--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "shempmcgurk" <shempmcgurk@> 
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], "shempmcgurk" 
> <shempmcgurk@> 
> > > wrote:
> > > <snip>
> > > > An incredible formula for removing poverty, improving the 
lives 
> > of 
> > > > the poorest of the poor and the most disenfranchised has 
been 
> > > > realized in this country.  And it's been a result of the 
free 
> > > > enterprise system along with some governmental social 
programs 
> > that 
> > > > provide a safety net of basic necessities.
> > > > 
> > > > There are many in this country that not only do not 
recognize 
> > this 
> > > > but reject it when the evidence is placed before them.
> > > 
> > > Or maybe what we recognize is that similar formulas
> > > have been realized in *many* developed countries--even
> > > those with fewer resources.  And some of them work
> > > better than ours.
> > > 
> > > So to pat ourselves on the back and figure we've
> > > handled it doesn't seem all that appropriate.
> > >
> > 
> > There's always room for improvement.  And if some other country 
has 
> > a better way of doing things we should adapt and adopt them.
> > 
> > But the reverse is also true: other countries should recognize 
how 
> > good things work here and adopt those policies so that they, 
too, 
> > can benefit from them.
> 
> They need to become *developed* first, Shemp,
> before they can hope to bring their level of
> poverty up to our level of poverty.  That they're
> not there yet doesn't mean we get to stop working
> to eliminate poverty




The things you call "poverty" here, I would call something else, not 
poverty.  And, yes, I agree we don't stop working to eliminate those 
negative things.  I just don't agree with the word poverty and the 
use of it, I believe, does no one any good.




> here until their poverty
> catches up with ours (especially since our great
> capitalistic system that keeps people in poverty
> here because it's so out of control is also what's
> keeping the third world nations from becoming
> developed).



To a certain extent I agree.  

What's needed here is MORE capitalism, just as more is needed in non-
industrialized countries.

Also less governmental interference, both here and in the countries 
with dire poverty.



> 
> You're comparing third world countries to the
> industrialized nations.  Apples and kiwi fruit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   One of the things we've done is eliminate 
> > poverty; the public policies that have led to that should be 
> > encouraged and perpetuated throughout the world.
> >
>






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Reply via email to