A Breath of fresh air

[Preston]

"Use your feelings, there is something out of place here." - Obi-Wan to Anakin, when referring to if the Supreme Chancellor was good - who was actually a Sith Lord.

Peter and Philip, I am sorry I cannot 'wholly' agree, by any means.
Philip, I am not trying to sound rude, by any means, though just because it seems that way to you does not mean it is correct/right, etc.

Peter, you and I often see close to eye to eye. Though, on this I cannot agree with you.

I do not know how to answer these questions and I think Robert would do better than I. He has a very clear and stable mentality, it seems, towards such serious issues. Robert?

[Quijote]

Clearly, obscenely rich people are not devils, and some (as Peter points out) have created foundations for the needy. Others (e.g. Peggy Guggenheim, RIP) have set up funds for artists and platforms for exhibiting their works, and yet others have provided the financing of academic chairs (though we should turn a blind eye to Monsieur Gaddaffi's funding of a certain academic institution in London, shouldn't we!).
All that's lacking is a bit more "wealth distribution" in my direction, that's all.

[Peter]

I agree. There is good on both sides. By no means am I saying that all the poor are good. I have seen some very bad, hardened, stupid, and hateful individuals who are poor. But yes I do disagree with the accusations of "blood sucking", and I do feel that the blood-suckers are the millionaires and even billionaires. Though, perhaps I am wrong? They live with all the wealth in the world while their fellow men is suffering to the max. It is a lot to think about and a lot to write about. Though, I was not referring to the ridiculous stereotype that all rich are bad and all poor are not.

Exactly what it seems to be like Robert. Exactly. It is exactly like a parody of the natural world. Strange, so strange. A problem is we have pretty much become "accustomed" to this way of life!?

Again you can't generalise about all billionaires - don't forget that millionaires create jobs and some billionaires are doing a lot of good, take the Bill Gates foundation for example. http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Pages/home.aspx

[Preston]

The argument is too simplistic - it isn't about the 'nice poor' and the 'horrible rich'.

I agree. There is good on both sides. By no means am I saying that all the poor are good. I have seen some very bad, hardened, stupid, and hateful individuals who are poor. But yes I do disagree with the accusations of "blood sucking", and I do feel that the blood-suckers are the millionaires and even billionaires. Though, perhaps I am wrong? They live with all the wealth in the world while their fellow men is suffering to the max. It is a lot to think about and a lot to write about. Though, I was not referring to the ridiculous stereotype that all rich are bad and all poor are not.

Its like some hideous parody of the natural world, the ordinary bees who only exist to keep the queen bees going, the billionaires in their own hives.

Exactly what it seems to be like Robert. Exactly. It is exactly like a parody of the natural world. Strange, so strange. A problem is we have pretty much become "accustomed" to this way of life!?

[RobertH]

I agree - it is all too easy, and too human, to generalize.
I hear some extraordinary things from contacts in the US - people preparing to leave the cities, stocking up with food, weapons for survival, only two days food in the stores. I may well be completely wrong but my take on the so called budget deal of Obama's was that the problems in the US ( and probably by implication the rest of the world ) are now so serious and unresolvable that try as we may to pull all the levers nothing is happening, nothing can happen because the system's broken beyond all hope of repair. Also, there is a breakdown of consensus, the politicos in the US simply cannot agree on how to approach the issues in any meaningful way. Politics after all is about compromise but what happens when you can't even compromise?
Why can't the US cut its military budget, its obscene in the amounts it absorbs, when you consider these are the natural resources of the planet turned into the means of waging war ( who on?), and then you see cities like Detroit, dying on their feet and people on food stamps.
Its like some hideous parody of the natural world, the ordinary bees who only exist to keep the queen bees going, the billionaires in their own hives.

[Peter]

This is a problem I have. You refer to people living off of benefits as "blood-suckers", when imo, it is the greedy rich who share next to nothing for the better cause - they are the real and true blood-suckers. That is the entire problem with money and one of the key problems with this world, people have millions and even billions of dollars while people who are poor are criticized as blood-suckers. I think the term "blood-sucking" should be thought about. Who get's the blood (gold)? Again, that shows me how sick this world can actually be. Praising the rich and damning the poor.

As for work - go work at a gas station, for your life, and try to make enough to even get by, yet alone comfortably, and see where you go from there. It is a make or break world and it is all based on what I feel are somewhat ridiculous degrees - which just fuel the cycle of this wretched advancement.

This world is a cycle of corruption, slavery, and never-ending greed. It has become most screwed. And most everyone knows it. Even the planet Earth is slowly withering away along with everything and one on it. It is like Planet of the Apes, "You fools look at what you have done! Look at what you have done!"

Also, 1 in 6 people living off of food-stamps should tell everyone something! Wake-up!

The argument is too simplistic - it isn't about the 'nice poor' and the 'horrible rich'. You cannot generalise in that way - poor people are just as capable of greed as rich - you only have to watch the insane orgy of materialism at sales to buy things they don't need. Poverty is relative - to some Africans or Indians, your poorest American would seem like a millionaire.

[Preston]

It is the same for the so-called benefit abusers (food stamps and so on) : a very, very small minority are used as a litmus test that "proves" these blood-suckers are draining the economies.
In actual fact, the reality of unemployment is unremitting hardship, strife and lack of self-esteem, and most unemployed people - I feel sure - dream of having the structure and value regular employment confers.

This is a problem I have. You refer to people living off of benefits as "blood-suckers", when imo, it is the greedy rich who share next to nothing for the better cause - they are the real and true blood-suckers. That is the entire problem with money and one of the key problems with this world, people have millions and even billions of dollars while people who are poor are criticized as blood-suckers. I think the term "blood-sucking" should be thought about. Who get's the blood (gold)? Again, that shows me how sick this world can actually be. Praising the rich and damning the poor.

As for work - go work at a gas station, for your life, and try to make enough to even get by, yet alone comfortably, and see where you go from there. It is a make or break world and it is all based on what I feel are somewhat ridiculous degrees - which just fuel the cycle of this wretched advancement.

This world is a cycle of corruption, slavery, and never-ending greed. It has become most screwed. And most everyone knows it. Even the planet Earth is slowly withering away along with everything and one on it. It is like Planet of the Apes, "You fools look at what you have done! Look at what you have done!"

Also, 1 in 6 people living off of food-stamps should tell everyone something! Wake-up!

[Quijote]

I agree, Sorrano, that one bad apple can spoil the barrel. The problem is that the press is so quick to pick up the "negative", and what is dangerous in my view is that the press for many people provides at times an unchallenged platform that conditions opinion and "discourse".
As you know, I am on holiday in Italy and have been unable to purchase the paper of my choice (The Guardian, the so-called left-wing rag favoured by teachers and such like...). I have, then, been obliged to spend my hard-earned euros on such titles as The Times (a Murdoch-owned rag), the Daily Mail (whose owner is an alleged pornographer) and (gasp, horrors of horrors) The Telegraph (whose former owner - Conrad Black - is now in prison for fraud).
What has "amused" me is the blatant political slant on these titles in view of the recent riots in England (not Scotland or Wales or N. Ireland). Although frayed tempers have been somewhat cooled after the events, the general "tenor" of such rags has been "string 'em up, it's the only way", and to call for strong legal reprisals.
Whilst I feel that these riotors need a good slapping (rather, a rubber bullet in the groin), I do accept that there are very probably "reasons" why such people acted in the way they did.
It is the same for the so-called benefit abusers (food stamps and so on) : a very, very small minority are used as a litmus test that "proves" these blood-suckers are draining the economies.
In actual fact, the reality of unemployment is unremitting hardship, strife and lack of self-esteem, and most unemployed people - I feel sure - dream of having the structure and value regular employment confers.

[Sorrano]

Philip, the problem that I see is that those who do abuse the system create the issues for those that truly need it. Too often the benefits go to those that are able to work instead of those who are unable. That's not to say that everyone that is on it is a parasite, but there are those few who are. Too often one bad apple can spoil the bushel.

[Preston]

Philip, food stamps is basically money on a card to buy food at the grocery store. Yes, it is for the poor and disabled.

[Preston]

Keep in mind that there are those who will, by choice, go with food stamps because it's easier than working. There is a lot of fraud out there.

I cannot and do not blame most anyone living off of food stamps. I am very thankful for the benefits for the poor. It is pretty much make or break here (get a degree or live life in poverty). Think about it, if one was to get off of benefits for the poor and attempt to work a job, it is next to impossible. The minimum wage is next to nothing and the jobs are hell.

[Quijote]

Keep in mind that there are those who will, by choice, go with food stamps because it's easier than working. There is a lot of fraud out there.

Not sure exactly what "food stamps" means, Sorrano, but I imagine it is the equivalent of the "dole" in the UK ("dole" = unemployment benefit). I'm not sure I can agree with you, as I think in reality any life based solely on a benefits system is pretty gruesome, and I do believe that the vast majority of unemployed people (in Europe, at least) would much rather be in work than out of it, and not only for reasons of financial security, e.g. the structure, the feeling of self-worth, the sense of achievement ...
I'm not going to mock what you have posted, but so many in the right-wing press are hasty to condemn those on benefits as "parasites", as benefit frauds and so on, and whilst there are certainly such cases I think it is a very, very, very small minority. Despite my lack of religious faith and cynicism, I do believe the usual human condition to be an honest, fair one (given the right circumstances).

[Quijote]

I see this "Breath of fresh air" thread is really opening up to take in issues of industrial and micro (and/or organic) farming practices. I think Euan is right, it is a question of economics more than ethics, but as Euan points out, any business today that willfully ignores the "ethical" or "socially responsible" aspects to their money-making ventures face opprobium and potential economic loss.
Personally, I always buy organic where I can for several reasons : humane treatment of the animals, less "chemicals" in the meat and veg, and taste. Unfortunately, organic produce is very expensive (depending on the country and prevailing attitudes; Germany being cheaper than France, for example), but money talks and the wind of change is in the air.
I know this may strike you as ridiculous, but I even buy (when my budget allows it) organic "prepared" foodstuffs such as pasta. A packet of normal penne costs about 75 centimes, whereas the organic equivalent about is about 2 euros.

[Sorrano]

Just very quickly found these:


- (1 in 6 living off of food stamps): http://www.naturalnews.com/032939_fo...epression.html

The article I referred to about 1 in 6 was over a period of time and may have been off, I don't think it was but am not sure.

Keep in mind that there are those who will, by choice, go with food stamps because it's easier than working. There is a lot of fraud out there.

[Euan Mackinnon]

Peter

Euan my comments were not meant as an attack on farmers

Thank you but I didn’t take it as such.

As to looking after the land, I think there is a greater awareness of the damage that has been done through chemical use, but I think only a minority at the moment farm organically and give some land over to wild flower meadows.
As to the economics, yes there is a huge problem and with no one seriously addressing the most serious problem the world faces - over population, it can only get worse.

Chemical use: agreed, especially to the water table.

Organic farming: another example of the general public being ignorant, only a tiny minority of whom, I would suggest, actually know what ‘organic farming’ means or involves. They might have some doubts if they bothered to find out the facts.

Wild flowers: I think you might find that more is going on than you realise. Set-aside (which benefits the flora and fauna alike) has been in use for some years promoted and supported at the EU level and widely employed in the UK at least.

Over-population: entirely agreed.

Mega-farms: I see nothing wrong in principle with this especially if, through government-sourced transfer payments, it also allows uneconomic farming in remote areas – Welsh sheep farmers, for example – to be sustained for the good of the land.

Where it becomes a problem is if mega-farms (i) confer disproportionate political power (at all levels); or if (ii) it becomes (as it is becoming) global – China buying up huge tracts of land in Africa, or investment funds becoming involved, for example; or if (iii) it means accountants running the business.

As with so much else the resolution is in our hands: we elect the politicians; we get (and deserve) what we vote for.

Nowhere is this clearer at the moment than the US (the current complete dysfunctionality of the Congress) or the Eurozone (a myopic refusal to grasp the nub of the sovereign debt crisis). The potential effect of either of these (let alone of them in tandem) makes problems with the economics of farming pale into insignificance.

But let me end on a positive note, especially for Preston who appears to despair of the world. There are, I strongly believe, solutions to these political problems. However, these solutions require a fundamental – and I do mean fundamental - re-think of how we perceive and interact with the ‘universe’. Which (among many things but given the title of this forum) raises again the question of music and the human condition posed by Megan in another thread.

Euan