[Jack]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('lotrfan55345', 'A')ny of you guys read the Time Magazine article on poverty? Pretty interesting....

I suppose for sheltered first-worlders like most of us on this forum, this gives you a lot of understanding/info of this issue.

Be aware that this is 7 pages long, so prepare for a 15-minute read.
I THINK WE SHOULD ALL READ THIS:
http://ciaraphone.envy.nu/poverty.html

(found through a search engine)

[BRAZNOFF]

That link is interesting. So your saying we should send all our money over to Africa and all those other third world contries and ignor all the people dying of hunger right here in the USA.
We should feel sorry for people dying of Aids in other countries becouse their own goverment will not educate them on a few health facts.
We should ignor the fact that we have children dieing of hunger right here in America in some of the poor regions of our own contry, like the osarks.
How much of that food realy gets to the children over there and how much goes on the black market?Or goes to the home of corrupt police officals or rebels?
I say we would be better off seeing to our own country first , before suplying the rest of the world with welfare benefits.
If the US can not save them selves, how are they going to save the world?

[lotrfan55345]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')hat means no aid. No clinics. No medicine. No food. Nothing.

[TWilliam]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', 'I') had what I thought was a solution too. Single people who aren't viable, as far as employment goes, would be paid not to have children. Not much, just a token amount, together with a reminder that if they have more than one child, while on welfare, that child has to be immediately put up for adoption. (With a qualifier that each case has to be judged individually, and the temporary or permanent nature of the situation has to be figured into the equation.)

[Jack]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('lotrfan55345', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')hat means no aid. No clinics. No medicine. No food. Nothing.

[threadbear]

TWilliams, Can't argue with a thing you posted. Supporting everyone with an attitude problem that could easily be defined by the medical/govt./industrial complex into the "medical condition" category, is not an option.

I remember a few years back reading about how borderline personality should be classed as a clinical condition, a handicap that employers have to accomodate. Some people are just so damned self centered and narcissistic, they're impossible to work with. Whether it's technically a "disease" or a "frame of mind", isn't actually an issue. Why should any employer have to accomodate that? A clinical disease whose symptoms are being a complete jerk? Intolerance of these symptoms, with a risk of being fired, if those symptoms are expressed, would probably be somewhat therapeutic. Personality disorders have no place in the workplace. (Unless you're the boss. Then they're applauded. See Donald Trump!)

Then on the other end of the spectrum, I know of this woman who has multiple sclerosis. She isn't completely paralyzed by it, can socialize on good days. I overheard another woman saying, "Well she looks just fine to me. She should be able to work".

This illness causes debilitating fatigue, and also has neurological effects effecting vision, ability to concentrate, and other more subtle things too numerous to mention. But yes, the person can "look fine" when they manage to gain enough strength to get out of the house and socialize, on ocassion. In a workplace setting, that demands total focus, 40 (at least) hour weeks, and an ability to not only concentrate on one thing, but several at the same time, in the new world of multi-tasking? I think not!!!

I really wanted to ring the judgmental woman's neck. She is the same type who used to go on about how people on welfare make out like bandits, putting her at least 20 years behind reality. Makes me burn.

Realism. It's not for everyone.

[Tyler_JC]

It's nice to see another rational thinker on this board. The "save-the-world-first" crowd gets on my nerves rather quickly. If you care about people, donate to American charities. It's not racism, it's common sense. If we can improve the quality of life in this country, we can help the world later. With PO, helping others means hurting yourself. More food for Africa means less food for your people.

Conclusion, America first.

[BRAZNOFF]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('lotrfan55345', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')hat means no aid. No clinics. No medicine. No food. Nothing.

[lotrfan55345]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BRAZNOFF', ' ')mean nothing to you but a way to put sneakers on you feet?

[Tyler_JC]

If your not an American. Fine. Donate to a German charity or a French one. Or what country you are from.

The average standard of living in the world is much lower than the average standard of living for my country. I want to maintain the standard of living of the people in my country before I start sending money to 3rd world dictatorships. If you see the world as one, give up 90% of your salary. That will put you at the same level as the rest of the world.

In fact, I would rather give to a charity in my state rather than a national one. I'd rather give a quarter to a homeless guy in my town than give that money to a state charity. I'd rather give my sister a gift than help that homeless guy. Rational people want to help the people they care about before they help people that don't effect them.

Charity begins at home. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

How can you say you care about community if you don't care about your community? I hate when people in the same breath demand justice around the world, a greater sense of community, and yet refuse to say anything nice about their country.

[TWilliam]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', 'T')Williams, Can't argue with a thing you posted. Supporting everyone with an attitude problem that could easily be defined by the medical/govt./industrial complex into the "medical condition" category, is not an option.

[lotrfan55345]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', '
')How can you say you care about community if you don't care about your community? I hate when people in the same breath demand justice around the world, a greater sense of community, and yet refuse to say anything nice about their country.

[BRAZNOFF]

[QUOTE]I plan to vonlunteer to some aid agency when I turn 18 if the The shit doesnt hit the fan yet...


AAHHH This says it all..not yet 18 = lives at home with mommy and daddy has not had to live in the real world and take care of self.

Well since there is no reason to flogg a dead horse....


My god bless you and keep you and may reality never rear its ugly head in your life

[threadbear]

Lorfann, You're a remarkably mature and kind person for your age. Don't ever change.

[uNkNowN ElEmEnt]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') remember a few years back reading about how borderline personality should be classed as a clinical condition, a handicap that employers have to accomodate. Some people are just so damned self centered and narcissistic, they're impossible to work with. Whether it's technically a "disease" or a "frame of mind", isn't actually an issue. Why should any employer have to accomodate that? A clinical disease whose symptoms are being a complete jerk? Intolerance of these symptoms, with a risk of being fired, if those symptoms are expressed, would probably be somewhat therapeutic. Personality disorders have no place in the workplace. (Unless you're the boss. Then they're applauded. See Donald Trump!)

[threadbear]

Sorry Unknown, I am endlessly compassionate but don't think the workplace is a good place to practise therapy. Reread what I posted. In the workplace, whether it's disease or a frame of mind, it would be impossible to accomodate this condition. Would you like to work with someone who was truly awful and maybe even scary to be around? Would you care if they had an illness or if they were just a jerk? I wouldn't. I'd want them gone. As a matter of fact, if they were truly ill, for the reasons you describe, they SHOULD be supported by the govt.

Borderline personality disorder as a diagnosis is pretty tricky because irresponsible selfish idiots would be the first ones who would claim they had it and that they should be catered to.

Actually I typed my prior post quickly without rereading it. I think some people classed as having BPS do have a true clinical condition, but it simply CANT be catered to, in the same way other conditions are. Along with the truly ill are a vast number of people who are simply a pain in the ass, trying to explain their lousy personalities away.

[TWilliam]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('uNkNowN ElEmEnt', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') remember a few years back reading about how borderline personality should be classed as a clinical condition, a handicap that employers have to accomodate. Some people are just so damned self centered and narcissistic, they're impossible to work with. Whether it's technically a "disease" or a "frame of mind", isn't actually an issue. Why should any employer have to accomodate that? A clinical disease whose symptoms are being a complete jerk? Intolerance of these symptoms, with a risk of being fired, if those symptoms are expressed, would probably be somewhat therapeutic. Personality disorders have no place in the workplace. (Unless you're the boss. Then they're applauded. See Donald Trump!)

[PenultimateManStanding]

No one with Tourette Syndrome should be a Radio Announcer or a priest either. Surely there is some appropriate job for narcissistic A-holes. How about, oh I dont know. . . Lawyer?

(that's for you Aaron, I remember your story)

[Jack]

So, lotrfan55345 - why do you want to inflict pain on the third worlders? Why do you wish to expand their suffering?

At this juncture, you must surely wonder how I could say such things.

There exists a general consensus on this board that energy is going to become more expensive and less available at some point in the forseeable future.

But note that modern agriculture depends on extensive use of petroleum for pesticides, fertilizers, and mechanization. Due to such programs, agricultural production has increased markedly, such that a global population of 6.5 billion (and growing) can exist today. Yet, as energy becomes less available, food production is likely to decline.

Some forecasters believe that a sustainable global population is not much more than 2 billion. Others, more pessimistic, regard half-a-billion as the maximum. The advocates of a soft crash believe the reduction would occur over a century, whereas hard crash proponents regard a shorter time horizon as more likely.

Thus, when Peak Oil hits - really hits, such that the global population reverts to a sustainable level - the greater the population, the more the suffering as large numbers of people die. Understand that in such a scenario, the cause is likely to be starvation and the disease that accompanies malnutrition. It is not going to be pretty, and those involved are likely to suffer a great deal.

Now, let us consider the charitable actions you propose. Were they accomplished extensively, the mortality rate would decline. Population would begin to increase. Perhaps infant mortality would also decline. This would spur population growth more strongly still.

And the curves would intercept. Population would increase as food supplies decreased. Demand - the kind of demand that represents life and death - would exceed supply.

Most likely, those that your programs are designed to aid would be well represented amongst the dying. Indeed, more would suffer than if their numbers had remained smaller. On the other hand, there is a small chance that they could overwhelm the first world - in which case, the various posters on this board would be likely to become casualties.

No, we and they are better off if we let their numbers decline. For the piper will be paid, and the bill will soon come due.

[uNkNowN ElEmEnt]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'N')o one with Tourette Syndrome should be a Radio Announcer or a priest either. Surely there is some appropriate job for narcissistic A-holes. How about, oh I dont know. . . Lawyer?