Can you make it out of the lower classes with a little elbow grease?

A

Apossum

Guest
just curious what people's thoughts are on this.


edit, the first "no" choice should be "maybe"

also, write in other options. of course the poll doesn't cover everything
 
The question ain't "can," it's "how likely is it."

If I only had the desire to dig up the wealth distribution chart from the NYT from last year - basically gave each income quintile a different color and showed them 20 years later (based on real data), and where they ended up. Needless to say, most of those in the bottom 20% stayed put, while some moved up - but, of course, most who moved up moved one income quintile up, meaning they went from the bottom 20% of income earners to the bottom 40% of income earners.

When you consider that the difference between bottom 20 and bottom 40 is a couple thousand dollars per year, you get to see how meaningless that is.

Anyway, I'm groggy and don't feel like data mining right now, so take me with a grain of salt until I do.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']The question ain't "can," it's "how likely is it."

If I only had the desire to dig up the wealth distribution chart from the NYT from last year - basically gave each income quintile a different color and showed them 20 years later (based on real data), and where they ended up. Needless to say, most of those in the bottom 20% stayed put, while some moved up - but, of course, most who moved up moved one income quintile up, meaning they went from the bottom 20% of income earners to the bottom 40% of income earners.

When you consider that the difference between bottom 20 and bottom 40 is a couple thousand dollars per year, you get to see how meaningless that is.

Anyway, I'm groggy and don't feel like data mining right now, so take me with a grain of salt until I do.[/QUOTE]


yer right about "how likely" and when I posted this I was just about falling over..

I've just finished "Ain't No Making It" and have seen all that data, so you know what I'm thinking right now ;)

just curious what the general CAG opinion is...
 
No one ever said it was easy, but it's been done countless times. If you aren't determined, though, it won't happen. Some luck doesn't hurt either, but luck favors the prepared.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Ah...of course. The "Hallway Hangers" and the "Brothers." I'm familiar with MacLeod's work.

Good stuff, really.[/QUOTE]


totally. not just for the content, but as an ethnography, it's really inspirational stuff. I still have to read the part about his methods and experiences...

(in fact, I should be writing a paper about it right now instead of posting on cag, argh)
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']No one ever said it was easy, but it's been done countless times. If you aren't determined, though, it won't happen. Some luck doesn't hurt either, but luck favors the prepared.[/QUOTE]


hey, about 3% of the poorest of the poor make it to that top bracket a year. and about 3% of the top bracket drop to the lowest of the low. iirc. boy, if statistics could talk...
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Sounds like you were throwing darts at the "Old Farmer's Almanac" looking for sayings. ;)[/QUOTE]

w3rd, dawg

i thought luck favored the wealthy and well-hung

shows what i know
 
[quote name='PKRipp3r']w3rd, dawg

i thought luck favored the wealthy and well-hung

shows what i know[/QUOTE]


:lol:

I'm way too passive for the Vs. forum. I should've cut his post apart...to show my toughness...or something. or at least commented on the "vagueness" alert that went off in my head when I read it. ;) Am I supposed to be demanding supporting data here or what? cause I'm not expecting well-supported arguments...I can respond seriously to Brycedraven. my standards can kill your standards in a limbo contest :lol:
 
[quote name='Apossum']:lol:

I'm way too passive for the Vs. forum. I should've cut his post apart...to show my toughness...or something. or at least commented on the "vagueness" alert that went off in my head when I read it. ;)[/QUOTE]

lol... let er rip

so to speak

it's all good
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Sounds like you were throwing darts at the "Old Farmer's Almanac" looking for sayings. ;)[/QUOTE]

LMAO. I was too distracted by my PS work to notice I sounded like a fortune cookie.
 
[quote name='xeverex18']If I was black i might have a better chance because there is rap and basketball.[/QUOTE]

Please tell me this was a comment made in jest.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']Please tell me this was a comment made in jest.[/QUOTE]

are you denying that black people are vastly superior at hip-hop and basketball related activities over other ethnic groups?

*posterizes you*

webber-dunk1.jpg
 
[quote name='mykevermin']The question ain't "can," it's "how likely is it."

If I only had the desire to dig up the wealth distribution chart from the NYT from last year - basically gave each income quintile a different color and showed them 20 years later (based on real data), and where they ended up. Needless to say, most of those in the bottom 20% stayed put, while some moved up - but, of course, most who moved up moved one income quintile up, meaning they went from the bottom 20% of income earners to the bottom 40% of income earners.

When you consider that the difference between bottom 20 and bottom 40 is a couple thousand dollars per year, you get to see how meaningless that is.

Anyway, I'm groggy and don't feel like data mining right now, so take me with a grain of salt until I do.[/QUOTE]


Yeah, and the difference today is that now those bottom 20% have 2 color televisions, digital cable, cellular service, and $100 tennis shoes. Not everyone in life has motivation, myke. Some people will end up at the bottom no matter how much you try to make the world an evenly distributed free-for-all. People are not poor becuase the rich steal their money.

Contrary to your belief, a couple thousand dollars a year is a significant difference. Just think of what $2000 a year in investment savings could do for a person in 20 years time. Figure it at 8% and get back to me with a figure. That additional 'couple thousand' could be put to good use paying a mortgage instead of rent.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']People are not poor becuase the rich steal their money.
[/QUOTE]

I could argue this just as easily depending on the situation. Face facts, a new generation of Robber Barons is coming, they're just using different tactics to pillage. What do you think Free Trade is REALLY all about? There's a reason they're Outsourcing those jobs to China. Their attempt is to slowly siphon off all the wealth from the American Middle Class and around the world. And the peoples goal behind them is to infantize the U.S. because they fear what could happen if we wake up and overthrow them, even if we have to murder them to force their hand off us. We're one of the few countries that can truly be self-sufficient if need be, so they wish to strip us of the tools that could make that possible. Ask yourself if in even 10 years if we'll still have most of our crops coming from here or the processing done here. Sounds absurd costwise but so does making our country an import country when we're not Japan or a more resource starved country that needs it. Tarriffs were created for a reason, to ensure economic prosperity against countries that don't possibly maintain the same labor standard we do or they don't have the same standard of living. Ask yourself this question: Why should an American have to compete for the job of an American company when they don't have 6 people living in a cramped house, no AC and Coal for hear like the Chinese person has? They shouldn't and the Chinese person shouldn't be expected to live in such a shitty situation also however I DO like the note of the daughter-in-law moving in with her husbands parents and being referenced daughter and calling them mom and dad as such. Jeez that Taiwanese Drama.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']Yeah, and the difference today is that now those bottom 20% have 2 color televisions, digital cable, cellular service, and $100 tennis shoes. Not everyone in life has motivation, myke. Some people will end up at the bottom no matter how much you try to make the world an evenly distributed free-for-all. People are not poor becuase the rich steal their money.

Contrary to your belief, a couple thousand dollars a year is a significant difference. Just think of what $2000 a year in investment savings could do for a person in 20 years time. Figure it at 8% and get back to me with a figure. That additional 'couple thousand' could be put to good use paying a mortgage instead of rent.[/QUOTE]

http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032005/hhinc/new05_000.htm

When moving up from the bottom 20% to the 2nd quintile, the income ranges moves from ($0-18,499 annually pretax) to ($18,500-34,737 annually pretax). We're not talking about moving into the domain of homeownership or investments at thatpoint. We're talking about moving from a household with no car to one that can afford a nicer used or low-end new car.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']Yeah, and the difference today is that now those bottom 20% have 2 color televisions, digital cable, cellular service, and $100 tennis shoes. Not everyone in life has motivation, myke. Some people will end up at the bottom no matter how much you try to make the world an evenly distributed free-for-all. People are not poor becuase the rich steal their money.
[/QUOTE]


they might own one or two nice things like that, but their house is empty, their food sucks, their clothes are bought from goodwill and they probably live in a project where people are constantly tempting their kids with crack and about any other bad lifestyle you can think of....their kids might even take that opportunity--considering their schools will not prepare them for anything more than a shit job. if the kid even has the motivation to attend said school, after seeing that hardly anyone is better off having attended it.

go visit a project...it's a lot more complex than you think. it's easy to attribute it to motivation, but that's not even half the battle. and at this point, it has nothing to do with even distribution (I'm personally weary of marxist-socialist ideas).

cleaning up the culture to lower the crime rate, and helping people live comfortably on less money is the first step, since these people are in no condition to overthrow a government (who would most likely gun them down if that ever happened.)
 
[quote name='PKRipp3r']are you denying that black people are vastly superior at hip-hop and basketball related activities over other ethnic groups?[/QUOTE]

Surely that is opinion, although I would agree with the assessment that there have been more good black basketball players and hip-hop artists than white ones. But really, that didn't have anything to do with my point. My point was to question if you really feel that you would have a good chance of getting rich through basketball or hip-hop if you were black. Do you really think that way?
 
[quote name='Sarang01']I could argue this just as easily depending on the situation. Face facts, a new generation of Robber Barons is coming, they're just using different tactics to pillage. What do you think Free Trade is REALLY all about? There's a reason they're Outsourcing those jobs to China. Their attempt is to slowly siphon off all the wealth from the American Middle Class and around the world. And the peoples goal behind them is to infantize the U.S. because they fear what could happen if we wake up and overthrow them, even if we have to murder them to force their hand off us. We're one of the few countries that can truly be self-sufficient if need be, so they wish to strip us of the tools that could make that possible. Ask yourself if in even 10 years if we'll still have most of our crops coming from here or the processing done here. Sounds absurd costwise but so does making our country an import country when we're not Japan or a more resource starved country that needs it. Tarriffs were created for a reason, to ensure economic prosperity against countries that don't possibly maintain the same labor standard we do or they don't have the same standard of living. Ask yourself this question: Why should an American have to compete for the job of an American company when they don't have 6 people living in a cramped house, no AC and Coal for hear like the Chinese person has? They shouldn't and the Chinese person shouldn't be expected to live in such a shitty situation also however I DO like the note of the daughter-in-law moving in with her husbands parents and being referenced daughter and calling them mom and dad as such. Jeez that Taiwanese Drama.[/QUOTE]

For all your rhetoric about helping the poor, yet if the poor are in other countries and they want to improve their lives, fuck 'em, right?
 
[quote name='elprincipe']For all your rhetoric about helping the poor, yet if the poor are in other countries and they want to improve their lives, fuck 'em, right?[/QUOTE]
Exactly. Now you understand.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']For all your rhetoric about helping the poor, yet if the poor are in other countries and they want to improve their lives, fuck 'em, right?[/QUOTE]

First you've ignored my comments about labor standards. Fact is International Businesses will find any area they can to cut costs if they can get away with it even at a chance of massive loss of life in an area. I don't neccessarily have issues with cutting costs as long as it truly makes sense.
However let's put all this into perspective. You think I don't give two shits about the poor. How about this? Look at the wages people are being paid in China and the hazards they're being exposed to in some workplaces on a daily basis they couldn't get away with here. Oh and as for wages if they threaten to strike or ask the government for help they're gone or the strike is broken. If you argue Free Enterprise then the workers should be just as free to strike if they think they're being underpaid right? Also the government should stay out of it between the two instead of helping one side or the other.
What I would like is Fair Trade, not Free, where neither of us lose and both of us export our cultural notables without Tarriffs. As it stands now I just see the Middle Class being pulled down and weakened and I truly doubt China's poor are really moving up to the Middle Class and if so, not much.
Here's what I mean by cultural notables, Silk, Cheongsams, films from that region and like products should not have tarriffs on them. Now, though, if it's culturally ambiguous like t-shirts and others like clothing tarriffs. The same idea applies to products with Japan like video games and here though I'm sure there are no tarriffs on either to begin with.
 
[quote name='Sarang01']First you've ignored my comments about labor standards. Fact is International Businesses will find any area they can to cut costs if they can get away with it even at a chance of massive loss of life in an area. I don't neccessarily have issues with cutting costs as long as it truly makes sense.
However let's put all this into perspective. You think I don't give two shits about the poor. How about this? Look at the wages people are being paid in China and the hazards they're being exposed to in some workplaces on a daily basis they couldn't get away with here. Oh and as for wages if they threaten to strike or ask the government for help they're gone or the strike is broken. If you argue Free Enterprise then the workers should be just as free to strike if they think they're being underpaid right? Also the government should stay out of it between the two instead of helping one side or the other.
What I would like is Fair Trade, not Free, where neither of us lose and both of us export our cultural notables without Tarriffs. As it stands now I just see the Middle Class being pulled down and weakened and I truly doubt China's poor are really moving up to the Middle Class and if so, not much.
Here's what I mean by cultural notables, Silk, Cheongsams, films from that region and like products should not have tarriffs on them. Now, though, if it's culturally ambiguous like t-shirts and others like clothing tarriffs. The same idea applies to products with Japan like video games and here though I'm sure there are no tarriffs on either to begin with.[/QUOTE]
You incorporate Japanese video games into EVERY post you make. ;o
 
Well, the most direct route out of the lower classes is to go to college, and you'd have to go for free if you're poor. To do that, you'd need to get fantastic grades and test scores and get the various need-based grants from the government.
 
[quote name='Brak']You incorporate Japanese video games into EVERY post you make. ;o[/QUOTE]

You realize I was including American games in that reference as well right?

edit: Evan that's debatable with the situation of outsourcing and now how usually fields that require quite a bit of intelligence like coding are up for grabs by Indians who are willing to work for a lot less. Just you wait and you'll start to hear of Ubisoft, EA and some other moving some studios in whole or part to India with maybe the exception of the game concepts. Basically I'm saying the hard coding will be done there. I could argue even Pharmaceutical work in the same vein and go on. About the only place you don't have to worry is writing. I can argue them importing doctors from India much as Hospitals are trying to screw nursing staff around the nation by hiring Pnaii who will work for much less than their American counterparts.
 
Yes but only if you put that goal above all others. I've met a number of people who were in college for that reason and it's really easy when you've got sick parents, children to take care of, or full time job to focus your time and energy elsewhere besides making more money.
 
[quote name='Sarang01']First you've ignored my comments about labor standards. Fact is International Businesses will find any area they can to cut costs if they can get away with it even at a chance of massive loss of life in an area. I don't neccessarily have issues with cutting costs as long as it truly makes sense.
However let's put all this into perspective. You think I don't give two shits about the poor. How about this? Look at the wages people are being paid in China and the hazards they're being exposed to in some workplaces on a daily basis they couldn't get away with here. Oh and as for wages if they threaten to strike or ask the government for help they're gone or the strike is broken. If you argue Free Enterprise then the workers should be just as free to strike if they think they're being underpaid right? Also the government should stay out of it between the two instead of helping one side or the other.
What I would like is Fair Trade, not Free, where neither of us lose and both of us export our cultural notables without Tarriffs. As it stands now I just see the Middle Class being pulled down and weakened and I truly doubt China's poor are really moving up to the Middle Class and if so, not much.
Here's what I mean by cultural notables, Silk, Cheongsams, films from that region and like products should not have tarriffs on them. Now, though, if it's culturally ambiguous like t-shirts and others like clothing tarriffs. The same idea applies to products with Japan like video games and here though I'm sure there are no tarriffs on either to begin with.[/QUOTE]

Obviously I don't support things like sweatshops and child labor, but your position would keep the rich rich and the poor poor, something you claim to want to remedy. If you really want people to be able to improve their lot, surely you don't support things like agricultural tarrifs on poor African countries or tarrifs on textiles from poor Central American countries.

But I forgot, you are basically protectionist because you feel somehow that will "save American jobs." The fact is, when you look at Europe, they have more protectionism and more taxes, and look at the unemployment rate in places like Germany and France (more than 10 percent) compared to here (less than 5 percent). We shouldn't be worried about losing some jobs to poorer countries as much as we should be worried about being the leader in what will obviously be the future of economic growth, fields like biotechnology and IT.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']Obviously I don't support things like sweatshops and child labor, but your position would keep the rich rich and the poor poor, something you claim to want to remedy. If you really want people to be able to improve their lot, surely you don't support things like agricultural tarrifs on poor African countries or tarrifs on textiles from poor Central American countries.

But I forgot, you are basically protectionist because you feel somehow that will "save American jobs." The fact is, when you look at Europe, they have more protectionism and more taxes, and look at the unemployment rate in places like Germany and France (more than 10 percent) compared to here (less than 5 percent). We shouldn't be worried about losing some jobs to poorer countries as much as we should be worried about being the leader in what will obviously be the future of economic growth, fields like biotechnology and IT.[/QUOTE]

First with IT I can debate that if it's sent overseas. Honestly wtf should I care about said Corporation if the only people in the U.S. who have jobs for it are management?
With Biotech what field are you narrowing in on? I'm assuming Gene Therapy and the like which I'm not opposed except in the Cosmetic sense and I don't mean I'm for keeping Cleft Palate, rather I'm opposed to doing anything with it other than correcting genetic disorders, like Cancers et all that. Anything Gattacaesque with Gene Therapy should be outlawed in every country in the world as it sets an unfair advantage to those who have money and those who don't and keeps it that way plus I think there's something genuinely sick about customizing a baby like a doll or other consumer product. It's nature and should be left alone as much as possible.
You also want to talk about using biologically related materials to process things and so forth or are you more on about Quantum?
When you say Sweatshops and Child Labor aren't you being redundant or are you implying some distinct differences besides shitty wages in both?
When you mention Europe's employment percentage being so shitty I would also ask you what's their comparative per person income as well compared to us. taking into account the paid Healthcare and Education systems some have. I mean I can just say 5% less unemployment here but if make 30-50% less then them then it still ends up better for them there pretty much.
 
Of course you can become a success even starting from the very bottom.

You will have more obstacles in your way, but that's life. Not everyone is going to have it easy.

Life isn't about your circumstances, or what befalls you (good or bad). It's about who you are inside and how you handle things. When you grasp that fundamental truth, you no longer look at the world via restrictions and reasons to fail- but rather as being limitless and full of possibilities.

At least, if you are a citizen of a free state.
 
[quote name='penmyst']Of course you can become a success even starting from the very bottom.

You will have more obstacles in your way, but that's life. Not everyone is going to have it easy.

Life isn't about your circumstances, or what befalls you (good or bad). It's about who you are inside and how you handle things. When you grasp that fundamental truth, you no longer look at the world via restrictions and reasons to fail- but rather as being limitless and full of possibilities.

At least, if you are a citizen of a free state.[/QUOTE]


in relative terms you could be a success..like starting out at the bottom and making it to the near bottom. then your kids could possibly take another step.

but the "fundamental truth" stuff really doesn't fly...everyone in life has different obstacles and circumstances, thus everyone has a different "fundamental truth." there will always be anomalies and people who manage to break free, of course. our system isn't made to support many of them for one reason or another, or it just doesn't let many through.
 
[quote name='Sarang01']First with IT I can debate that if it's sent overseas. Honestly wtf should I care about said Corporation if the only people in the U.S. who have jobs for it are management?[/quote]

What are you talking about? You think firms can just fire all their employees except management, move the jobs overseas and be profitable? Think again.

[quote name='Sarang01']With Biotech what field are you narrowing in on? I'm assuming Gene Therapy and the like which I'm not opposed except in the Cosmetic sense and I don't mean I'm for keeping Cleft Palate, rather I'm opposed to doing anything with it other than correcting genetic disorders, like Cancers et all that. Anything Gattacaesque with Gene Therapy should be outlawed in every country in the world as it sets an unfair advantage to those who have money and those who don't and keeps it that way plus I think there's something genuinely sick about customizing a baby like a doll or other consumer product. It's nature and should be left alone as much as possible.[/quote]

Boy, you don't know much about this field. Yes, part of it is gene therapy, a small part. I certainly am repulsed by any genetic engineering of human children as you are. But biotech crops, nanotechnology and other related fields are really the future, wouldn't you say?

[quote name='Sarang01']When you mention Europe's employment percentage being so shitty I would also ask you what's their comparative per person income as well compared to us. taking into account the paid Healthcare and Education systems some have. I mean I can just say 5% less unemployment here but if make 30-50% less then them then it still ends up better for them there pretty much.[/QUOTE]

So let's look at the numbers:

http://www.finfacts.com/biz10/globalworldincomepercapita.htm

COUNTRY_NAME 2003 2004

Luxembourg 45750 56230
Norway 43400 52030
Switzerland 40680 48230
United States 37870 41400
Denmark 33580 40650
Iceland 30910 38620
Japan 34190 37180
Sweden 28910 35770
Ireland 27020 34280
United Kingdom 28320 33940
Finland 27060 32790
Austria 26810 32300
Netherlands 26240 31700
Belgium 25760 31030
Germany 25270 30120
France 24750 30090
Click to expand...

Now, consider that most European countries (all ?) employ a VAT (value-added tax) system instead of income tax. In other words, they pay a fat 30-40% markup on everything they buy that goes into the government instead of a progressive income tax that we employ. The U.S. beats France and Germany, the two largest economies in Europe, by more than $10,000 per capita as of 2005. Given their anemic economic growth rates, I don't see them catching up soon.

Most Europeans would kill to have our economic successes, but their citizens are so dependent on their own governments to take care of them (aka the welfare state) that they can never realistically change back to what we are (more or less): a laissez-faire, free market, high-opportunity economy.
 
Nanotechnology I don't have issues with but Biotech crops, no, just no. I don't trust Pharma not to poison the product to make more profit which is why I oppose GMO's.
You can think I'm being overly pessimistic but I know you're not an idiot and can follow through on my reasoning, my logic. If they rig the game from beginning to end it's the most certain way to profit. Why? After all do you see the name Novartis on a bag of Sweet Peas? Because they poison it and reap the rewards from getting people sick.
I miss the days when Corporations had to exist for the good of the people and profit was a side benefit. Now it seems they shirk the people and focus on windfalls for their shareholders. I truly believe actions such as what happened at Bhopal are commonplace among Multinational Corporations. Maybe they're not so obvious but they happen readily unknown to fatten wallets.
I just see the writing on the wall in general.
Also when you bring up Biotechnology I was talking with a woman and she made a good point that it seems the Medical Industry is trying to make Stem Cells the new cure and brought up how Herbs and combinations as such can cure some diseases already. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Herbs can cure Spinal cord injuries and the like but I think she made an excellent point. If I hear you disagree about Herbs working I'll truly think you an idiot though. I'm not saying some aren't bullshit but I think there's a reason they're so widely discredited in general and it's because you can't patent Herbs because they come from nature, you can patent a process or mixture but not the Herb itself and this is why Pharma is so hellbent on discrediting it, because can't make as much money as they can from selling drugs with who knows how many side effects.
 
[quote name='evanft']Well, the most direct route out of the lower classes is to go to college, and you'd have to go for free if you're poor. To do that, you'd need to get fantastic grades and test scores and get the various need-based grants from the government.[/QUOTE]

If you live in Georgia and have the grades to get into Georgia Tech, you go free. Same goes for every institution in the state. All you need is a B average to get a scholarship, but with increasing competition, you need to do better than that.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']Surely that is opinion, although I would agree with the assessment that there have been more good black basketball players and hip-hop artists than white ones. But really, that didn't have anything to do with my point. My point was to question if you really feel that you would have a good chance of getting rich through basketball or hip-hop if you were black. Do you really think that way?[/QUOTE]

of course not, and i was just being silly

those odds are LONG no matter the color of your skin

nobody anywhere should count on a profession in entertainment or professional sports, without having a solid backup

even the MOST talented people, regardless of ethnicity, can catch a career ending injury at any point

it's just a risky way to make a paycheck any way you slice it
 
[quote name='Sarang01']Nanotechnology I don't have issues with but Biotech crops, no, just no. I don't trust Pharma not to poison the product to make more profit which is why I oppose GMO's.[/QUOTE]

Like it or not, biotech is already here. The corn you eat is probably biotech corn. There is no requirement for it to be labeled or anything.

As for misgivings about it, I do have some. As with most things, it can be a good thing if done responsibly and a bad thing if done irresponsibly. I'm perhaps not as worried as you are about corporations intentionally poisoning people (think of it this way: remember the tobacco settlement?), but messing with the genetic makeup of things and then releasing it into nature can be a very frightening proposition. Not to mention that it always seems that people think we know a lot more about the world and everything in it and how it works than we really do.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']Like it or not, biotech is already here. The corn you eat is probably biotech corn. There is no requirement for it to be labeled or anything.

As for misgivings about it, I do have some. As with most things, it can be a good thing if done responsibly and a bad thing if done irresponsibly. I'm perhaps not as worried as you are about corporations intentionally poisoning people (think of it this way: remember the tobacco settlement?), but messing with the genetic makeup of things and then releasing it into nature can be a very frightening proposition. Not to mention that it always seems that people think we know a lot more about the world and everything in it and how it works than we really do.[/QUOTE]

Actually correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't everything labeled as Organic with the USDA seal have to be GMO free? If not I'm taking it up with my representatives from Congress immediately.
How can you not be worried about them poisoning people? It's just good business sense for them to do it then reap the benefits when they come into the doctors office sick. Granted I think there's something wrong when you act more beholden to your shareholders then keeping in line with the public good but as it is now Sociopathic behavior from them is allowed if not encouraged. Also in terms of the media catching them you and I both know the media is firmly under their thumb and has been for a while, the complete discreditation of almost all Herbs in the mainstream is proof enough of that.
 
[quote name='Sarang01']Actually correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't everything labeled as Organic with the USDA seal have to be GMO free? If not I'm taking it up with my representatives from Congress immediately.
How can you not be worried about them poisoning people? It's just good business sense for them to do it then reap the benefits when they come into the doctors office sick. Granted I think there's something wrong when you act more beholden to your shareholders then keeping in line with the public good but as it is now Sociopathic behavior from them is allowed if not encouraged. Also in terms of the media catching them you and I both know the media is firmly under their thumb and has been for a while, the complete discreditation of almost all Herbs in the mainstream is proof enough of that.[/QUOTE]

Yes, if it's labeled organic it does have to be non-engineered and other things that I would comment on, but probably get incorrect.

That's not to say organic is the best thing for you, and that genetically engineered crops are bad. If you've ever eaten a seedless watermelon, you've eaten a genetically engineered product. If people start to come up sick, we're going to have an issue like with the spinach, and we'll know where it came from. I'm more worried about terrorists poisoning a water supply than ADM making us sick on purpose. And that risk is pretty low, considering they like high-profile targets.

We're all going to die from cancer anyways, so don't worry about it.
 
[quote name='Sarang01']Actually correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't everything labeled as Organic with the USDA seal have to be GMO free? If not I'm taking it up with my representatives from Congress immediately.[/quote]

Not sure, but I know standards for organic labeling have been loosened lately. Not that I care since I would never fall for the scam that is "organic" anyway.

[quote name='Sarang01']How can you not be worried about them poisoning people? It's just good business sense for them to do it then reap the benefits when they come into the doctors office sick. Granted I think there's something wrong when you act more beholden to your shareholders then keeping in line with the public good but as it is now Sociopathic behavior from them is allowed if not encouraged. Also in terms of the media catching them you and I both know the media is firmly under their thumb and has been for a while, the complete discreditation of almost all Herbs in the mainstream is proof enough of that.[/QUOTE]

So you feel that the tobacco companies were in league with doctors to get people sick for their profit? And you feel it would be good business sense to poison people and not fear massive lawsuits that doom your entire industry to permanent decline? I'm sure you'll understand I can't agree.
 
No because their products were so bloody obvious it's hard to hide it. Food on the other hand, some poisons can take longer to show effect and by then it's hard to mark WHAT did it.
However certain treatments doctors give are about as toxic as the disease. They can act like those are the only cures but fact is the Pharmaceutical Industry is an infestation in the Medical field. Do you see giant Herb companies paying doctors all these millions to accredit a product? And IF they're legit and not a dummy company set up by Pharma to discredit then there's still the question of whether they'll bribe the doctor to fudge the results or find some way to minimize, discredit or do BOTH to the findings. Yes I'm being very Pessimistic but I believe with good reason.
And reading your last comment, that's because you have standards. Become the head of a Multinational Corporation in Pharma, the Mainstream Media or the Medical Industry and watch them either fall by the wayside or get blindsided. Even IF you manage to find people you think are clean you might get blindsided.
edit: Forgot to mention a natural cure for Hodgekin's Disease. The Rosy Periwinkle in Madagascar's Rainforest can cure Stage 1 of it. Hopefully it hasn't been made extinct.
 
[quote name='Apossum']they might own one or two nice things like that, (digital cable, cellular service, $10 tennis shoes, from a previous quote) but their house is empty, their food sucks, their clothes are bought from goodwill and they probably live in a project where people are constantly tempting their kids with crack and about any other bad lifestyle you can think of....their kids might even take that opportunity--considering their schools will not prepare them for anything more than a shit job. if the kid even has the motivation to attend said school, after seeing that hardly anyone is better off having attended it.

go visit a project...it's a lot more complex than you think. it's easy to attribute it to motivation, but that's not even half the battle. and at this point, it has nothing to do with even distribution (I'm personally weary of marxist-socialist ideas).
[/QUOTE]

I hate to break this to you, since no one here has an inkling as to what I do for a living, but not only have I visited a project, I happen to vst government subsidized housing on a regular basis and could give you a litnay of anecdotes as to the purchasing practices of the residents who live in these housing projects that following the same iresponsible patterns as I've described. Let's just say if you can't feed your family you have no business buying a $50 a month cable service, air jordans for your kid, or the latest videogame console.

The problem is that we've taught these people that their basic needs will be taken care of in the form of government subsidy and they end up frittering their discretionary income on things like a new gold chain or baggy pants that are supposed to be worn at or near the ankles. They know that someone will always be around to bail them out instead of putting forth the effort to better their position or earn themselves some self respect. Their houses are not empty, nor are their refregerators, they ust can't bring themselves to buy concentrated orange juice for $1 instead of coca-cola, and ground chicken instead of a Mc Chicken sandwich.

And Goodwill sells some good clothes for cheap prices. There's no shame in shopping here if it's all you can afford. Hell, I shopped there while putting myself though college. I still shop there and can find some good deals from time to time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top