Quotes of the Day -- On Rich and Poor

 I just discovered this writer.

“All charities would disappear from earth once the governments start taxing the rich 90% of their income and investing that revenue in public essentials – such as, groceries, housing, healthcare and education.”

“Till luxury becomes a thing of the past, equality will remain a thing of the future.”

“In a truly civilized society there wouldn't be any billionaire, nor will there be any homeless, for all the revenue generated through taxing the rich would be distributed among the people through welfare initiatives.”

― Abhijit Naskar, Good Scientist: When Science and Service Combine

And the rich would still be rich, rest assured. 

They would do without nothing.

The Already-Wealthy Really Do Owe the Poor

I was reading the Sunday edition of the New York Times yesterday when I ran across this article:

Things We Learned in 2016

It listed 45 different items that readers of the newspaper might have learned in the last year. I thought number 22 very instructing and insightful:

Sixth graders in the richest school districts are four grade levels ahead of children in the poorest districts.

It was from this article:

Money, Race and Success: 

How Your School District Compares

This statement/fact has so many ramifications for people, individually, but for societies as a whole, it's difficult to know where to begin or end but I'll try.

First, it proves the idea of noblesse oblige quickly, firmly and completely. The idea that the wealthy, the already-wealthy have an obligation to help those with less is driven home here totally. The formal definition is 

"the inferred responsibility of privileged people to act with generosity and nobility toward those less privileged."

Since those "privileged" or again, wealthy have much, they rather "owe it" to the "less privileged" to assist. Part of that is just due to quantities---quantities of wealthy, of money, in our modern societies. If a person is "loaded" and has more than they could possibly spend, it seems easy, obvious and incumbent on them to help those who are of small means and struggling. This is especially true, it would seem clear, if that "struggling" includes being homeless, starving, sick or what have you.

This also seems easy and true if the person is both wealthy and either a moralist--as I'd think we all should be--or, more, a Christian or Jew or of any religion that believes in helping the poor. Sure, again, this seems easy and obvious.

But it's more than that. It's much more than that.

What becomes true, just from that one, brief sentence and fact is that the already-wealthy have many, many advantages--financial, social, educational, etc.--given to them, and from birth up, that if they didn't assist the less fortunate, the poor or what have you, it would only perpetuate horribly the divisions between the two groups of people, those "haves" and "have nots." This seems self-evident, too.

This makes it easy to see why those with money keep piling on more and more, frequently, if not usually, while those of lesser means get less, to begin with, but then also are able to save and keep less, over time. It's what makes the "1%" of a nation, of a society, grow and grow their wealth.

Offers and possibilities snowball up for the wealthy by virtue of money and education and contacts, at least, while the costs of being less fortunate snowball against "the little guy." It's a system built to go for the wealthy and against the poor. And sure, to an extent it's just human nature but it's not right and we need to acknowledge it and correct for it, each of us, let alone as a people, as a nation, again, as societies.

This isn't about the poor mooching off the wealthy or not pulling their own weight or their expecting, demanding easy things from those that have, either. As the old saying goes, if only work made people wealthy, African women would be the wealthiest of the world.

One of the great things about all this, though, about the fortunate helping the unfortunate is that, besides making one feel good, besides the fact that it is, as just one example, the "Christian thing to do", it also helps the society, too. Any person who is helped with some food, say, might well avoid going to a hospital later or, in another example, might not steal--and risk getting caught and arrested. They may not try to rob a store and should that happen, things get much worse for all involved right there.

Then there's helping a person with education. Or a job. Both certainly help the area, the town, the city, the region, the state, the nation. They help with the person's health, their expenses. Heck, they help the different government's tax coffers. The benefits here snowball upward, positively, as well.

So there's every reason in the world why the already wealthy should help the unfortunate, the poor, the sick. It's good for that person and their family, sure.  But it's also great for the society and those benefits come back to that wealthy person. The healthier, wealthier and stronger our societies are, the better it even is for the wealthy. Their own companies will likely do better. Their own city, county, state and nation will do better.  That, in fact, then is the "rising tides help all boats." Not tax cuts for the already-wealthy. That does nothing but make the rich, richer.

So, yeah, the rich owe the poor. Don't ever think they don't.  

They owe it to themselves to help.

Links:

It's expensive to be poor | The Economist

8 Ways Being Poor Is Wildly Expensive in America

It's getting more expensive to be poor - The Washington Post

It Is Expensive to Be Poor - The Atlantic

​The high cost of being poor - CBS News

How Expensive It Is to Be Poor - The New York Times

Being Poor Is Too Expensive - Lifehacker

Shockingly small 'crimes' that can land you in jail

World Homeless Day

Yes sir, today is World Homeless Day. From today's New York Times:

Started in 2010, the day seeks to bring attention to homelessness, a problem that affects tens of millions of people worldwide, according to the United Nations.

In the U.S., more than a half-million people live on the streets or in shelters for temporary stays.

But national statistics show that homelessness is declining. And Salt Lake City has been held up as a model.

The city’s approach is simple: Before tackling the problems that led someone to become homeless, those in need first receive a place to live. The program is credited with reducing the number of chronically homeless people across the state by 91 percent since 2005.

Lloyd Pendleton, who leads Utah’s homeless task force, initially doubted the plan. “I get probably two to five calls a week now,” he said in an interview last year, “wanting to know how we did it.”

For information on how you can help, the National Alliance to End Homelessnessand the National Coalition for the Homeless offer resources.

Congratulations, Kansas, Missouri

Yes, indeed, many congratulations to the border/sister/brother states of Missouri and Kansas. According to research done with data from the Department of Housing and Urban Development, these two states are among a short list of those where homelessness is getting worse. Additionally, to make things worse, Kansas is one of the top worst, being one of the 7 states with the worst situations. (click on picture for larger, easier viewing).

Governor Brownback must be so proud.

And if not proud, then certainly happy. He and his political party cohorts, both.

Link to original article here: Is Your State Winning The Fight Against Homelessness?

I believe "deflation" may have begun

There is an article out right now on Yahoo! News telling how there are such great prices on items for us at local stores: "Quick, Go Shopping! Sales Are Everywhere." (see link below). And that's great, it's always good to find some thing we need at some terrific price. But think about it--home prices have been falling for at least the last 2 years--and still are. It seems virtually everything we need to buy--except gas for our cars and maybe food--is "on sale" and at least a good buy. So sure, it's terrific for us who need this stuff. Except the one really big fear on most economist's minds is that of deflation. Deflation, defined : "In economics, deflation is a decrease in the general price level of goods and services.[1] Deflation occurs when the inflation rate falls below 0% (a negative inflation rate)." and deflation is one scary word to those economists and people at the tops of corporations, in particular, because if they're not increasing their profitability, year after year in corporations, then yet more jobs will be cut from those same corporations and there will be yet more unemployment and people out on the streets, at least jobless, if not homeless. It ain't pretty, by a long shot. Let's hope these are just "great deals" to be had at the local stores and not true deflation. Links: http://financiallyfit.yahoo.com/finance/article-113039-10141-3-stores-offer-big-sales-for-consumers?ywaad=ad0035&nc; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deflation; http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/113047/disappearing-middle-class-jobs-forbes

Homelessness: Understanding it/Judging it

--Who of us can understand homelessness unless you've been out there and lived it? --Who can understand how that feels? --Who can understand how they got there? Truly. --Who can understand what it's like to not be sure where you're going to sleep that night? --Who of us can understand what it's like to not know where your next meal is coming from? --Who of us understands what it's like to not quite be sure if you're going to be safe, wherever you're going--where you have to go? --Who of us understands what it's like to not be sure if some young person or group is going to beat you up just because you're homeless? --Who of us understands the hostility so many people in society feel toward homelessness and the homeless--and that some of us outwardly show? It seems a lot of us--most?--at least have opinions about homelessness if we don't out-and-out judge it and/or judge the homeless and too frequently we end up with both strong and negative views of both the homeless and homelessness. This thought occurred to me today at a local Quik Trip as there was a homeless person there. It made me think.

We can no longer afford the sick luxury that is war

The fact is, with global climate change and what it’s doing to the world—drought, forest fires and losing at least 20% of their food crops all in Russia alone, the floods that have ravaged the people, cities and towns of Pakistan, the 100 square mile ice sheet that just broke off Greenland this week, along with the shrinking of both polar ice caps and the glaciers all over the planet, I think the point needs to be made and considered that humankind can no longer afford war or war machinery and the senseless killing of each other any longer. It seems evident that we need to, instead, use the helicopters and war materiel to, instead, feed, clothe, house and nurse one another and build infrastructure—roads, bridges, highways, streets, power plants, hospitals, etc. If you look at conditions around the world ni various countries from Iraq to, again, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India, China, etc., it’s clear too many corners of the world and peoples of the world are in desperate condition. Heck, even look here in the US at what we need—we have too many homeless, underfed, undernourished, in need of health care and so on. So, yeah, the time has come and the time is now. We need to accept that we can afford war no longer. We need to come to this collective conclusion and start working together aound the world. Too many of us are already dying and it will surely only get worse, the longer we put it off. Links to additional posts: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100816/ap_on_re_as/as_pakistan_floods http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100816/ap_on_bi_ge/eu_russia_fires

Too important not to repost

Ten Things You Should Know About Poverty In America

by SARAH NELSON, Contributing Writer, Causecast.org

The overwhelming statistics of global poverty often overshadow the very real issue of poverty in America. With the collapse of the housing market and a painfully stagnant economy, millions of Americans are facing hunger, homelessness and unrelenting debt. Just like the billions of global citizens trapped in poverty around the world, impoverished Americans often find themselves oppressed by a cycle that makes it difficult to break free.

1. Poverty and homelessness are not synonymous, meaning that the poor are not always homeless. Poverty can leave an individual or an entire family without adequate housing, food, access to heath care, education and employment.

2. There are more than 40 million Americans living below the poverty threshold. The largest percentage of impoverished Americans are between the ages of 25 and 44.

3. Approximately 14 million Americans living in poverty are children – that’s about 19 percent of all American children.

4. Across the country, 30 million American families face housing deficiency. About half of those dealing with housing deficiency issues qualify for government aid, but only 4.1 million are actually receiving it.

5. Poverty can lead to housing concerns like overcrowding or other inadequacies. One of every seven poor families lack a vital housing component, such as electricity, hot water or access to a toilet or shower.

6. In 2009, approximately 32.2 million Americans were enrolled to receive food stamps. In 2010, that number climbed to 40 million and is expected to continue growing. Experts predict 43 million Americans will be facing food insecurity by 2011.

7. The official measurement of poverty is determined by the U.S. Census Bureau. The threshold is adjusted for inflation annually, but the methodology used to calculate the poverty threshold (or the amount of cash income required to support an individual or family) has not been updated in more than 40 years.

8. For a single person under the age of 65, the poverty threshold is an annual income of $10,836. In the state of California, a person who works full-time at a minimum wage job will make just over $15,000. That’s before taxes.

9. In 2009, more than 3 million Americans lost their homes to foreclosure. Experts suggest that the housing recession will force an additional 1.5 million people into homelessness by 2011.

10. While poverty in America shows up in every state, nearly every city and spans urban and rural communities, American minorities are much more likely to live in poverty. In 2008, black and Hispanic families made up approximately two-thirds of America’s poor, while white families only accounted for about 12 percent.

But if they're poor, it's their own fault, right?

Link to original post here:
http://www.causecast.org/news_items/9807-ten-things-you-should-know-about-poverty-in-america?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+causecast/latest_news+(Causecast+-+Latest+News)

More reasons why, maybe, we should also "come down a few notches"?

Thanks to Skippy the Bush Kangaroo and his blog for this.

A different entry today

 

One of few times, if ever, my entry for the day--my message--is a photograph of mine and not prose.

Ronnie is a friend of mine, of a sort, honestly, and I occasionally have shot pictures of him or his things. You may have seen them if you ever saw my other, photography blog: www.kcphotogblog.blogspot.com.

I was just putting this up on that photo blog under the heading "Ronnie's bedroom and closet", when it occurred to me it would be very appropriate here, as well, today.

I think it can speak volumes to us, if we care to look.

If I were a better photographer, you could read that the sign says "No Loitering".

Try to have a good weekend, y'all.