What gets you going?

[The Persnickety Platypus]

Too often I think we clutter our minds (and this forum) with things and issues that, push comes to shove, just don't matter.

What do you think are the three absolute most important issues currently pressing humanity?


#1. Inequal resource distribution
It is bad enough that billions of people around the world cannot adequately provide for themselves. Even more infuriating is the fact that, for decades, we have had the resources available to completely abolish this problem. Allocating just a small percentage of money from the world's top 10% of income earners to impoverished areas could provide (first of all) life to those unequipted to sustain it, but moreso, opportunity for such people to make something of themselves. The combined income of world's 500 richest people alone, if properly distributed, could arguably bring about the same results. The fact that society favors the freedom and luxery of 500 people over the essential needs of over two billion is an injustice that is not getting near the attention it deserves.

#2. Conservatism
The greatest hinderance to worldwide peace and tolerance are the populations of nations who feel that to move forward as a society will forsake their precious traditions and personal prejudices. There exists a mentality in socially conservative circles that the world cannot be improved upon, that what is always will be. Consequently, they cling to their traditions, inhibitive traditions that maintain that people are to remain divided; by race, nationality, by religion, even by something as stupid as sexual orientation. They insist that the best solutions to contemporary problems can be found in the past, all the while ignoring that (despite their resistance) society has progressed to a point beyond what it once was, and that new solutions are often the ONLY solutions. How can society ever progress if we don't even allow it the chance to do so?

#3. The Media
I think the media effects us more than we realize. When you think about it, pretty much all of our information regarding the outside world is conveyed through an independent media source. What's scary is how easily bias can be injected into this news, consequently effecting our entire perception of the matter. Given this, those in the business of media are arguably amoung the most powerful people in the world, as they have unchecked control over all information. The turning point for the media was when news casting was no longer a matter of providing the public with an accurate picture of reality, but about increasing profits. How can we say that we are an informed public when we know more about some random melodromatic pedophile kidnapping story than we know about the recent landmark peace treaty signed in Uganda? Thanks to the independent media, we are still a fair ways off from winning the war against ignorance.

[McCulloch]

#1. Unequal resource distribution
It is bad enough that billions of people around the world cannot adequately provide for themselves. Even more infuriating is the fact that, for decades, we have had the resources available to completely abolish this problem. Allocating just a small percentage of money from the world's top 10% of income earners to impoverished areas could provide (first of all) life to those unequipped to sustain it, but more so, opportunity for such people to make something of themselves. The combined income of world's 500 richest people alone, if properly distributed, could arguably bring about the same results. The fact that society favors the freedom and luxery of 500 people over the essential needs of over two billion is an injustice that is not getting near the attention it deserves.

This is an important but tricky issue. Humanity has been struggling with this one for quite a while. Forced solutions have been tried and generally don't work. Yet, neither do voluntary ones. To a certain degree, the concept of enlightened self-interest has been the most effective. Convince the rich that if the poor are too oppressed they will cause unrest, or get sick or die too much and that that will have an eventual impact on the rich that outweighs the cost of helping them. Not good, but do I hear other workable solutions.
How do you take the wealth of the 500 richest people away from them to redistribute to the poor?

#2. Conservatism
The greatest hindrance to worldwide peace and tolerance are the populations of nations who feel that to move forward as a society will forsake their precious traditions and personal prejudices. There exists a mentality in socially conservative circles that the world cannot be improved upon, that what is always will be. Consequently, they cling to their traditions, inhibitive traditions that maintain that people are to remain divided; by race, nationality, by religion, even by something as stupid as sexual orientation. They insist that the best solutions to contemporary problems can be found in the past, all the while ignoring that (despite their resistance) society has progressed to a point beyond what it once was, and that new solutions are often the ONLY solutions. How can society ever progress if we don't even allow it the chance to do so?

Here, here!

#3. The Media
I think the media effects us more than we realize. When you think about it, pretty much all of our information regarding the outside world is conveyed through an independent media source. What's scary is how easily bias can be injected into this news, consequently effecting our entire perception of the matter. Given this, those in the business of media are arguably among the most powerful people in the world, as they have unchecked control over all information. The turning point for the media was when news casting was no longer a matter of providing the public with an accurate picture of reality, but about increasing profits.

When did that turning point happen? I'm thinking before the Spanish-American war.

How can we say that we are an informed public when we know more about some random melodramatic pedophile kidnapping story than we know about the recent landmark peace treaty signed in Uganda? Thanks to the independent media, we are still a fair ways off from winning the war against ignorance.

Freedom of speech and freedom of the press are critically important to democracy. The press, panders to the public, who prefer sensationalism to news. How do you hold the press to any kind of standard, without trampling on rights? One way might be to enact and enforce anti-monopoly laws, to ensure at least a variety of public voices.

The internet is another. With its low cost of entry and high immediacy, the internet does an end run around the traditional media. Anybody and everybody says what they want with few or no standards imposted.

[The Persnickety Platypus]

I'd love to debate these, but I was more aiming for other's to share what they they think are the most pressing issues.

If you are an activist type of person, I think that simplifying your most cherished principles is a great way to clear your mind of all the clutter, and help you focus on what really matters.

#1. Unequal resource distribution
It is bad enough that billions of people around the world cannot adequately provide for themselves. Even more infuriating is the fact that, for decades, we have had the resources available to completely abolish this problem. Allocating just a small percentage of money from the world's top 10% of income earners to impoverished areas could provide (first of all) life to those unequipped to sustain it, but more so, opportunity for such people to make something of themselves. The combined income of world's 500 richest people alone, if properly distributed, could arguably bring about the same results. The fact that society favors the freedom and luxery of 500 people over the essential needs of over two billion is an injustice that is not getting near the attention it deserves.

This is an important but tricky issue. Humanity has been struggling with this one for quite a while. Forced solutions have been tried and generally don't work. Yet, neither do voluntary ones.

Honestly, I don't find this issue in the least bit tricky. Bottom line is, we have the resources needed to get the job done. The way I see it, the only matter of contention is whether we can ever get serious about this problem. If the answer is yes, then the solution is clear.

(And if that solution means forsaking an individuals freedom to do what he/she wishes with his/her money, then so be it.)

Convince the rich that if the poor are too oppressed they will cause unrest, or get sick or die too much and that that will have an eventual impact on the rich that outweighs the cost of helping them. Not good, but do I hear other workable solutions.

Indeed, from an economist's point of view, there are absolutely no positive benefits from losing billions upon billions of potential man-hours every year just because it seems more convenient in the short run to let millions of perfectly capable workers waste away.

The benefits of ending poverty far outweigh the cost it would require to do so. Someone just needs to take the initiative.

How do you take the wealth of the 500 richest people away from them to redistribute to the poor?

Well, I have some ideas, but none are voluntary...

Freedom of speech and freedom of the press are critically important to democracy. The press, panders to the public, who prefer sensationalism to news. How do you hold the press to any kind of standard, without trampling on rights? One way might be to enact and enforce anti-monopoly laws, to ensure at least a variety of public voices.

I was thinking a bi-partisan broadcasting outlet, set up with certain "checks and balances" which would prevent biased perspectives from being passed off as fact.

Profit incentive would also have to be abolished, which most likely means nationalizing the media. Sounds terrifying, I know, but with the proper checks in place, there would theoretically be no way for the government to manipulate the news.

Of course, as you said, the internet is another. If the internet can eventually abolish the traditional media (newspaper sales have been down ever since the web took off), many of my percieved problems may not need fixing. The internet is a much less dangerous media source, given that there is such a wider variety of viewpoints comming across. Put all these viewpoints together, and you should get something resembling reality, or a close proximity thereof.

[Confused]

I guess humanity as whole may consider the three you have posted as being the most pressing issues. But I see differently, as you know. I will word it the best I can but expressing my concepts on paper is harder than verbally so bare with me.

!) Family: Family is no longer considered the most important resource. I personally have never met my grandparent (nor have my 8 other brothers and sisters), I haven't seen my father since I was 9. Most who live in my area have family across the country who they speak with maybe once a month at most. Children grow up with little exposure to the heritage. To their grandparents. Even to their parents. As the family structure breaks down, people such as myself find they don't really fit anywhere specific in society. We have chilren without having the benefit of going to mom for questions because mom lives on the other side of the country. We try it alone, and frustration results. Add special needs children into the mix and it becomes even more complicated. Grandparents are shuffled into nursing homes every day. Tell me, if your parents put you in a nursing home as a baby because you couldn't care for yourself, where would you be? I am not referring to special cases such as alzheimers, dementia, etc.. where they are a threat to themselves and others. But the breakdown of family values had led to societies values being placed outside of family and we try to compensate with materialistic things and power.

2) Legal system: In the United States, every law enacted started out for a good reason. Ie: child abuse. Initially it was in response to beating your child. Now you cant even spank your child or yell at them without it being considered physical or emotion abuse. Your teenager doesn't like the rule to be home at midnight, she calls a hotline and claims abuse. McDonalds coffee is too hot, well sue them. Complication arise during a surgery and despite the best efforts, the person dies, family sues and even if the case it thown out, the MD malpractice insurane sky rockets as a result. A crack addicted mother give birth, the state takes the baby, places it in foster care where it is abused or killed. The mother then sues the state. Forget the fact that the mother set up the situation to begin with, but no, instead, blame an imperfect system. People abuse the legal system every day, and we say, well it isn't a perfect system, but it is the best we got. Well I say, hell no. Any system that lets a child molester out of prison is a failed system. Any system that allows frivilous law suits is a failed system. Any system that says the more children you have, the more money we will give you to support them (AFDC) is a failed system.

3) Religion: yes, I hate to say it, but relgion as a whole gets me irrate. Any man who feels he has the right to judge me based on some supernatural concept, when that supernatural concept itself warns you against it grinds my grain.

Theres my opinon. Not much, but the top three things that piss me off.

[Vladd44]

Jared Diamond put forward some compelling theories regarding current wealth distribution in his Guns Germs and Steel Book.

If you haven't read it, its worth the time.

But for me, most of the issues raised by others really boil down to just a few common root causes.

The outdated concepts of government we are all currently under in this world is not only a result of the problem, it is often the cause. It is a self perpetuating juggernaut that continues with the purpose of reallocating wealth into the hands of those who least need it.

Even worse, by entangling so much wealth into the control of so few we have taken the ability to make the most basic decisions away from family units and given it to the state.

By allowing the rich to increasingly place the tax burden on a middle class, we are taking away both a familys ability to make its own choices and any sense of responsibility that goes along with it.

The only way to expect government to start saying the right things is to remove their ability to effect change. Only when it has no vested interest in things remaining the same will our 'leaders' even consider pointing us in an ethical direction.

But to summarize, what gets me going?

A system that denies people basic human rights through taxation and regulation. Which by doing so take away any feeling of personal responsiblity, or the belief that an individual can make a difference. Which has helped break down safety nets that humans have counted on since the beginning of our species.

Whether the culprit is reactionary leaders in govt or religion, the song is the same. The meek shall inherit the earth, so be meek and pay your taxes/tithes.

[Confused]

Jared Diamond put forward some compelling theories regarding current wealth distribution in his Guns Germs and Steel Book.

If you haven't read it, its worth the time.

But for me, most of the issues raised by others really boil down to just a few common root causes.

The outdated concepts of government we are all currently under in this world is not only a result of the problem, it is often the cause. It is a self perpetuating juggernaut that continues with the purpose of reallocating wealth into the hands of those who least need it.

Even worse, by entangling so much wealth into the control of so few we have taken the ability to make the most basic decisions away from family units and given it to the state.

By allowing the rich to increasingly place the tax burden on a middle class, we are taking away both a familys ability to make its own choices and any sense of responsibility that goes along with it.

The only way to expect government to start saying the right things is to remove their ability to effect change. Only when it has no vested interest in things remaining the same will our 'leaders' even consider pointing us in an ethical direction.

But to summarize, what gets me going?

A system that denies people basic human rights through taxation and regulation. Which by doing so take away any feeling of personal responsiblity, or the belief that an individual can make a difference. Which has helped break down safety nets that humans have counted on since the beginning of our species.

Whether the culprit is reactionary leaders in govt or religion, the song is the same. The meek shall inherit the earth, so be meek and pay your taxes/tithes.

Very, very, very good book

[The Persnickety Platypus]

The outdated concepts of government we are all currently under in this world is not only a result of the problem, it is often the cause. It is a self perpetuating juggernaut that continues with the purpose of reallocating wealth into the hands of those who least need it.

Even worse, by entangling so much wealth into the control of so few we have taken the ability to make the most basic decisions away from family units and given it to the state.

By allowing the rich to increasingly place the tax burden on a middle class, we are taking away both a familys ability to make its own choices and any sense of responsibility that goes along with it.

The only way to expect government to start saying the right things is to remove their ability to effect change. Only when it has no vested interest in things remaining the same will our 'leaders' even consider pointing us in an ethical direction.

Remove government influence and society will quickly revert to social darwinism, which certainly worse than anything the government can do to us (consider the Rockefeller years).

The trick is not to restrict the government's power, it is to direct that power to a more ethical, equitable venue. As far as modern policy is concerned, if you want to redirect government interest in favor of the majority, only one thing is required; campaign finance reform. With nothing to regulate campaign contributions, it gives the rich a major advantage. The more money you give to a politician, the more inclined he will be to win your support. That is why Republicans are so eager to pass their rediculous tax breaks for the rich. It's not because they genuinely think it's the right thing to do; it's about appeasing the rich corporate elite who got them into office.

95% of canidates who recieve the most campaign contributions win their elections. Essentially, the American "democratic" system is selling off elections to the highest bidder. No wonder why there are still starving people within our borders. It's because the government does not control our nation; the corporate elite do.

[Confused]

The Persnickety Platypus:
That is why Republicans are so eager to pass their rediculous tax breaks for the rich

.

Are you going to try to tell me that no democrat has ever done anything to favor the rich??

The Persnickety Platypus:
Essentially, the American "democratic" system is selling off elections to the highest bidder. No wonder why there are still starving people within our borders. It's because the government does not control our nation; the corporate elite do.

You realize this is the second thing we have agree on. This can't become a trend. It is true though, the poor are encouraged to remain poor while the rich are encouraged to remain rich. But I stll beleive that of the governments available right now, Democracy hold the best hope. And I also beleive that it is possible to break out of the cycle. I had 8 sisters and brothers, one mother. I went to college on financial aid, never got a scholarship, nothing until my junior year. Yes, I will be paying off student loans forever, but I have broken out of the white trailer trash park class, and with any hope, my children will go even further (at least my two oldest).

[Vladd44]

Platypus, I must admit that I often find your posts thought provoking and well reasoned. But on this matter, I think we are in as opposite positions as possible.

I do not accept that government can be redirected towards a positive aim. By default power is such a dangerous and corrupting factor that the only way to minimize its effects are to diffuse them as much as possible.

Remove government influence and society will quickly revert to social darwinism,

There is a certain level of truth to that statement, however I am of the opinion that shifting power away from the govt and moving it to the individual would result in forcing people to take responsiblity for their own actions, and the world around them. I am of the belief that the current system relieves its citizens of their responsiblity to other people, to community and to family. Remove this, and people will (for the most part) act responsibly. But as long as we are treated like children, we will act like them.

The trick is not to restrict the government's power, it is to direct that power to a more ethical, equitable venue.

I applaud the sentiment, but I simply do not believe it is realistic. It doesn't matter who is in control, or their intentions government is not capable of such a path.

Power is a danger, however well intentioned, the consolidation of power gives the few in control the ability to abuse that power over the masses.

I would rather see abuses on a smaller scale from individuals that affect a few, rather than the few affect all.

As far as modern policy is concerned, if you want to redirect government interest in favor of the majority, only one thing is required; campaign finance reform.

I cannot disagree, if we are going to keep our current system, campaign reform is a must. I cannot be convinced that the billions contributed to both sides doesn't buy something.

On the other hand, I am no fan of majority decision. The fact that most people want/don't want, support/hate something does not make it right. One more reason I wish to empower the individual, not a system.

It's because the government does not control our nation; the corporate elite do.

Agree wholeheartedly, the International Corporations will replace the nation-state if we continue in the direction we are headed.

[Galphanore]

1. Willful Ignorance - The kind of person who not only does not know, but activly does not want to know. These are the kind of people who will look at you with a smug look on their face and say emphatically "I don't care about all that, I have faith." when you're having a discussion with them about their religion and find a point they cannot refute.
2. Discrimintation - Of all kinds really, this includes everyone from the people who think it's a good idea to say things like "I don't know that Atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots." to the people who, going to the other side, say things like "I would ban religion completely".
3. Conservatism - Here I agree with the Platypus. It just irritates the hell out of me when people hide from, fear, and try to make illegal the very act of changing. We are all human, none of us is perfect, so why insist that we should not change?