ban it in 2004

ban poverty is a great . We often give our cast offs to charity shops & they can make some money for many causes.
My daughter works for a Social Services Unit loooking after the needs of people with learning difficulties and other problems. She has a phsycology degree & is only too well aware of the problems & yes we have a similar problem of closing mental institutions & encouraging people to live in the community. But it doesn't alwys work. If people stay on their medication then they survive. If not the problem is like rust, always eating away at their stability.

It was LBJ who started the "War on Poverty." He announced it on January 8, 1964, (almost exactly 50 years ago!) but the Viet Nam war got in the way. I wish it had worked as he envisioned it.

Proposal for A Nationwide War On The Sources of Poverty'

The ideals put into place by FDR in the 1930s was highly productive and powerfull. perhaps an encore is needed

I wish we could help everybody... does that make me a communist?

Piffka -------- on the contrary. there is a world of difference between helping people thru care & persuation, rather than the imposition of force.
The commie way is to reduce everyone to the lowest common denominator.
What you want to do & myself as well, is to help raise people to a higher level. to establish their pride & self respect by offering them opportunity to improve and then build ambition. What we have or desire we have to work for. There are jobs out there. Reward is governed by our input, not non stop freebies.
Only in cases of illness or disability or old age should people get welfare.
If people fall from grace give 'em a helping hand to get back up, then it's down to them.

But OAK (sorry to be late in responding), what about the truly crummy jobs... service jobs that pay $8 an hour or less? Those don't provide a living wage. We have, in this country, the working poor. What about the healthy moms, single maybe, or even not, who have children to raise? Are they to raised as both Reps & Dems suggest, in institutions for 3-4-5 year olds while the moms go to work in some dead-end job? That's not right.

Where did this economy go so wrong, that the topcats get billions of dollars in compensation and then groan if they pay an extra quarter to the peons?(I'm thinking about this... but I think I want to ban all wealthy people too.)

Piffka -------- the things above that you mention are similar to those we have. Low paid part time jobs. Full time workers must get paid the legal minimum, about £5.00 per hour == $9.00 at todays exchange rates.
There are a lot of single mothers, often teenagers, who rely on Welfare & family help. The Government claims to give low paid workers top up money in the form of tax breaks. A safety net but it's not great.
Mothers who work also rely on licenced child minders but of course they have to pay for them. So there is not always a chance for a lot of mothers to move up. The low paid are forced to eat low quality food from the stack 'em high, sell 'em quick grocery stores, rather than the quality supermarkets. This means kids eating a lot of sugar & fat loaded food that weakens their health. Another day another cough.
Whilst I accept that people should be paid according to their jobs & responsibilty they carry, but when you hear of Big Company Bosses earning millions & some people living on very low levels, it makes you wonder what's going on.
Two reasons why I think there are problems are these.

#1 A lot of jobs are going to Asia as cost cutting excercises. The UK is now giving a lot of it's Call Center jobs to India cos wages are a quarter of UK wages. Hi-tech systems lower man power

#2 The billions spent fighting wars in places like Iraq, not to mention the loss of life involved.

At times I feel the future doesn't bear thinking about

Yep, those would be the same Bosses who despite their bloated salaries still choose to lead their company into graft & corruption for even more money. And there is nothing wrong with moderately-paid, part-time jobs... as long as one can still afford a pleasant stable home, clothes, food, medical care & education... or get (at least some of) them gratis from the state. What really grates on me is the closing off of free governmental items... here the parks are no longer free, neither are the museums, library funds have been cut, reasonable medical care is a joke, pharmaceuticals are sky-high, and education quality goes down with public control and access. The stupidest thing is the general public are pawns of advertising and believe that the newest fashions and toys will make them happy.

I am of the opinion that if things were fair (patently they are not) everyone on this earth could live adequately... be educated, have a job commensurate with their ability, count on reliable medical care, have a simple happy lifestyle. That means I don't want to deny those people in Asia (or wherever) the chance to have good jobs as well. I don't like that they are having to service us, not themselves though.

As for the other point, money spent on wars & defense budgets makes me a little bit crazy. I think the US military budget equals the combined budgets of the next ten largest militaries. Heavily armed and nary a place to play with their weapons, so they make up reasons, often having to do with protecting the "rights" of fat cats. Grrrrrrrrrrr

The future is hard not to view it with despair unless you put on rose-colored glasses. I can do it, but I recognize that I'm trying to put a good spin on a bad situation.

Piffka ---- I think the social/cultural gap between the USA & the UK has almost closed. Government & Industrial ideologies seem to be pretty similar. Maybe on your recent visit here you noticed how many of our towns & cities have taken on an American look in it's retail & industrial make up. I may be wrong there but that's the feeling I get. I don't get uptight about it, but it just shows a greater international impact in many ways. Now Wal-Mart is over here, I wonder what we'll get next.
I feel that 2 of the things about the UK that make think I am better off, are the fact that we have strict gun control, not that that doesn't prevent gunplay taking place & that we have a health system that is free at the users end. Sure we pay for it in tax/state insurance & the system isn't perfect but I have Parkinson's Disease & have received exemplary treatment now for some 6 years. I don't get any bills to worry about, all my medication is free as is any hospital treatment. I dread to think what it would cost in the USA.

I just do not understand why politicians always seen to ignore such salient facts & arguments that people such as you and others so often raise.
They exist thru out the world & love the power they wield & joe public is their sacrificial offering.

Blue Laws

OAK -- Welll, I'm glad you've got some good treatment for the Parkinson's. That's a tough row to hoe for you. ((((Hugs)))) I think you're right... the UK really pulls ahead when you consider the healthcare. I'm not as concerned about guns, probably because Mr.P has rifles (no handguns) and enjoys them. He's got a rifle from England, from the US and from Russia during wwii. Why? I dunno. He likes 'em, he had one issued to him when he was in the army, and he thinks it is fun to practice his shooting at the local gun club. He's a member of both the ACLU & the National Rifle Association (which he says is stupid and should call themselves the national hand gun assoc). Go figure.

I think that the UK has three other things going for it that the United States doesn't. One is the access to public/private lands... the network of walking paths and the entry into large estates, sometimes for a fee or annual pass, but we just don't have that here. Secondly, you've got a lot more museums & public education institutions -- here we struggle with small private things except in the largest cities. It's like you value this access more and your politicians can't get away with closing them down. Finally, and I know this is going to seem controversial to you, having a royal family gives you (for better, sometimes for worse) a national conscience. You know that if things get really bad, you could get the queen to say "I don't approve" and people would actually pay attention. Here, we don't have anyone with enough social/public stature that we'd give a damn what they think.

So, for example... if a large corporation is going to rip into a beautiful old forest and you're down to the wire, the queen could step in and say... "don't cut those trees" and people would listen.

Maybe I should send over my immigration papers, huh?

Banning things is a very difficult line to cross; people with good intentions can seem rather fascist in trying to stop people from doing what they want to do. I have a few ideas:

Ban the Class system: If I had the power to change things, I would ban the rigidity of the class system. Everyone deserves to use the best of their potential; I would bring in meritocracy, as I think it unfair that someone extremely talented but from a working/ lower-middle class background could not get into Oxbridge, whereas someone 'less intellectually capable' but able to make generous donations could. With this ban, the current Royals would be thrown out, and there would be an election on whom we want as our head of state, based on their MERITS for the job, rather than their privilege.

Controversial one, but:

I would ban the banning of things by Governments; I don't want a Père Gouvernment dictating what is right and wrong, contrary to the needs and wants of many. If something does NOT inflict on the will of others (i.e. rape, murder, etc), then it should be up to the PERSON to decide whether it be right or wrong.

This has been an excellent discussion, yawl. I have read every word of it, and am totally impressed with the lucid exchanges. There has been humor, serious thoughts, and open mindedness. Nice way to start a day.

(and it's not you all--it's yawl)

Smoking was banned in NYC bars last year. You should see the poor schlubs standing outside in the freezing wind yanking on their weed. But inside, it's so weird. The air is clear, you can see the TV! and next day your clothes don't stink!

I want someone to invent a device that would prevent any car not moving more the 5mph from using it's horn. Honking horns are the most annoying and useless sounds.

Joe

And the plural of yawl is 'all yawl'.

I have indeed given this topic consideration (about 35 seconds) um, and you know those elevator (lift) call buttons with the arrows to go either up or down and how peeps will push them repeatedly iffin they are in a hurry as if the lift will come sooner? well, I think they should be electrified so that the second and succeeding pushings of the button results in a mild electrical shock gradually increasing to a fatal dose of electricicals by the 10th pushing. also each pushing results in increasing the loudness level of the "elevator MusaK" to deafing levels (1,001 strings playing Beatles tunes)

It's really nice to see you back here, Dys. I'm glad that everything is OK. Everything is all right, isn't it?

I would ban muzak too; I remember one of the worst experiences of my life: listening to dodgy muzac whilst trying to order University application forms years ago... disgusting!

Dys -- They push those buttons repeatedly so you know they are (1) important and (2) in a hurry. That way you'll let them clamber aboard sooner.

I hate muzak too (does anybody like it?). I remember being in a grocery store and hearing a muzak-icized rendition of Jagger's "Brown Sugar." I thought I was going to fall over. In fact, ever since that day, the world has dropped lower and lower into that handbasket to hell.

I agree, Drom, delivering us from this society of classes would be good. I still believe that a society does better if it has an agreed-upon conscience. Not for justice matters (look at our supreme court and the messes they make) but for social issues. Nelson Mandela may be the closest thing we've got to that. Meritocracy is an ideal, but how long would it last before somebody would get a gun? Anyway, who chooses the merited ones? Even if it were a test, that would be subjective.

Did anybody mention banning TV?

We should hold a competition to see who has had the worst muzak-related incident. Mine was, when caught between heavily persperating men in a lift, a Muzak-ified version of Lennon's 'Jealous Guy' came on! That was just evil. Other disgraces include a Muzak-ified version of one of my favourite Dylan songs, Lay Lady Lay.

Hmmm, I had to be on hold with the IRS (that's the hated federal taxing agency for you UKers). They had such horrible, loud music that I wanted desperately to get off... but I couldn't, or I'd lose my "place" in the phone line-up. I don't even know what the music was. I blocked it. I just remember feeling even more trapped than I already was. Never, ever talk to the IRS if you can avoid it.