their standard of living.

Also, a reform in the military to turn it into a border patrol unit is essential. The migration flows of the island would remain as they are now, mostly going east, but their needs to be implemented the laws of migration. If a person crosses illegally, then that person is a criminal in the eyes of the law and shall be punished according to the migration laws specification. Companies and citizens that higher illegal labor (even illegal immigrants who prostitute themselves, survive off the informal sector, or do house work) shall be punished according to the specification of the law.

This is only a sampling of the things the DR could do in trying to fix its problems.

 

[deelt]

TB, this is an issue of perception...

While I think we agree more than we disagree, her I go to again to play devil's advocate.

A lot of what occurred both in the cases I presented, were beyond my control. It should not necessarily have to be this way.

what many on this board have been saying!

Where the individual takes advantage of the opportunities available, they will succeed through THEIR OWN EFFORTS!

One has to be taught when to recognize the opportunity when they see it, else it is a concept out of their understanding and out of their comfort zone.
I studied because I rebeled within the home. There are families that refuse to have their children read and learn. I can tell you becaused I lived it and saw it. A child that is obedient in this case scenario will suffer for something that is beyond their control. Not everyone has an ideal supportive environment in which to learn or is able to escape to one. It can be just as simple as opening a library.

It is those who do not, or ignore, those opportunities that will forever remain in the milieu of poverty and it's constituency.

Yes the previous design of welfare programs did create a disincentive to work. I could not agree with you more. The Mormon privatized model that is currently used works better. I am a strong supporter for it. However, the previous welfare programs were not functional because THE LIVABLE WAGE SUCKED. If you can make more money sitting on your butt on welfare than working at a McDs, then this is a RATIONAL CHOICE. However, if the case were reversed, then this hunger and ambition would kick in. This would also be a RATIONAL CHOICE.

I believe you mentioned that you benefitted from your hard work, opportunities, the GI Bill. However, many people who fit your profile in the US also benefitted from FHA loans. This was the SINGLE most damaging effect creating the chism reflect in the huge economic disparities that exists between whites and blacks in the US. As you prospered from FHA loan type policies, redlining practices were mainstreamed everywhere, separating previously poor whites from blacks. The property VALUE of "selected" FHA loans increased substantially which in turn directly impacted ASSET porfolios of many white veterans, now resulting in the "Two Americas." None of this is a coincidence. This was programmed policy that was just, barely, recently corrected. This discrepancy in wealth is still felt today. While I am not one to constantly support the victim mentality, not all is as black and white as it seems. Everyone needs to understand that there are RAMIFICATIONS to these older policies that we are still dealing with TODAY. But slowly, we are effecting change.

An in depth study of welfare programs in the US and their insidious undermining of natural survival instincts should turn on the light for you. It wasn't until those people in those programs were forced to begin work or lose their welfare that the welfare population quit expanding exponentially.
I grew up during the Great Depression in the US and lookig back realize that there was a segment of the population who benefited greatly from the WPA, CCC, AAA, NRA and like programs. However there were those who became dependent on those programs and similar one forever---including their children.

Social programs are, in and of themselves, nothing but a stop-gap measure, designed to accomodate temporary situations. Unfortunately, these temporary measures tend to become self-perpetuating and in the long run tend to destroy that indefinable element of ambition we are all initially endowed with. The results are two dis-enchanted segments of society which resent the other and smoke screen the elements originally creating the problem.

Then there are those who will not ever recognize opportunity no matter how loudly it knocks. They haven't the mental capacity to do so and therefore will forever remain stuck in poverty and non-production socially and economically.

Texas Bill

 

[deelt]

Hey Tordok,
I agree that in practice Marxism will never work. It kills the incentive to better yourself. This was one of the issues Russia faced some time ago in reprogramming its folks. Balance is an issue of perception, we are adaptable creatures. We just need to maximize usage of what we already have access to, as we give ourselves time to find appropriate alternatives. Poverty alleviation can be achieve, we just need to have government leaders willing to commit and enough sense of humanity to care. I really feel it is that complex and that simple. So yes, can we find enough people to be part of the solution not part of the problem?

As far as taking the "world as our backyard" view, I agree. This is becoming more of a reality every day. Water, natural resources, among other things are constant sources of conflict. We no longer live in a vacuum. As Texas Bill says taking on many of these issues can seem overwhelming in time and cost if it is just one person. But if we each do our part then maybe it would be a lot more than just an aspiration.

Best-
D

Howdy Deelt,
Thank you for the review of my comments. Absolute balance would seem predetermined by nature not to be achievable. This should hold true under any kind of socio-economic system. I happen to disagree with Marxism even on a theoretical basis, and even more so in its experience. But the constant striving towards accomplishing that balance is what moves humanity. Poverty is pernicious and has a growth tendency. Different methods to fix our problems can be used, from the right, the left, or anywhere in between. Sometimes we might have the technical solutions but lack the political dynamics or structures that can make them happen.

Regardless of the ideological source of the proposed remedies, at least they are responding to a perceived big problem. Unfortunately some people apparently still choose not to see poverty as "their" problem.

But I can assure them that these are indeed problems for everyone. As long as we all share the same real estate (Earth) the problems of one are the problems of all. It is inevitable that our fates are interconnected, the poor and the rich, the virtuous and the criminal, the sane and the insane, the conservatives and the liberals. Just because I have the privileges of education and baseline advantageous social position does not eliminate my sense of human resposibility and concern for those who perish in miserable conditions in Santo Domingo and elsewhere. I could say "is-not-my-fault-and-I-can't do-anything-about-it". That would accomplish nothing, and at the end of the day we all still have a big problem.
cheers,

- Tordok

 

[Texas Bill]

Tordok,

I commend your commentary as one which obviously is well thought out and presented. I really do not take exception to any of the posts you have made.

What I am objecting to are those commentaries which throw blame about in an indiscriminate manner with no reference to solutions or probabilities of solutions. These people tend to focus on the 'rich-poor' scenarios and blame the rich for the shortcomings of the poor on a personal basis as if there were a world-wide conspiracy.
I have no problem in rendering aid at the time it is needed, but I do object strongly to the continuance of that aid when evidence discloses a dependence being created and/or sought. I guess I haven't articulated that sufficiently.
Much better minds than mine have struggled with the ogre of poverty for centuries and we still haven't a workable solution. I'm not sure we ever will have, although I do hold out hope for one. Being poor is not an easy life anywhere.

Texas Bill

 

[Texas Bill]

NalOws, you have a history---

and that history is full of ideas that focus on the DR as being a nation which has progressed beyound what it actually is.
You state that the Saudis bring in people to fill jobs their own people consider beneath themselves to perform and totally turn a blind eye to that same demonstration of reluctance with regard to the Haitian population occupying that same position in the DR.
You advocate bringing in foreign elements to do that same work and leave out the vast uneducated element of the DR that wouldn't be able to fulfill those industrial jobs being offered in your 'Free Zone" described above. In addition, you advocate severe punishment for those that don't comply (am I reading you wrong?).
I'm not trying to belittle you when I say that your plan is one that needs A LOT OF WORK in order to make it acceptable to ANY potential foreign companies OR immigrants.
Where will you house them? Or, would you require the companies to provide that housing?
What about the endemic problems of the almost nonexistant infrastructure? Or would you have those not accustomed to the amenities of a modern civilized nation?
From what countries would you suggest these recruits for your "El Dorado" be drawn? Africa, the Mid-East, the Phillipines, China, Siberia?
Surely not from Europe, the US or India. They'd laugh in your face outright for your audacity.
May I just got lost in your commentary, but it doesn't make sense to me.
Care to go into a little more detail??

Texas Bill