Image via Wikipedia

The year is 2012. The world is three years into the most damaging economic collapses since the Wall Street Crash of 1929 and seeing no signs of abating. The cause of the economic crash can be pointed directly at the financial sector taking reckless risks with money to make bigger profits. And it will take many years before the damage caused economically is mitigated. But there is a risk that the human cost will be neglected completely.

In the news we hear that investment bankers and large corporations are still trying to award their top earners obscene amounts of money, while at the poor end of society the BBC program, ‘Panorama’ reports a person in Las Vegas reduced to catching rats for food and tent cities springing up all over the place. People are dying of hypothermia because they cannot afford to pay for heating. Greece is on the brink of total economic collapse. This is a staggering failure of global proportions.

Clearly the economic models in use today are not bringing people out of poverty. In many cases the models appear to be creating poverty. In fact all the economic models I have seen provide no safety net for when societies poorest find that their low, or fixed, incomes fail to keep pace with consumer price rises. With pension funds now under threat from drastic reduction there is less of a safety net for all of us. But right now the low paid, the unemployed and the elderly are placed in vulnerable situations that are quite unacceptable.

The ‘Occupy Wall Street’ campaigners and their counterparts all over the world have spent, by the time of writing this article, at least a year protesting over the abuse of the capitalist system. They demand that the system be changed in order to include the ever increasing number of people who are pushed into poverty and then disregarded. But naturally, those very rich and powerful individual and large corporations who pursue more money and bigger profit do not see those in poverty as their problem.

Perhaps they are right in thinking this way, if their primary objective is simply to make as much money as possible in as short a time as possible. Current economic models have very little mind to the effects of society outside of broad terms, and even then the focus lies squarely with the maintenance of business and growth and not the consequences at the bottom end of the model’s implementation. Hence the ground swell of protesters against capitalism may only highlight the obvious, of their dissatisfaction with a system that has no moral compass – and isn’t looking at getting one any time soon.

If not business, then perhaps it is the Governments of the world who should see the growing number of people in poverty as their problem. Certainly in democratic countries there are those in poverty who have the right to vote, which in turn implies that the power lies ultimately with the electorate. The problem with relying on change via individual electors is simply the absence of an organisational structure and precious little control over the choice of electable bodies. Business knows this and therefore supports those standing for election that are, in return, influenced to change only that which does not rock the boat of the wealthy and the powerful and also guarantees support for future election prospects.

From the viewpoint of the many disenfranchised, the dispossessed, the poor, the destitute and the ever-squeezed middle classes, there is a need to find a solution that makes economic sense to everyone; not just the privileged few. But in order for any economic reform to work, it has to receive popular support and must be seen to have a positive effect on society as a whole.

In the absence of a capitalist monetary system, for example, there would have to be something else. One such alternative put forward by the Zeitgeist Movement, promotes the idea of a resource-based economy, where money no longer exists and the resources of the world are the property of everyone. It is a fantastic idea for many good reasons but the transition from capitalism to a resource-based economy is too huge a leap for society; barring global revolution or holocaust.

So in the short term there has to be an injection of fairness into the current capitalist system that is far less radical, alleviates the insanity of poverty in a world of plenty and still allows wealth creating establishments to operate without destroying society by their actions.

The Goldilocks Band (so-called after the Earth’s position in the solar system that supports the possibility of sustained life) is a very simple economic measuring device that controls the ownership of money between those at the top of the economic scale and those at the bottom. The band consists quite simply of a line at the top and a line at the bottom and operates as stabilising mechanism against boom and bust economics.

Everything in between the two lines contains most, if not all, of the nation’s wealth (W) within the confines of a tax year. The top line represents a level by which the possessors of wealth are not in possession of wealth at the cost of poverty (R). Where this line sits depends on the state of the nation’s poorest. The bottom line represents the nation’s benchmark of the definition of poverty (P). The simplicity of the model is that at no time should the economic fortunes of the lowest paid in society fall below the bottom line at the cost of those better off.

The width of the band (B) between W and R is dependant on the nation’s economic earnings (personal) and profit (corporate). It is the moveable part of the model with everything above W subject to a higher taxable contribution to redress any imbalance where personal earned or fixed income falls below R. The amount of money available to a nation is finite. Therefore, if large corporations suck up too much money, or charge unaffordable prices, the consumers have less disposable income with which to buy anything. This would seem to be a common cause of recession, when demand is strangled by financial constraints. The poorest of consumers are frequently in debt just to get by on basic essential services such as heating and eating. Consequently there must be a way to ensure that the consumers – even the ones at the bottom of the economic tree – do not fall below a certain level of living standard. The simplest way to do this would be to fund welfare payments with a formulated economic tax ratio (T).

Everything above the top line (R) of the Goldilocks Band is eligible to pay this increased tax, at a rate that ensures that those at the very top pay what is necessary to support those at the very bottom in society. This includes not only the possibility of personal taxation but, most importantly, corporate taxation. Consequently it would be ideal to consider this model in both personal and corporate taxation systems.

Let us say, for example, that 10% of a society is living below the poverty line as is defined by statistical information that measures the cost of those basic essentials such as housing, food, heating, water, clothing and affordable travel to work. In the UK I would reject the ‘consumer price index’ (CPI) because it excludes the essential cost of housing. Likewise I would reject the ‘retail price index’ (RPI) because it include luxury items such as TVs. The average cost of essential items and, most importantly, services such as utilities, water and Council tax, becomes the benchmark by which the level of poverty experienced is set. The test for this is simple; no one within that society is without the means to live above the poverty line. Things like the minimum wage was designed to eradicate poverty but then prices shot up beyond the ability of wages to keep pace, bringing poverty back into reality and a minimum wage unattractive. So whatever amount of money the 10% of society is short of under a means tested system, run by the Government’s tax system, the top end of earnings must pay for it. The current, and supposedly accepted alternative to alleviating poverty, is to allow people to go hungry, cold and sick.

However, it is not just for everyone at the top to pay for the greed of one sector. Recent activities within the UK utilities sector, for example, announce profits of 733 per cent higher than the previous year. This kind of outrageous hike in profit is the kind of thing that would demand investigation. If it was found that the huge increase was the result of greater business, but the individual consumer paid more or less the same, it would be accepted as an endorsement of confidence and support by the consumer. If, as was the case here, that the hike was just a rip off, where individuals paid so much more money in the same year for the same expensive service, there might be argument for a 733 per cent windfall tax for sheer greed. Perhaps then on the following year the said utility company would not be so greedy.

So in order to share this burden responsibly it may be necessary to lower the top band line if the burden on those above the top band line is deemed excessive to so few or insufficient to maintain the integrity of the bottom band. It is up to Governments to decide. The model will ensure that companies attempting to charge for higher profits to offset their tax losses will find it an exercise in futility. To ensure this, there must be a commission within the tax system to investigate any sudden price hikes (like the one cited above) and if there is no sound justification for doing so, tax the offender at up to 100% accordingly.

Also it is not an acceptable outcome to have remnants of people below the poverty line any more than it would be deemed acceptable to set the poverty line so low as to not alleviate poverty at all. So the onus remains with those at the top of the economic tree to acquire wealth reasonably and without detriment economically to society in any way.

The poorest person in any society should have the basic means to live. This should include a roof over their head and food to eat, regardless of the manner in which they reached the stage of poverty. A person in debt cannot repay it if they are without somewhere to live, something to eat and therefore the opportunity to land a job. The prospect of a job is zero if the first two criteria are not fulfilled. Those in poverty live in perpetual fear of the next step down the ladder. It is unacceptable that any civilised society believes this is attributable to free will and self determination.

The world in 2012 is changing rapidly and often too fast for even the most fluent of business models to adapt to new opportunities without the possibility of damaging the very economic consumer base it wishes to attract. The Goldilocks Band regulates the changes in a way that protects the most vulnerable in society, while at the same time ensures that business practice gives some consideration to what their actions might reap.

My personal knowledge of how to present the Goldilocks Band in mathematical formula is insufficient, so I welcome anyone who wishes to forward it. I am also no economist but with the world’s economic stability at present in complete disarray, I can’t see that I could possibly make the situation worse than my expert predecessors and their use of current economic models.

I am also aware that some people may consider the Goldilocks Band as just a taxing system that is designed to punish the well off and the successful. However, I reject this argument for the following reasons.

1. A tax system is designed to raise revenue for a Government to spend according to its manifesto. The Goldilocks Band is designed to irrevocably wipe out poverty in a nation no matter what its tax system is. It does not set the revenue required.

2. The Goldilocks Band does not set a tax percentage at any level. It is up to each nation to set what it sees as a realistic poverty threshold and then decide a tax percentage that is fair to all. If the tax threshold ends up being extraordinarily high, it is merely a reflection of how big the problem of poverty exists within a nation; and perhaps a need to bring excessive charges for essential items and services down to levels affordable to all.

3. The Goldilocks Band is not like a tax system devised to punish the rich. It is a model designed to ensure a sustainable path of economic growth less likely to boom and bust, which means it must protect the stability of the consumer from the greed of corporate recklessness.

Most businesses are unlikely to suffer greatly from the adoption of the Goldilocks Band as a model for stable economic growth. However, I would expect that banks, utility companies, oil producers and pharmaceutical companies may have to rethink the speed at which they attempt to accumulate wealth. Likewise it might also impact on the unnecessarily high taxation by Governments on products such as fuel for transportation.

No attempt has been made within this model to interfere with the free market. It is a matter of record that some of the essential requirements to live healthily and out of poverty will include the use of utilities such as fuel for heating and water for drinking and hygiene. Irresponsible charges by the owners of companies like these will either increase the share of taxation unfairly on other individuals and businesses, or it may require the setting up of ‘not for profit’ companies for essential services to ensure that profit does not come before the basic needs of individuals.

Likewise no attempt has been made to regulate or enforce charges on luxury items and no inclusion of how much government may place tax on tobacco or alcohol. Businesses who manufacture luxury items or services of choice are already hostages to supply and demand. No one has yet suffered poverty because they do not have a TV or do not subscribe to a telephone service. There will be individuals who live in poverty because of alcohol abuse or because they would rather buy tobacco than buy food. We can at least give people the means to live above the poverty line but we cannot make them choose to buy food over tobacco or alcohol.

I hope that the Goldilocks Band will be discussed by more learned economic folk as a potential working model and trial it as an intervention against the present lopsided economies of the world. No debt based economy can work without consumers, so it would appear necessary for the capitalist system to continue, to factor in something that is clearly ignored in all economic models – the economic health and well being of the consumer.

VIOLENCE IN OUR COMMUNITIES: A COMMENTARY

On Friday, February 10th we had another school shooting.  It happened during lunch hour in a cafeteria filled with elementary children happily eating lunch.  All we can ask is why?  The school is about 20 minutes from my doorstep and diagonally southeast as the crow flies.  I know several of the teachers and students that work and attend this school.  We share sports programs and the arts.  It is a good school.  Who would have thought such a tragedy would strike here and with a child so young carrying a gun and somehow getting it past the eyes of a watchful and caring staff.  It is heartbreaking. 

We don’t think of these things happening is small, rural communities like the one I live in or those children live in but it even happens here.  Why?

When I was growing up we only occasionally heard of a murder, maybe a few more robberies and off and on a case of domestic violence but it was rare, very rare, especially in rural communities and we never heard of such violence and tragedy in our schools.  What has gone wrong?

Where are all this hate, fear, bullying, desperation, violence, vengeance and moral decay coming from?  Is there anything we can do to stop it?  God help us.  I sure don’t have the answer.  I wish I did.

Maybe it is the broken families, lack of stability in the homes.  Both parents work, they have to.  They have no choice.  Maybe it is because there is only one parent to start with and you just can’t be mother and father and bread winner all in the same breath.  Parents are pushed beyond their limits and children end up ignored and without the discipline and moral upbringing they need.  We may love our children but we are too busy trying to survive to let them know just how deeply they are loved.  There is very little if any family unity anymore. 

The TV becomes the nanny, the babysitter and it doesn’t teach very high morals.  The same goes for the video games and internet games we and our children play and the media plays their part in the nightly news and the daily paper too as they lean toward scandals, violence and all manner of sensationalism with next to no reporting of the good that happens in the community, State, Nation or the world.  We are being fed a very heavy diet of negative with little to no positive.  Children learn what they live.

Schools push for the competitive edge, win no matter what it takes when it comes to sports or any other competition and academically every child still passes to the next grade and still gets some sort of award even if they haven’t truly learned or earned it…No child left behind.  It is sending mixed signals to the child.  It is okay to fail in one area or another.  Why do my best, be my best.  The effort is a waste of time.  We are all going to get some special award and our diploma anyhow.  So what if I can’t really read or write or even do basic math.  Machines will do it for me.  I don’t have to read a book.  I can listen to it or watch the movie, same difference, right?  Who really cares so long as I’m not in the way?  I don’t have to learn math, I have a calculator that with just the push of a button will give me the correct answer so why study.  Who really cares about the process?

Churches are not much if any better today.  They no longer teach morals and God given laws.  They are politically correct and just about anything goes.  That helps bring more money into the coffers when no one is offended in any way.  Many now speak of God as a higher power, not Lord God Almighty but whatever higher power you choose to believe in, be it the Judeo-Christian God or some other god or whatever power you choose, wind, rain, stars, the moon, the cobra, the cat or a tree.  It makes no difference as long as you believe in something beyond self.  Not every church is this way but a lot are today.  I’ve been there and listened to them.  God forbid we offend anyone and stand up for God and His teachings.  I’m sure God is very offended and that bothers me. 

No wonder children, our young adults don’t know right from wrong.  Oh some will blame it on Satan and his legions of fallen angels called demons (You know, the devil made me do it.) and that may be correct to a point but it is each of us who make the choice.  We decide for our self how we choose to behave.  How can we choose when we are not taught morality in the first place?

We are a society that has become segmented, segregated and morally corrupt.  Drug and alcohol abuse is no longer just ghetto garbage; it is rampant in the highest echelons of our society and affects everyone from the homeless wino in some back alley to the CEO of our multibillion dollar corporations to the government leaders of our communities and nations.  We reap just what we sow. 

It is sad when we see young children becoming so disconnected with reality and life and living and the wonder of being human and alive that they no longer feel life is worth their next breath and they put a gun to their head or their neighbors or peers and squeeze the trigger.  BANG and it is over in a split second.  No more worries, no more fears, no more feeling lost and alone, no more being bullied and belittled, no more nothing.  Is this what our society as come down to?  God, I hope not.

Maybe we shouldn’t have thrown God out.  Just a thought on my part. 

It has not always been bad. I had to work hard. I had to quit several jobs, find new ones. I had to spend 75% of their pay mi to the bar when I knew that my bills have easily taken 90%. I had credit cards and not pay them. I had to give money to women who I knew could never pay. And most importantly, he had to move in a small town where time and $ 6.00 is considered “good money”.

I did not know I was only the poverty line, while I did all these things. I woke up one day and realized he could not pay my car note, because I had 11 cents in the bank. And that’s when I realized: I’m poor! It took 25 long years, but eventually fell below the poverty line. Now he was in the same category as a homeless clientele and well-being. Nothing else is hampered by my wealth. I paid lifestyle. I got up and fixed a mayonnaise sandwiches to celebrate. Delicious!

As a poor person is entitled to the privileges that I have found that good at all be ready. Listed decides to name a few:

– Instead of carrying a wallet full of dollar bills, which now pays heavy large purchases like gasoline and food with pocket money to mess around

house.

– I have to buy from stores with misspelled titles like Sav-A-Lot, Thrif-Ti-Mart, and DisKount king. These stores offer a wide range of obsolete, slightly damaged merchandise as Wal-Mart can only dream.

– I’m going to drool on TV commercials restaurant because I know that will never afford a meal like that, unless a wealthy relative dies

– I have to use hand-me-down my friend clothes and shoes. This means that rarely match and it hurts my feet always wear shoes that are three sizes too small.

– I can freely participate in sports officials of the National Association for the poor: begging and borrowing.

– I have to go to bed every night with the comforting thought that if I ever customize Ms.Right I can not afford to get away with it.

I’ll stop there because I see a desire to reach dangerous levels in the eye of a reader of a few. These readers are probably a stable job and nice houses or apartments. Their accounts are probably stuck. Probably has a large closet with shoes of suitable size. Your bank account can never fall below $ 5000. I apologize to the readers of my screen on my condition of poverty has made ​​them feel inferior and completely removed all self-respect that might have had left.All I can say is that I never wanted to be poor.I was just at the right place at the right time. Maybe someday everyone will be on the way and Rags. Until then, please contact me if you want to know what is. I’ll be the man on the side of the exit ramp to inter-work “for food sign.

POVERTY (Photo credit: whologwhy)

            Poverty is a multi-faceted problem. It adversely affects the behavior and mentality of people. Living in a slum environment makes people hungry, sick, unproductive, angry, desperate and hopeless. It keeps people ignorant and is said to be the perfect breeding ground for crime and violence. Poverty strips people of their dignity and allows prejudice to breed as others tend to look down upon the poor with pity, shame or fear.

            Lawyer Gary Guido Tabio, president of the Consumers’ Welfare Group in the Philippines said through the Sun Star that people belonging in the lower class of the community are the ones being tempted to do evil things just to survive since they are the most affected with the continued increase of rice prices and other commodities. He even stressed out that the poor people are struggling to survive so as entering into crimes such as theft, kidnapping for ransom, car napping, human trafficking and among others.

            For the past years, it has been observed that many individuals had been committing crimes, and if asked reasons why they had come to think of stealing or kidnapping is only because they want to have money. They want to provide themselves their basic necessities in life. If one is to see their sociodemographic profiles, it is recorded that these people who we call criminals are those belonging to the low class of the community or we call as the poor. They also have their own stories behind the crimes they had committed.

            One criminal would give a reason that he is unemployed and has two or more children to raise, or the other would say he lacks education and doesn’t know any job but stealing. One would also give a story that she’s a widowed mother of a five or six young children in which led her to selling of abused drugs.

            Whichever story is heard, this still does not guarantee the person to be freed away from the crime he/she had committed. There are still punishments equated with it which they have to bear. That’s the consequence of everything they had done. As the cliché goes, regret is always at the end.

According to Statistics Canada, 9.6% of Canadians in 2009 live below the poverty line (Statistics Canada, 2009). As a teacher in classrooms with 20-30+ students, it is inevitable that there will be at least a few students who live below the poverty line, not to mention students who come from low income families who rank above the poverty line cut off. “In 2007, 720,230 people in Canada used food banks, including 280,900 children” (Canadian Teacher’s Federation). This means that as a teacher, there will be students in the class who come to school hungry. The impact of poverty on students in school is felt in a variety of ways and Grade 4 and 5 students in North Bay described poverty as:

Feeling ashamed when my dad can’t get a job.

Pretending that you forgot your lunch.

Being afraid to tell your Mom you need gym shoes.

Not buying books at the book fair.

Not getting to go on school trips. (Canadian Teacher’s Federation)

Students who live in poverty have to deal with the social stigma that comes with being poor and are often singled out or easily identified as the students who can’t participate in activities. As a teacher, it is important to ensure that field trips and other activities which are planned are ones that all students are able to partake in. However, as a teacher it is important to not eliminate things such as field trips because they are costly, but rather find ways to make them more affordable such as going with other classes in your school so that you can get a better group rate. Because hunger is such a pressing issue, it is vital that schools provide some type of food program, whether it is a breakfast program or a snack program, to ensure that students are all nourished so that they are able to concentrate and learn better.

All of this started supposedly on September 17, 2011 but actually we have to take into account the rest of the world.  The OWS is just the continuation of a cancer that started in the 3rd world countries with the intervention of the IMF and the forceful imposition of its redemption packages. The very same banks that caused the financial crisis that started on 2000 (the press says it started on 2007) were the responsible for the collapse of many nations like Argentina, Ecuador, Japan and many many more.

Sooner of later this sickness had to come home with such a dramatic impact.  Reviewing all the evidence, the origin in the US would be with the presidency of Ronald Reagan.  Reagan handed the country to the service of the supper rich.  Just taking a look to the salaries of workers, these have not increased ever since.  Nowadays, the upper 1% of the people in the US takes in nearly a quarter of the nation‘s income. All the growth that has occurred in our country over the last decade or more has gone to the upper 1%. Much of the wealth of this 1% comes from investments in political capital in Washington [Vanity Fair May 2011] The average American worker was taking home $752 a week in late 2010 while the median pay for top executives at 200 big companies last year was $10.8 million. In fact, the gap between chief executive compensation and average US worker pay rose from a ratio of 263 to 1 in 2009 to 325 to 1 on 2010. [Washington Post Aug 31st 2011] It is estimated that 400 US Americans have more wealth than half of all Americans combined. This exclusive group benefited directly or indirectly from the multi-trillion bailout in 2008, and now they have more cash, stock and property than the assets of 155 million Americans combined.  Globally, the richest 2% owns more than half the household wealth in the entire world and the richest 10% holds 85% of total.

All the info is taken from the book “Confrontational Poetry”

(insert racial tensions between the black and white cultures of North Louisiana)
I’m sure my dad probably doesn’t remember this conversation but it has stuck with me.  Riding in the truck home after a cross country practice in high school he was telling me about his day. As the principal of an elementary school he had to make a trip up to the local school board office. There he had to argue with the payroll department for his janitorial staff to receive their appropriate pay and benefits. This was part of an ongoing battle of mishaps that never favored the janitorial staff. I asked my what made him keep doing that. I still remember his reply, “Because I can see them as people”

The other story comes from a friend. I will not use names because I did not ask permission to share even though he gladly shared the story with me…….A homeless man in Asheville approached two guys in college on summer break and asked them for some money. One of the guys asked politely what he needed the money for. The homeless man said he just wanted to buy a beer. Surprised by the man’s honesty the college guy offered to buy him a beer in exchange for some conversation. The three men shared a beer and discussed their lives and relationships with Jesus.

I have never known affluence. I’d known poverty and hardship. I wasn’t born in the slumps, but I sojourned there. Where I come from, people are poor, but never lack the necessary stuff that keeps life going: food,clothing, housing. But they know a certain kind of necessity. It is that of living like others who have all they want.

I have a story to tell you. I am not making it up. This really happened. I was barely seven when the Major’s son came to the village. They had a farmhouse in the little hamlet where I hailed from and often spent some days, just some few days of summer there. And this little lad of the Major had some kind of those snickers that were rare in our parts.

And he was cute, the little lad of the Major was, and looked like he slept in water, and looked like dust never fell on him. I wanted to look like him, I wanted to be cute, and I wanted to be like dust never fell on me, like I lived in water.

So I went to my old man and told him: “Dad, I wanna wear snickers like those of the little lad of the Major.”

I saw embarrassment on his face. I knew he wouldn’t give me. Not just then. I knew the answer though. You know, from where we come from, things are never free, they are earned. And when you earn them you know their value. I knew this, but I never wanted my dad to tell me. But he did say something, not what I expected. He asked me a question that had never left my mind.

He didn’t just ask me a question, it was accompanied by the usual smile he wore each time he said grave things to me like he was a jester: “Which would you choose? Snickers or freedom?”
I didn’t answer. I looked at him. I looked at the roof above us. I looked at my toes and left the room. His face was buried again in the newspaper. And i knew, I was a free boy without snickers.

Tens of thousands abortion opponents participated in the 39th Annual March for Life in Washington DC on Monday. The afternoon rally on the National Mall and the following march to the Supreme Court took place on a damp winter’s day in the nation’s capital. The day also included such events as a mini-rally at the White House with Mike Huckabee and screenings of Blood Money and Life After Abortion.

At the rally, attendees heard from Pro-Life speakers such as House Speaker John S. Boehner, R-Ohio.  In a recent statement, he said, “Respect for life has never been a political position for me: it’s who I am, and it’s who we are as a people.”

“Respect for life” is a term John Boehner knows little about.  He is just one of the hypocrites who attended the rally. Children born into our society have basic survival needs that include healthcare, nutritious food, and education.  While Pro-Lifers identify with the rhetoric of the Republican Party, they fail to recognize that it is the Republicans that consistently vote against policies to improve the lives of children in America. 

Those people who advocate for the lives of the unborn should advocate for policies to protect children and families from the difficulties of poverty.  In   If Pro-Lifers want to put an end to abortion, then they should stop supporting political candidates that don’t care about families and children.

The Women’s National Law Center reported that in 2010, 17.2 million women were living in poverty and 19 million women were uninsured.  How can politicians make abortion part of their political agenda when they are unwilling to care for women’s health and welfare in America? 

Pro-Lifers are clearly against Planned Parenthood saying that the organization funds abortions.   It is Planned Parenthood which also educates women about their reproductive health and promotes birth control.  How backward is the approach of people who use abortion as a wedge issue to deny women affordable health maintenance?

Abortion is a difficult, personal issue which has moral and ethical complications for women and families.   Marching around Washington with graphic posters of bloody fetuses does little for a child living in poverty in America.