Forum Post: Why should the 1% give us money and privledges if we don't first help the super poor
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 19, 2011, 1:23 p.m. EST by 20percentofworld
(1)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
I know this might tick some people off or might be controversial. I just want to see what the reaction might be. Don't take it personal. The tougher the feedback, the better.
Think about it. We are asking the 1% super rich, the politicians and the corporations to relinquish some of their power and money in order to 'give' us 99%'ers money, security, stability and benefits. Obviously they will say: "We can't give you money, we need it to be competitive, to grow, to protect ourselves, we earned it etc". I guess we might eventually lobby the government to create laws that will force the 1% to give us their money. Surely they will fight back and resent us for doing so.
They say you get more with honey than with vinegar. I mean think about the message. I can see why the elites have a problem with the movement. Now don't get me wrong, I am not saying it is a bad message or invalid. It is commendable. Maybe things are so bad, that only protests, yelling and non-violent civil disobedience will change anything. Maybe we are at such an extremely critical time in history where this is our only option. Could be. Maybe this is the only option.
But lets say you made $30,000 per year and worked hard and someone from a third world country who makes $1000 per year says: "Hey rich American you make 10x more than me. I want health insurance, safe housing, unemployment insurance, paid vacation and income equality." Would you help them? Think of the difference between them demanding it, versus them asking for it.
Why should the rich give us anything? Why should they cave in when we demand it? Us 99%'ers ignore the bottom 80% of the world all day long. If we don't share with them, then the rich will just follow our lead, and not share with us. Why should the rich be generous to us, if we are stingy to the poor.
If we started sticking up for the poor and sharing with them. We could guilt trip the rich into helping us. I just feel it is hypocritical to ask someone else to do something I am not willing to do first.
And what has this to do with reclaiming the rights of the people?
The people have a right to represented in congress, not the money of the few like is now the case.
If people in third world countries want to learn how to claim their rights, they are more than welcome to join all sort of online communities.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7Fzm1hEiDQ
But yes, help the poor become self sustainable
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrMJwIedrWU
The third world countries that are only making 1000 dollars per year are employed by the corporations that run our countries and politicians, these people are starving and willing to work for whatever wage they can in order to provide, and these corporations come into the poor countries employ them for 3 cents a t shirt and the people are more than willing to do so. These corporations that buy out our politicians and media are the ones needing to be held accountable for their obvious manipulations for personal gain. The intention of these people is greed. If they actually cared about the people starving in these countries, with their resources and power they could do so much positive construction rather than using them as a cheap slave labor force. I would love to help the people living in poverty, but the only way that we can do that is to put forth our efforts to holding these transparent corporations and politicians accountable for their devious motivation. The one percent has only "earned" their money by the constant manipulation of those less fortunate, they do it in other countries as well as their own, and now the time has come for them to stop undermining the collective, and to start sharing their enormous gains amongst all those that have helped them reach the financial success. We are all in this thing called life together, not one person is better than another, so we must work together and share all of our wealth, stop supporting greed, and care for our fellow man.
I agree, and well said. Best regards (and much love :) ) Per from Sweden
Exactly, "it is (utterly) hypocritical to ask someone else (the 1%) to do something I am not willing to do first (the 99%)", so start the war against Injustice by starting our own banks to double the income of the Bottom 99% of Workers, for many more people will come to your side when you are proactive (for “new” Business & Government solutions), instead of reactive (against “old” Business & Government solutions), which is why what we most immediately need is a comprehensive “new” strategy that implements all our various socioeconomic demands at the same time, regardless of party, and although I'm all in favor of taking down today's ineffective and inefficient Top 1% Management System of Business & Government, there's only one way to do it – by fighting bankers as bankers ourselves, and thus doubling our income from Bank Profits which are 40% of all Corporate Profits; that is, using a Focused Direct Democracy organized according to our current Occupations & Generations. Consequently, I have posted a 1-page Summary of the Strategically Weighted Policies, Organizational Operating Structures, and Tactical Investment Procedures necessary to do this at:
http://getsatisfaction.com/americanselect/topics/on_strategically_weighted_policies_organizational_operating_structures_tactical_investment_procedures-448eo
Join http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/StrategicInternationalSystems/ because we need 100,000 “support clicks” at AmericansElect.org in support of the above bank-focused platform.
Most importantly, remember, as cited in the first link, that as Bank Owner-Voters in your 1 of 48 "new" Business Investment Groups (or "new" Congressional Committees) you become the "new" Online Congress, and related “new” Businesses, REPLACING the "old" Congress, and related “old” Businesses, according to your current Occupations & Generations, called a Focused Direct Democracy.
Therefore, any Candidate (or Leader) therein, regardless of party, is a straw man, a puppet, a political opportunist, just like today; what's important is the STRATEGY – the sequence of steps – that the people organize themselves under in Military Internet Formation of their Individual Purchasing Power & Group Investment Power. In this, sequence is key, and if the correct mathematical sequence is followed then it results in doubling the income of the Bottom 99% of Workers from today's Bank Profits, which are 40% of all Corporate Profits.
Why? Because there are Natural Social Laws – in mathematical sequence – that are just like Natural Physical Laws, such as the Law of Gravity. You must follow those Natural Social Laws or the result will be Injustice, War, etc.
The FIRST step in Natural Social Law is to CONTROL the Banks as Bank Owner-Voters. If you do not, you will inevitably be UNJUSTLY EXPLOITED by the Top 1% Management System of Business & Government who have a Legitimate Profit Motive, just like you, to do so.
Consequently, you have no choice but to become Candidates (or Leaders) yourselves as Bank Owner-Voters according to your current Occupations & Generations.
So JOIN the 2nd link, and spread the word, so we can make 100,000 support clicks at AmericansElect.org when called for, at exactly the right time, by an e-mail from that group, in support of the above the bank-focused platform. If so, then you will see and feel how your goals can be accomplished within the above strategy as a “new” Candidate (or Leader) of your current Occupation & Generation.
I live in poverty your a joke to me.
It is I live in poverty your a joke to me
If your the Boss and your Employees are nothing that makes you the boss of nothing,
Boats being lifted helps everybody, including foreign countries, where we would have more money to give.
Prosperity, but a real prosperity works.
I think it`s an interesting point of view you are writing about. My believes are that everybody must contribute too the community (the world?) and the amount is depending of the money you make. What I have seen in the world (by my own and somewhat narrow point of view) is that less fortunate pay moore and the succesfull people hides by the the mantra that you so well express as "we need it to be competitive, to grow, to protect ourselves, we earned it etc". To sum it all up, everybody should give whatever he or she can as an individual according to the income. Best regards Per Holmqvist, Sweden
Don't fall for this psychological crap from any one percent goon. It's an obvious attempt to discredit our cause and break our will. Don't fall for it. Just follow the law and keep protesting no matter what the one percent goons say or do. Our message is vital. Below is my two cents:
We have been mislead by Reagan, Bush Sr, Clinton, Bush Jr, Obama, and nearly every other public figure. Economic growth, job creation, and actual prosperity are not necessarily a package deal. In fact, the first two are horribly misunderstood. Economic growth/loss (GDP) is little more than a measure of wealth changing hands. A transfer of currency from one party to another. The rate at which it is traded. This was up until mid ’07′ however, has never been a measure of actual prosperity. Neither has job creation. The phrase itself has been thrown around so often, and in such a generic politicali manner, that it has come to mean nothing. Of course, we need to have certain things done for the benefit of society as a whole. We need farmers, builders, manufacturers, transporters, teachers, cops, firefighters, soldiers, mechanics, sanitationi workers, doctors, managers, and visionaries. Their work is vital. I’ll even go out on a limb and say that we need politicians, attorneys, bankers, investors, and entertainers. In order to keep them productive, we must provide reasonable incentives. We need to compensate each by a fair measure for their actual contributions to society. We need to provide a reasonable scale of income opportunity for every independent adult, every provider, and share responsibility for those who have a legitimate need for aid. In order to achieve and sustain this, we must also address the cost of living and the distribution of wealth. Here, we have failed miserably. The majority have already lost their home equity, their financial security, and their relative buying power. The middle class have actually lost much of their ability to make ends meet, re-pay loans, pay taxes, and support their own economy. The lower class have gone nearly bankrupt. In all, its a multi-trillion dollar loss taken over about 30 years. Millions are under the impression that we need to create more jobs simply to provide more opportunity. as if that would solve the problem. It won’t. Not by a longshot. Jobs don’t necessarily create wealth. In fact, they almost never do. For the mostpart, they only transfer wealth from one party to another. A gain here. A loss there. Appreciation in one community. Depreciation in another. In order to create net wealth, you must harvest a new resource or make more efficient use of one. Either way you must have a reliable and ethical system in place to distribute that newly created wealth in order to benefit society as a whole and prevent a lagging downside. The ‘free market’ just doesn’t cut it. Its a farce. Many of the jobs created are nothing but filler. The promises empty. Sure, unemployment reached an all-time low under Bush. GDP reached an all-time high. But those are both shallow and misleading indicators. In order to gauge actual prosperity, you must consider the economy in human terms. As of ’08′ the average American was working more hours than the previous generation with far less equity to show for it. Consumer debt, forclosure, and bankruptcy were also at all-time highs. As of ’08′, every major American city was riddled with depressed communities, neglected neighborhoods, failing infrastructures, lost revenue, and gang activity. All of this has coincided with massive economic growth and job creation. Meanwhile, the rich have been getting richer and richer and richer even after taxes. Our nation’s wealth has been concentrated. Again, this represents a multi-trillion dollar loss taken by the majority. Its an absolute deal breaker. Bottom line: With or without economic growth or job creation, you must have a system in place to prevent too much wealth from being concentrated at the top. Unfortunately, we don’t. Our economy has become nothing but a giant game of Monopoly. The richest one percent already own nearly 1/2 of all United States wealth. More than double their share before Reagan took office. Still, they want more. They absolutely will not stop. Now, our society as a whole is in serious jeapordy. Greed kills.
Of course, most people try in some way to help the least fortunate. This movement is an extension of that.
Please, don't get me started on Bill Clinton. One of the most overrated fiends we ever elected--or who selected.
The poor are part of the 99%, my friend.
Helping people with less than me sounds like a great idea, as long as I can do it voluntarily and not be forced to do it.
Hi Why are you so afraid of the idea of helping people with less than you that is not voluntarily? Why should a wellfaresystem be depending so much on voluntarily work and/or charity? Best regards Per from Sweden
Right now, money is taken from me by force (taxes) and given to people who I do not think should get it. I should be able to decide the best use for my money, not letting someone else decide, someone who may have different values than I do. Forced charity is not charity at all, but extortion.
I gladly pay my taxes (which is approx 30% of my monthly salary) because I know that I and others can benefit from it. For exampel; cheap dental care, free health care, not to mention the help that the people that life has not been so kind to. I respect your believes, but to me is what you are saying a real lack of confidence of other people doing the right thing. What if you should (god forbidden) ever happen to be on the needing side???? Best regards Per from Sweden
You are correct,I do have a lack of confidence in people doing the right thing. I have seen many people who take money from the government instead of working, when they are able to work. This almost always leads to other bad things in their life. No one should shirk their social responsibilities. I give generously to organizations that help the unfortunate.but I want to be in control of where my money goes. It seems that would be part of my social responsibility also.
Because the argument is that I would be far more efficient with my money than the government.
The US government is bloated and the bureaucracy kills all efficiency. So, for every dollar into the government welfare system - maybe a fractional penny makes it out.
That's why people argue against it.
Further, the current welfare system provides no incentive to get off. We need to reform that so that we are motivating and providing an opportunity to improve rather than tossing money at someone.
The truth of welfare is that it is designed to quiet the poor and keep them complicit in their ignorance.
How do you know that you are far more efficient helping so many people that isn`t really in your neighborhood? Because voluntary and charity work usually stops (at the best) there. I know for a fact that in Sweden every dollar (or "crown" in Swedish currency) and even most of the fractional penny (or "öre" in Swedish currency) makes it out, as you put it. Yes, some of it goes to the people who makes things happen, but I would say that a large sum goes where it is ment to go. Come visit and study this, you´re welcome to stay at our home for free.
Swedish government is FAR more efficient than US government. It is a byproduct of being a smaller country with a more unified vision.
But then again, Sweden has been accused of being a high tax country with a bureaucracy thats eats it all up. Look at the worlds economy right now and how Sweden (at least not yet) is not falling as deep as rest of many of the western world countries (in Europe as well as otherwise). I do think (as you do) that it is easier being a small country to unify a vision, for good and for bad. However is normally a big country with a big economy better fitted for disturbance in the economy because the total and higher income for the country can "easily" be redistributed. But that, as you say, need a unified vision politically. All the best /Per
That's the idea, brother. We address issues of race, class, and gender during our GA. It is important to voice this. We are also a global movement.