Are we doomed to always have an underclass group of people?

[zombiekiller]

For as long as there's been people, there's been the haves and the havenots. In fact, this seems to be so ingrained in our biology that even other primates show this exact characteristic in their society. Take the Japanese snow monkeys, for example. When it gets cold, they immerse themselves in hot springs. But only the ones that were higher in their social order get to go in. The rest are left out in the cold. They even have guards preventing the havenots to enter.

Are we forever doomed to always have the haves and havenots?

 

[Benvolio]

For as long as there's been people, there's been the haves and the havenots. In fact, this seems to be so ingrained in our biology that even other primates show this exact characteristic in their society. Take the Japanese snow monkeys, for example. When it gets cold, they immerse themselves in hot springs. But only the ones that were higher in their social order get to go in. The rest are left out in the cold. They even have guards preventing the havenots to enter.

Are we forever doomed to always have the haves and havenots?

As long as we continue to bring in millions of additional poor, legally and illegally, there is no possibility of ending poverty.

 

[peeonme]

Their are different reasons why some have: ambition, intellect, inheritance to name a few.
Like wise their are different reasons why some are in need or have not; oppression, lack of ambition, lack of opportunity and lack of intellect to name some reasons on this side of the coin.

I have little doubt that the deck is stacked so that the "haves" keep on having. As has become a popular cry as of late from politicians "the system is rigged". That doesn't mean that one can't go from being a have not to a have, it means that it has been made difficult.

But, even on a level playing field you will find lazy people who don't apply themselves and will be in need, along with them those who just don't possess the skill or talent to do much more than menial work.
Plus, rich parents will leave money to children who could never have earned it on their own.

So, yes, their will always be an underclass for a number of reasons.

 

[peeonme]

As long as we continue to bring in millions of additional poor, legally and illegally, there is no possibility of ending poverty.

Have you been tested for OCD on this?

 

[NotHardUp1]

As if he were fit to pass any test, but we digress.

There will always be haves and have-nots here on this plane.

And it is not all doom. Having less doesn't mean having not enough. It is all relative.

Must we always have those who don't have enough when "enough" is basic? We don't have to, but knowing our species, we probably always will.

 

[zombiekiller]

As if he were fit to pass any test, but we digress.

There will always be haves and have-nots here on this plane.

And it is not all doom. Having less doesn't mean having not enough. It is all relative.

Must we always have those who don't have enough when "enough" is basic? We don't have to, but knowing our species, we probably always will.

But that's just it. The top 50 richest people in the world own like 1/3 of all the wealth in the world. On the other hand, there are hundreds of millions of people around the world who don't even have enough to eat on a daily basis.

Yes, I accept that there are always people who have more than others. But the levels of disparities at this point are simply ridiculous.

 

[peeonme]

But that's just it. The top 50 richest people in the world own like 1/3 of all the wealth in the world. On the other hand, there are hundreds of millions of people around the world who don't even have enough to eat on a daily basis.

Yes, I accept that there are always people who have more than others. But the levels of disparities at this point are simply ridiculous.

Unfortunately society has grown to accept the level of disparity that exists, even lower paid blue collar guys point at those bellow them and complain that minimum wages should not be raised because a hamburger will then be to expensive.

 

[NotHardUp1]

Then again, the disparities aren't new. The nobility of yore lived ridiculously above the workers who supported them, be they in Egypt, Babylon, Greece, Rome, China, England, you name it.

We have somewhat better clarity today about the degree of disparity, but we don't have sure knowledge.

On the other hand, the vastly wealthy own title to a lot of abstract things, like stock, the value of gold or gems, or real estate. Them losing title doesn't necessarily make more bread, more housing, or more clothes for the 99%.

 

[gsdx]

As long as we continue to bring in millions of additional poor, legally and illegally, there is no possibility of ending poverty.

Of course, there has always been poverty even before you started bringing in "millions of additional poor".

Do you ever think about what you're writing before you write it? You're an expert at proving your own arguments are wrong.

 

[-Kane-]

Yes.. Having a permanent underclass is essential to maintaining the socioeconomic status quo. It also serves to help the self esteems of people who drive expensive cars and live in large homes. Knowing you can't afford their lifestyle is what motivates them to keep it. If everyone can do it (and have it), then it wouldn't feel special or exclusive.

 

[peeonme]

It is all too obvious that the underclass is becoming more and more "under", wages have not only stagnated but have fallen in real dollar amounts.
If a person makes the same per hour as they did five or ten years ago they have already lost money, then we see that more and more health care costs are deducted from these wages. No, Obama care did not fix this, I find that the AHCA was aimed at a certain
wage group, the working poor.

Ever since "supply side" economics came on the scene the American worker has been screwed, many were pushed into the underclass by globalization as well.

 

[zoltanspawn]

For as long as there's been people, there's been the haves and the havenots. In fact, this seems to be so ingrained in our biology that even other primates show this exact characteristic in their society. Take the Japanese snow monkeys, for example. When it gets cold, they immerse themselves in hot springs. But only the ones that were higher in their social order get to go in. The rest are left out in the cold. They even have guards preventing the havenots to enter.

Are we forever doomed to always have the haves and havenots?

I think you're noticing something very interesting here. And that is, that there is a biological component to social structures such that hierarchies of prestige are inevitable.

It is even possible that the competition for resources that underlies this malady reaches all the way down to the simplest organisms. If there were a society of sponges, for example, it may be that some sponges would exert their personal control of abundant filtration into great status. After all, every organism thrives by getting the greater share.

Or do they? By contrast to the snow monkeys, you should consider the Bonobos. In their societies, 'rank plays a less prominent role than in other primates.' Because of their polyamorous lifestyles, the vicious drive to provide for one's own offspring is diminished. There's more fucking and less inequality.

I have no doubt that we are utterly unlike the Bonobo, though. We leave our bitches out in the cold to freeze. The filth and hunger of the poor make our own ornaments shinier. We're genetic fiends. Bloody rivers carve up the earth to provide our spawn an inheritance.

There's far fouler fruit than mere class division that hangs on our rotten branch of the tree of life.

 

[kallipolis]

In a rush to condemn the evil that man perpetrates on ones fellow man, there is the thought that from another perspective the good that man does, is often overlooked in ones rush to judgement.

The word 'good' has many meanings. For example, if a man were to shoot his grandmother at a range of five hundred yards, I should call him a good shot, but not necessarily a good man.¬ Gilbert K. Chesterton

 

[Benvolio]

Of course, there has always been poverty even before you started bringing in "millions of additional poor".

Do you ever think about what you're writing before you write it? You're an expert at proving your own arguments are wrong.

Do you ever think? How it is possible to think that bringing in millions of poor people, willing to work for low wages, year after year, decade after decade, does not increase the underclass? The effect on the blacks has been the worst. Since 1865, untold millions have come in, moved up the economic ladder, but, benefiting from discrimination, leaving the blacks behind.

 

[kallipolis]

^Poverty is never the result of ones skin colour, no matter how hard you attempt to justify your agenda, that immigration impoverishes a nation. Were that the case the United States, built on the ongoing flow of immigrants, would not be the most successful economy on this planet.

 

[Benvolio]

^Poverty is never the result of ones skin colour, no matter how hard you attempt to justify your agenda, that immigration impoverishes a nation. Were that the case the United States, built on the ongoing flow of immigrants, would not be the most successful economy on this planet.

Times have changed. We no longer have the expanding economy we once had. Our manufacturing has largely been forced overseas or has lost out to foreign competition. Most blacks would disagree with your claim the poverty is never the result of skin color. Black poverty is in large part the result of discrimination against their skin color. Wages at the bottom have not increased much in decades because of the ongoing flow of immigrants willing to work cheaper.

 

[pat grimshaw]

...immigration impoverishes a nation...

Greece has decided it has had enough impoverishment and is now sending its migrants to Turkey

The migrants aren't happy

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35956836

 

[kallipolis]

I am very well aware that there are very many White Americans who are conscious of their own economic distress, shared with many Black Americans.

I am certain that were the immigrants entering the United States, of European extraction you would not be objecting.

 

[kallipolis]

Greece has decided it has had enough impoverishment and is now sending its migrants to Turkey

The migrants aren't happy

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35956836

That's a European Union agreement that requires Greece, to return economic refugees back to Turkey, who in turn ensures that the immigrants are conveyed back to their countries of origin. Greece, and Turkey (not a EU member) are receiving EU aid to implement this plan.

This weekend's breakdown of the truce among the warring parties in Syria will encourage more Syrians to flee the bombing, death, and destruction that daily kills hundreds of innocent civilians. Competing political interests outside Syria don't care.

 

[pat grimshaw]

I say that all those who make grandiose, sanctimonious statements should prove their bona fides by doing what they say.
I say that anyone who has a motor car and an unused bed in their house has no right to condemn others.