rachelcrisscross
|
posted on October 27, 2001 02:25:23 PM new
That the % difference of the "haves" and "have nots" in the U.S. is now the same (or may have recently even surpassed) as it was at the start of the French Revolution...
|
dman3
|
posted on October 27, 2001 02:41:39 PM new
that would make the middle class a Mythical memmory...
http://www.Dman-N-Company.com
Email [email protected]
[ edited by dman3 on Oct 27, 2001 02:44 PM ]
|
gravid
|
posted on October 27, 2001 02:54:01 PM new
Sounds like a business plan. Time to start up a Guillotine factory.
|
Fez
|
posted on October 27, 2001 05:04:27 PM new
Rachelcrisscross, what's your point?
|
rachelcrisscross
|
posted on October 27, 2001 05:07:38 PM new
No point required...
Editing to add...
I already made my point, if you don't get it, well sorry, I'm not going to explain it to you because I don't have to, also because I think it's quite obvious what my point was...
So explaining it further would be pointless...
Maybe though, for the uneducated, it might not be quite so obvious. My opinion then would be that those people might possibly do well to go study history...
Furthermore, I suspect that you asked me what my point was in order to try to intimidate me...
Anyone who knows me well, knows that's near impossible...
[ edited by rachelcrisscross on Oct 27, 2001 05:22 PM ]
|
jamesoblivion
|
posted on October 27, 2001 07:52:41 PM new
Let them eat cake.
|
jt-2007
|
posted on October 27, 2001 07:54:19 PM new
You're on a food roll James.
~role? roll? *shrug*
[ edited by jt on Oct 27, 2001 07:55 PM ]
|
jamesoblivion
|
posted on October 27, 2001 07:56:19 PM new
I am?
I made a great Kahlua cake yesterday. Want the recipe?
|
outoftheblue
|
posted on October 27, 2001 07:57:21 PM new
"Furthermore, I suspect that you asked me what my point was in order to try to intimidate me...
Anyone who knows me well, knows that's near impossible..."
I think I like you 
|
rachelcrisscross
|
posted on October 27, 2001 08:05:53 PM new
Hi... 
|
plsmith
|
posted on October 27, 2001 08:27:19 PM new
Hisshead (Hi, btw, LTNS & all the other where've-you-been razzmatazz) I read somewhere recently (think it was Gore Vidal who said it) that we (U.S. of A.) are on our way to becoming a third-world country a la Brazil or Bolivia. Now that I found intimidating...
|
rachelcrisscross
|
posted on October 27, 2001 08:42:09 PM new
Hi you too...
Oh, I've been around mostly you know where...don't ya?
Hmmm. That's a disturbing thought to say the least...I tend to take Gore Vidal with a grain of salt (though) who knows...
|
plsmith
|
posted on October 27, 2001 08:50:38 PM new
Yeah, he's a bit out there (his fondness for Tim McVeigh was more than out here, imo) but he (Vidal) made a very good argument for where we're heading economically (small, rich upper class, huge lower/poor class) and he supplied plenty of ammunition (relocation of labor to outside countries, to name one bullet) to make his point. Sorry I can't give ya the meat of his message (or even a link) -- I'm really here just to see if I can log 1,000 posts before Thursday...
|
gravid
|
posted on October 27, 2001 09:05:01 PM new
Ask yourself what the masses have that the Corperations need. Not much. Production is automated. Really creative production of art and literature has never been motivated by profit. People are so creative there is a glut of fine photographs and painting and sculpture. Don't believe it? Ask anyone who has tried to make a living that way. Writers are producing more than can be printed, and more than most people have time to read. Publisher's want more from the same writers to feed a sure market. Not more risky offerings from new writers. You have to be really exceptional to break in.
Where is growth? From services that are standardized and predictable. McDonald's is not great food but if we are far from home and see one most of us will choose it over an unknown dinner that may be at either end of the quality spectrum. If you watch two TV news programs they are almost word for word alike in what they cover and how they say it.
People say but if you don't pay the workers well there is no market for your goods. That is a nice theory but every busness seems to think they will save costs and increase profits and the other fellow will supply the well paid customers for the product. It's magic! Just say you believe.
|
rachelcrisscross
|
posted on October 27, 2001 09:34:46 PM new
A large number of corporations assume that a lot of money is a need...
|
REAMOND
|
posted on October 28, 2001 11:31:30 AM new
The ratio to "haves" and "have nots" is an important element that prognosticators use in predictating social upheaval.
Those corporations that used Cetron Co. to plan for future events saved millions when Iran went down - Cetron predicted well in advance and some Fortune 500 Co's that took his advice got out in time. This ratio is a primary and integral part in the calculus of predicting social unrest.
However, it is only one facet of determining if there will be revolutionary or evolutionary change.
An element that determines how quick or radical the change will take place is the strength and/or state of democratic institutions.
A strong democratic state has the means to peacefully evolve rather than revolt.
|
rachelcrisscross
|
posted on October 28, 2001 01:01:18 PM new
(Peaceful?) evolution...
That sounds like a plan too...
Though somebody will probably...
...(probably? can we determine that? and if so, how well can we determine it? and if so, ought we, is it moral? ethical? what if we just look but don't actually do anything to interfere? sheesh, do I sound like an alien>>[I'm just here to observe - interactive fun is permissible, just don't screw up the time what's-a-ma-jiggy]>>or what?hopefully somebody understands me)...
...come along and try to stop it...
>>>>>>>Irregardeless of the intrinsic inevitableness of it...
|
spazmodeus
|
posted on October 28, 2001 01:06:44 PM new
With respect to rachel's initial post, what constitutes a "have-not?"
|
NearTheSea
|
posted on October 28, 2001 01:15:06 PM new
I wanted to know the same thing, can someone define a 'have not'?
[email protected]
|
Microbes
|
posted on October 28, 2001 01:18:16 PM new
Those with cake to eat?
|
rachelcrisscross
|
posted on October 28, 2001 01:20:11 PM new
Homeless, mal-nourished...etc...
|
REAMOND
|
posted on October 28, 2001 01:21:52 PM new
If we look but don't interfere, it usually means that most either don't feel the change is ripe, or haven't been effected by the problem.
Peaceful evolution takes place all the time in democracies. We just don't notice it either because it may be suttle, or it has become so common we don't see it.
What surprised many observers in other countries when Nixon was impeached was that our military did nothing. They expected our generals to exercise a coup. For the American people, a military coup didn't even cross their minds.
No look at all the living ex-presidents the U.S. has and none of them are exiled or were killed after leaving office.
Democracies transition leaders, policies, and direction very efficiently. This also includes little destruction or blood shed.
|
spazmodeus
|
posted on October 28, 2001 01:26:25 PM new
I have a hard time with descriptions like "homeless, malnourished, etc.," rachel. It's far too vague.
|
rachelcrisscross
|
posted on October 28, 2001 01:34:50 PM new
Spaz - sorry you have a problem with that, go look the information up for yourself then, if you want...
[ edited by rachelcrisscross on Oct 28, 2001 01:36 PM ]
|
NearTheSea
|
posted on October 28, 2001 01:51:54 PM new
I don't believe I would define the 'have nots' as the homeless
I think they would be more along the lines of the working class, maybe blue collar workers, though a lot of those make pretty good money
I don't quite see a 2 class society yet, I still see a middle class.
[email protected]
|
spazmodeus
|
posted on October 28, 2001 02:09:23 PM new
rachel,
What's with the attitude? You began with a somewhat cryptic post, then insult people when they don't get it. I ask for some clarification and you tell me to go look it up myself ...
What's the proper response here, then? Is anything but Yes, rachel, you are so right allowed?
|
gravid
|
posted on October 28, 2001 02:09:34 PM new
I will define "have not" from practical experience of living that way as a child.
Never having any extra income to invest or have enough savings to be secure. Living from pay check to paycheck. Never having disposable income for more than weekly luxeries like beer or cigerettes. Never having funds to take a decent vacation and fly or stay in a hotel, or engage in leisure like golf or skiing.
Never having dress clothing like a decent suit or a tux.
Always making do with worn furniture and carpet and used old cars that are unreliable.
Never having associations with other people based on your interests and social agendas.
Your associations being people with whom you work and go to church or relatives.
Associating with people who don't talk about ideas and world events. They talk about celebrities and sports. Considering it normal for relatives and friends to do drugs be in jail and not be employed or have to live with relatives to survive.
People who are unable to recognize mental illness and do not know what health care and dental careis available. People who have never learned English although they live here and still follow strange foreign customs and superstitions from the
'old country"
People who consider it not normal to have a business or go to the university and follow all the stereotypes of gender class and racial groups.
People who have no books in their home and don't read the newspaper because they can't understand it. People who sign contarcts without reading because the salesman tells them it is a "standard" contarct and they could not understand it anyway. People who buy collectables as investments and buy lotto tickets really expecting to win.
People who never use whom in a sentance and make up words like irregardless - who use ain't and swear words as normal adjectives instead of a curse. Who think you are "putting on airs" or "acting white" if you speak properly or don't dress like a bum.
People who believe the tabloids in the supermarket and call psychic hot lines and palm readers. Who can't access the risk involved in smoking or running a red light or having sex with a stranger.
The UNDERCLASS.
[ edited by gravid on Oct 28, 2001 02:42 PM ]
|
kazoo
|
posted on October 28, 2001 02:16:35 PM new
My idea of a have-not is a person with limited options ... and very little hope for improvement in their situation ... doesn't have to be financial, tho that's the most obvious one, and the one that affects most aspects of everything else, I guess ...
edited to add: I think the middle class has been a myth for a long time now .. certainly for most of my adult years, anyway .. there's them on their way up, them on their way down .. and them that's treading water ... I tread water most of the time.
[ edited by kazoo on Oct 28, 2001 02:18 PM ]
|
rachelcrisscross
|
posted on October 28, 2001 02:33:43 PM new
Spaz - what do you mean?
Editing to add - Interesting posts...hi up there...
[ edited by rachelcrisscross on Oct 28, 2001 02:36 PM ]
|
NearTheSea
|
posted on October 28, 2001 04:59:28 PM new
gravid and kazoo, I agree with most of that.
The treading water is a good example, but it does not mean homelessness.
I still think there is a lower middle class, middle class, upper middle class.
I'm treading water most times these days too, so I wouldn't know what class that is
[email protected]
|
