It is this statement here that is all to commonly heard. There is fear of change so new ideas are dismissed as too expensive or risky.

So poverty, what can be done about poverty? Exactly what do we do with it currently?

@

i was hoping this thread wouldn't as a preventative measure of some kind? get blown off track before some thoughts had a chance to be expressed or thought of in the way of answering questions....possibly?

"why human rights is wrong" and "why democracy is wrong" are also articles by paul treanor

In 2008 there were 39,108,422 million people in our country living below the poverty level. To me this is shocking. Now some of these folks could maybe get by living without some things but many of these people are skipping meals, not able to pay for medication and so on. So in my view what are we doing currently? In my view not enough! It is ignorance to believe that you can't lose everything you have and be financially ruined. Believe me you can and it can happen to you faster than you realize.
More and more soup kitchens and food pantry’s are on the verge of closing for lack of donations. So this is why I get irritated when I hear that these people should be relying on charity instead of the government. It amazes me that our government can feed millions of people over seas and no one even squawks about our government spending a dime but when it comes to helping our own people it seems to me that politically people are less sympathetic and turn a blind eye.
Below you will find a government website link with poverty statistics and an article about a soup kitchen in Ohio facing closure because of a lack of donations.
http://www.census.gov/prod/2009pubs/acsbr08-1.pdf

http://www.wlwt.com/r/24825057/detail.html

There are a lot of good Americans in this country but problems like this can't just be solved at the local level and has to be an issue at the National level as well.
-Eric

@

oh please...



threatened much?

carry on!

That's an interesting video (the very first one, I mean), but seems to be edited in a way that makes it look like it was a just a bunch of guys spouting their opinions on subjects; I don't have much idea of what it had to do with the "future of libertarianism" or anything else.

Watching it, though, I couldn't help but be reminded of that old Sesame Street "game": "One of these things is not like the other/One of these things just doesn't belong/Can you guess which thing is not like the others/by the time I finish this song?"

The two bookend guys are worthless; they're politicians just spouting out what they think their audience wants to hear. Barr has improved since he left Congress, but he's not my guy. But Mike Gravel? I've always hearted Mike Gravel; he's a great man who took great risks --

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5ks8hz5Ulg

-- and the other 3 can't begin to approach him. If he actually represented the future of libertarianism...

Those bookends are pretty trippy all right.

One Libertarian argument is to decrease taxes to allow for people to support charities other than Government. Of course another approach is tax incentives designed to encourage local charity support but people in poverty don't respond well to tax incentives.

My concern is that this treats symptoms and not the cause. I don't argue that the symptoms should not be treated but I really do not see any reasonable plan to reduce low incomes and poverty right now (except over seas but I don't want to argue for isolationism either...it is a world issue). There are social and psychological reasons for its (poverties)persistence as well as economic reasons. A social ethic should target these issues..what are we doing?

@

Hey Agnes, can I see your pom poms?

my point is to try and learn something...i am pretty sure i have said that.
subterfuge gets pretty thick sometimes

i suppose i could also throw in a gratuitous "yo momma" just to keep up with the silly brand of insults but...nah

is that a trick question?

funny...

Kinda. Definitely not an insult though.

i didn't take it as an insult.