BF2S Forums There has to be, otherwise it wouldn't work

you know this issue has come up for me a lot lately.
im from what you could call the "lower class". raised by my single mother, never lived in the huge house or had the designer shit.
my wife on the other hand comes from money....the type of money that judges people by their class and not who they are. they like to play the elitists as much as possible...in fact they recently polluted your country CP on one of their elitist trips across the pond.
the more i think about it, the more i realize that there will always need to be people in the "lower class". how would the elitists know they were elite???








i hate my in-laws, but unfortunately someone made the rule that i cant shoot people.

You need a better definition of Poor to debate.  I would argue that there has to be a middle class and a lower class, otherwise there would be no motivation for people to do work that is dangerous or filthy.  If everyone was on even ground and nobody was hard up for money, why would you want to be a coal miner, garbage man, ____any other dirty job___?

Yes we do need poor people for it to work. But we also need the largest class to be the middle class. for the sake of an example during the early industrial revolution factory workers were paid little, so little that the workers could not afford the products of their factories. The factories that paid their workers better were able to sell their products to them. so yes the poor are necessary but we do still need a large middle class if we want profitable enterprise.

Society will always have drones, I spent a number of years working as a security guard here in Dublin to help pay my way through college. When I finally quit the job I was one of the few Irish people left at the company; in the space of a few years Irish people have come to regard security work as beneath them and fit only for foreigners. Strange how money changes things.

What is poor? Someone is always going to be earning less. Even if the everybody in the world is making $50,000,000 a year, someone making $49,999,999.99 is a poor person by comparison.

Hunter/Jumper wrote:

There are ALWAYS poor people in modern free market capitalist economies.

                                   There has to be - otherwise it wouldn't work.


Personally I disagree.

( Unless you describe "poor" as “people with less money than their neighbors” )

Which sounds a little Marxist to me.

Please weigh in. Feel free to give examples.

As always "first hand experience" out performs a google search and pasting 8 hyperlinks. Try not to insult.

Poor do have to exist in every society, but not because of necessity but rather....  variance in both human ability and circumstance.  Countries like Norway operate at an amazingly egalitarian level in terms of wealth disparity, but even they have poor people.

A commonly accepted principle in economics is that a certain % of people are "unemployable."  Usually, people this inept or unstable are poor or locked up in an institution.  2-3% is a common estimate for this kind of people among a population.

Bubbalo wrote:

Hunter/Jumper wrote:

Personally I disagree.

Wow.  What I love is the clear, concise reasoning.  It really can't be argued with.

Of course, that's because it's so clear and concise it doesn't actually exist.........but who cares about details like that?

Hunter/Jumper wrote:

As always "first hand experience" out performs a google search and pasting 8 hyperlinks. Try not to insult.

It does?  Wow, that's lucky, because just last week I was chatting with the economy and he reckons that it is necessary, and Capitalism ultimately creates a class structure.  Granted, that was before he got drunk and did the dead with the military establishment, but hey, what can you do?

Seriously, though, first hand experience of what?

As to the topic itself: Capitalism always requires someone to be poor because that's the way it works: without poor people, there's no-one for the rich to boss around, and the rich love to boss people around.

Best post of Bubbalo to date.

When has there not been a rich and poor in any system? And don't tell me Communist Russia, the Poltiburro (sp?) were most definately rich.

Hunter/Jumper wrote:

Personally I disagree.

Bubbalo wrote:

Wow.  What I love is the clear, concise reasoning.  It really can't be argued with..

It was a statement. The opposite of  “ I agree “ In the same vain as “ I don’t share the same opinion.”  There was no Reason stated because  it is a poll, not an Op-Ed. Piece. Please re-read the title page. We aren't trying to teach or educate you. We wanted to hear Your opinions. I think that cuaght you off guard.

Bubbalo wrote:

Seriously, though, first hand experience of what?

Capitalism, Supply side Economics, Business ownership, Boom and bust economies. The Political decisions which proceeded them. The Political decisions which perpetrated  them.
In other words, if you lived through  a “ Tax your country into prosperity  “ administration and saw your country fall into a deep, long recession. That would be considered first hand experience.

Bubbalo wrote:

As to the topic itself: Capitalism always requires someone to be poor because that's the way it works:

See here is your statement above. Very good.  Now following right behind it is were you could have your “ clear, concise reasoning.” for us to read and evaluate. Unless the sum of your argument is “ but who cares about details like that ? “

Bubbalo wrote:

without poor people, there's no-one for the rich to boss around, and the rich love to boss people around.

Here is another place for you to practice your.  “ clear, concise reasoning.” for us to read and evaluate. Unless the sum of your argument is “ but who cares about details like that ? “



One qualification for people in the United States is You must be at least Four to have lived through and Administration. Perhaps I should have made a disqualifier?

Last edited by Hunter/Jumper (2007-05-27 11:02:04)

Poor are not required. Socialist experiments have provided reason to believe that a market economy can be extremely successful while supporting the lower class. See Ireland, etc. With moderation it is possible to maintain a market economy and still reduce poverty.

oug wrote:

Hunter/Jumper wrote:

There are ALWAYS poor people in modern free market capitalist economies. There has to be - otherwise it wouldn't work.

yarp

narp

Hot Fuzz ftw

Hunter/Jumper wrote:

not my quote...sorry

What?

Last edited by jonsimon (2007-05-27 12:30:07)