Poverty

[Autumnlicious]

Well, the first thing I would point out is that poverty is automatically connected into the properties of capitalism. There are winners, and there are losers. The losers dwell in poverty.

That's human nature and greed. And also, many of the "winners" are winners only because they were born into place, not through any merit.

So the "loser" aspect, however appealing, is a rather flawed conception perpetuated by idiots who like to imagine they can rise to the top and that poor people are poor by their own hand and fault (sometimes true, but the scale to which is drastically dwarfed by the reality that 1% owns a significant portion of all our wealth).

The second thing I would point out is what measuring stone are you using to decide what poverty is? Is poverty being unable to eat? Is poverty not owning a microwave? Etc...

I would guess not meeting basic human rights and living conditions would qualify as poverty. Considering the Scandivian view, that would be food, housing, medical and internet access. The last is because the Swedes are swayed (as am I) by the argument that the internet is no longer a luxury, but a basic requirement to secure and extend any housing, job offers and pursuit.

The third thing I would ask is why do you think freedom has to be foresaken to eradicate poverty?

Because there are many people who benefit directly from others being poor. To force without their consent some redistributing of their ill gotten gain would be forsaking freedom, their freedom (and potentially yours if you rise to the top).

Of course, the way I see it, you rise to the top, you have a fucking obligation to direct and enhance our environment. After all, you got there on the backs of others. It is one's duty.

Mind you, I am looking at Warren Buffet and Bill Gates as examples of Rich-People-Making-Things-Better.