How do a person's political views relate to self sufficiency?

Status
Not open for further replies.

patandchickens

Crazy Cat Lady
Joined
Jul 12, 2008
Messages
3,323
Reaction score
6
Points
163
Location
Ontario, Canada
ScottSD said:
patandchickens said:
I cannot recall a single instance of someone on this forum saying they want <whatever gov't program> for their OWN benefit.
Isn't someone saying they want "environment help now" because it is getting more difficult to grow things in extreme weather saying they want it for their own benefit?
If you say so. To me, environmental policies do NOT count as government-handout social policies, which is what I thought you were talking about.

But if your problem is with people favoring ANY policy that has ANY practical impact on their own lives... well, that is hardly just the province of liberals. Surely some of your own preferences for what gov't should do are colored by your own needs/wants/situation, too? Like, I would betcha you're probably against an increase in taxes for whatever tax bracket you are personally in?

And, I do agree with being compassionate. There are definitely times that the government needs to help out....for a time.
But when people milk it and become dependent on it....that is an entirely different story.How does the government prevent those from becoming dependent and/or abusing the system? I think if we could figure that one out, we could figure a lot of our problems.
Yes, that is what we have said over and over in a bunch of previous threads on this subject. I have never heard anybody say "gee, I think it is really a good thing for gov't to fund lots of programs where millions of cheaters sponge off taxpayers' money for no reason other than greed or laziness". Those espousing social assistance type programs have ALWAYS been in favor of better precision in determining who gets money, to weed out as much as possible the 'cheaters'.

So, if that is all you've got a problem with or claim to be confused by, it's just a straw man. Nobody is saying that in the first place.


Pat
 

bibliophile birds

Lovin' The Homestead
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Messages
988
Reaction score
0
Points
94
Location
Great Smoky Mtns, Tennessee
i'm going to do something i NEVER do, so that maybe we can shine a little light on some of these things.

my family falls into that "wealthy" category that Scott keeps talking about. ok, we aren't the Trumps or anything close, but we've got more than our share of comforts. a lot more. we definitely don't need to be sufficient for monetary reasons.

this whole thing about how it's such a bad idea to tax the rich more to help out everyone else is just stupid. most of the money we have hasn't come from actual hard work, but rather interest on interest going back 4 generations. so tax it. i get that. i'm more than happy for it to go towards people who need it. hell, i give even more on top of that every year as direct donations.

do i think it's unfair that some people will pay less in taxes? nope. i'm blessed to have what i have and i think a lot of people need a little help.

personally, i believe in self sufficiency as an ideal we should all work towards. i'm an Anthropologist, though, and understand that there are lots of social, cultural factors that feed into why one person can't take care of themselves. like i said before, i believe in a hand-up, not a hand-out. give a man a fish and he eats for a day, then comes looking for the same free fish tomorrow. teach a man to fish and he feeds himself. and he gains personal pride. and he teaches others. what is more self sufficient than helping other people become self sufficient?

our welfare system is broken because conservative political movements push for privatization of business sectors that once were used to help people get back on their feet. the government starts bidding wars for road work to make sure they get a cheap price (which ends up with shoddy work) rather than guarantee a fair wage and jobs for people who need them. giant corporations, usually backed by conservatives, monopolize industry to the point that it is cheaper to buy junk food than it is to buy local produce.

i'm not anti-conservatives. my family is FULL of conservatives (and i live in the South). they think Obama represents socialism and Bush was the bastion of freedom and democracy. and yet, even they are starting to see that things need fixing.

on some level, that has to be done politically. people have a right to health care even if they can't afford it. like i said, we can do nothing and let them drain us through the ER, which we are paying for already, or we can get them some good health care that includes preventative care and we can save ourselves some money in the long run.

obviously, i don't think any single person or government body is going to make these things happen. we've got to do our part. if my part if getting taxed a little more, then so be it. i'm trying to live as self sufficiently as possible, which will end up meaning i spend less on things that are taxed, so maybe it will even itself out somehow. i don't really care. i know the value of taking care of my neighbor, be it offering him eggs when i know he's doing it tough or grinning while i sign my exorbitant tax documents.
 

bibliophile birds

Lovin' The Homestead
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Messages
988
Reaction score
0
Points
94
Location
Great Smoky Mtns, Tennessee
Ldychef2k said:
For me, capitalism is personal. It means that I am free to succeed and fail based solely on my own behaviors. If I work hard, I will do well.
if we're talking about a local market setting, i agree. but outside of that, capitalism has almost nothing to do with work hard= do well. no one can compete with big business except other big business. conglomerates make it almost impossible to function as a successful business outside of their influence. it just doesn't happen.

prime example: Jamaica needed aid. they were in a really desperate place and people were going hungry. they appealed to the US and the World Bank. the US and the World Bank were more than happy to help out... on some conditions. Jamaica had been a closed market previously. the US insisted that Jamaica not only set up tax-free zones where US businesses (like Fruit of the Loom) could build factories, but that they also open their market to US goods. Jamaica had no option but to comply.

so, the first thing that gets imported into Jamaica is milk powder from a US company. they are selling it at insanely low rates because it's manufactured in ANOTHER tax-free zone in another country. hard-working Jamaican dairy farmers, who had been doing well, had their businesses almost instantly destroyed by this. they were literally dumping milk in the ditches because no one could now afford to buy their milk but the cows still had to be milked. all these now unemployed dairy farmers had to look for new jobs. how convenient that Fruit of the Loom was opening their new factory! wages were low but it was work.

now, Jamaica owes the US a lot of money, money it will NEVER be able to pay back because the way the system is set up. they can't make money off the businesses in the tax-free zone and no one in the country can compete with US goods at such low prices. they can't kick the US companies out to set up their own because they'd never be able to deal with the unemployment rates, which are directly tied to US demands anyway.

this type of capitalism is not a benevolent system that rewards your hard work. it is completely controlled by Big Business.
 

enjoy the ride

Sufficient Life
Joined
Jul 12, 2008
Messages
1,406
Reaction score
4
Points
123
Location
Really Northern California
Why couldn't the jamaican farmers comptet with the imported milk? It seems they would have as low a cost of manufacture as anywhere without the shipping expenses?
I can understand the US market being unable to compete with the increased costs of huge regulation of enviromental issues, wage and other taxes and safety regulations. Did Jamaica have those too?
It seems to me that, taking your word for the success of the dairy farmers, that most of the country was suffering gut wrenching poverty with huge burdens of graft. Maybe the general population of the country will do better at the expense of that section.
I somehow don't think that the whole story is presented.

I believe that the first obligation of any government is the protection of it's citizens. So I believe in protectionism for that purpose. If a regulation exists that costs a US producer more than an equivalent imported good, then the imported good should have a tarriff of that amount.
Foreign countries should tarriff US goods for the same purpose. That would be a level playing field for true competition.
But our government seems to be controlled by corporate greed - bought and paid for politicians who do not have the will to oppose sending jobs outside the US solely for profitablility of companies. This is sandbagging the US producer to make more money for the few wealthy enough to be the owners.

Now if foreign producers have the same level of government imposed burdens on them, no tarriff. I wonder if this might encourage paying more to foreign workers as it would not give an advantage to people willing to abuse their own workers. Or maybe make the US companies lobby Congress to reduce the tax burden whihc would then be a burden to them that they can't avoid.

PS Pulleeeze- tell me how someone with 50 horses can ever be self-sufficient? I have two and can't pursuade them to earn their keep. :D
 

bibliophile birds

Lovin' The Homestead
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Messages
988
Reaction score
0
Points
94
Location
Great Smoky Mtns, Tennessee
i suggest the documentary Life & Debt if you are interested in the Jamaica story. here's an excerpt from their site about the milk problem.

"Every country aims to be self-sufficient in milk production. The milk farmers in the U.S., Australia, New Zealand, and the European Union all receive huge subsidies to keep their milk prices low. Thus when the milk solids from the U.S. or Europe are exported they are at an artificially low price due to support. Jamaica's local production of milk was on a strong upward climb. In a 5 year period (1987-1992) the industry grew to 30 million liters, producing over 25% of the nations consumption, and was poised to rapidly increase production. In 1992, liberalization policies (those required by IMF, World Bank, and the US) demanded that the import taxes placed on imported milk solids from Western countries be eliminated and subsidies to the local industry removed. In 1993, one year after liberalization, millions of dollars of unpasteurized local milk had to be dumped, 700 cows were slaughtered pre-maturely and several dairy farmers closed down operations. At present, the industry has sized down nearly 60% and continues to decline. It is unlikely the dairy industry will ever revitalise its growth."

i give this example so we can compare it to our own goals of self-sufficiency. obviously, politics and "capitalism" have larger influences on that goal that many of us would hope to believe. anyone who tries to sell what they grow or raise probably realizes that it's hard to compete with the kinds of subsidies that Agribusiness gets. why would someone with limited funds buy my eggs at $3/dz, even though they are local, organic, and free-range when they could get regular old, Agribusiness eggs at Walmart for $.88/dz?

politics are behind all that. the government makes the subsidies and the regulations that favor big farming companies. they subsidize corn and soy so that it's in EVERYTHING, creating a National health problem of near epidemic proportions and then deny that we have the right to healthcare? those are some of the main reasons i'm trying to be SS. i just don't want to be a part of that vicious circle anymore.
 

bibliophile birds

Lovin' The Homestead
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Messages
988
Reaction score
0
Points
94
Location
Great Smoky Mtns, Tennessee
enjoy the ride said:
PS Pulleeeze- tell me how someone with 50 horses can ever be self-sufficient? I have two and can't pursuade them to earn their keep. :D
ah, yes. it's a battle, let me tell you. my self-sufficiency dreams are often at odds with that machinery that is the family business (our farm is run by committee: which includes my grandparents, parents, 3 uncles, and myself... i'm really the only one interested in sufficiency, so it's an uphill battle most of the time). for a long time we've made decent money off our equestrian school, but it's starting to cost us more than it's worth. i'm trying to convince the family that we need to downsize.

i want to get rid of most of the horses and get pigs, sheep, and goats as well as some more cattle... i'm aiming for a FARM rather than a HORSE BARN. one day.......
 

THEFAN

Lovin' The Homestead
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
570
Reaction score
1
Points
98
Location
Northern Frontline
enjoy the ride said:
Why couldn't the jamaican farmers comptet with the imported milk? It seems they would have as low a cost of manufacture as anywhere without the shipping expenses?
I can understand the US market being unable to compete with the increased costs of huge regulation of enviromental issues, wage and other taxes and safety regulations. Did Jamaica have those too?
It seems to me that, taking your word for the success of the dairy farmers, that most of the country was suffering gut wrenching poverty with huge burdens of graft. Maybe the general population of the country will do better at the expense of that section.
I somehow don't think that the whole story is presented.

I believe that the first obligation of any government is the protection of it's citizens. So I believe in protectionism for that purpose. ( I DISAGREE......... The first obligation is to listen to the people!!!! WE THE PEOPLE!!)



If a regulation exists that costs a US producer more than an equivalent imported good, then the imported good should have a tarriff of that amount.
Foreign countries should tarriff US goods for the same purpose. That would be a level playing field for true competition.
But our government seems to be controlled by corporate greed - bought and paid for politicians who do not have the will to oppose sending jobs outside the US solely for profitablility of companies. This is sandbagging the US producer to make more money for the few wealthy enough to be the owners.

Now if foreign producers have the same level of government imposed burdens on them, no tarriff. I wonder if this might encourage paying more to foreign workers as it would not give an advantage to people willing to abuse their own workers. Or maybe make the US companies lobby Congress to reduce the tax burden whihc would then be a burden to them that they can't avoid.

PS Pulleeeze- tell me how someone with 50 horses can ever be self-sufficient? I have two and can't pursuade them to earn their keep. :D
WOW 50......... need pix or it'snot true
 

me&thegals

A Major Squash & Pumpkin Lover
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
3,806
Reaction score
9
Points
163
Location
central WI
Wow--really interesting points, everyone!!

Ldychef2k--I really get where you're coming from on the hard work. It's something I plan to do my whole life. Here's something I've noticed, though: The hardest of my jobs were the worst pay with no benefits. My college summers, I worked 60-80 hours per week with zero benefits. The pay was minimum wage.

These days, I don't have to work so insanely, or at least not at things I hate. The pay is much better. All my jobs have been considered necessary by society, or I wouldn't have had them. I think gov't or business policy should allow all working people decent pay and health insurance, enough for them to be self sufficient, no/low debt.

As for competition and non-gov't intervention, the gov't already IS in all our commerce. That's what I see when my state offers tax breaks to draw business to our state. It's what I see with crop subsidies that allow conventional farmers to grow food much more cheaply than I can. It's a part of trade agreements, tariffs, etc.

___________________
QueenRed: I clearly understood you to say that SS is not AS encouraged in a capitalist society. Makes perfect sense to me. As per another thread, my spending less money is not helpful to our capitalist economy, although it works great for me :)
___________________
Bibliophile: I have heard many times of US industry moving into a foreign nation, wiping out the local economy and making very cheap goods with cheap labor, little environmental requirements, etc. No, I don't have a list of footnotes, folks, but I guess I could go look it up. Otherwise, common sense would indicate that corporations move out of the US for a reason, and it's not to free up fresh air for the rest of us.
___________________
ETR: You ask about why Jamaicans cannot compete. I thought the US had dropped its milk subsidies, but I Googled it and found out that EXPORT dairy subsidies have been reinstituted. I'm not sure if that applies here in this situation, but it is not a level playing field when countries with unsubsidized dairy/corn/soy have to compete with our subsidized system here. It has devastated the corn "industry" in Mexico.


So, to me it looks like political systems have tremendous impact on how/whether their citizens are able to sustain themselves.


Biblio: I applaud your willingness to share your family's story of fortune and even more your willingness to share it with those not as lucky. I have been mocked for this analogy before, but it works for me: We all teach our kids to share. We don't let them hog all the goods, no matter how much smarter, bigger or luckier they are. I still really don't see why this would not apply on a larger level. Why could I not do well by my family and then see if anybody else could use a hand?

And, as mentioned, I don't know ANYBODY who would like perfectly intelligent, healthy, strong people to live off the dole if great jobs were available. Not a single person. But sometimes there simply is not the economy, health, ability to sustain one's self and that person needs help. And a "self-sufficient" person is in the very BEST position to help.


BTW: Is anybody else tired of this "self sufficiency" label? I know a forum needs a name, but I feel it hinders the conversation sometimes.
 

hikerchick

Lovin' The Homestead
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Messages
550
Reaction score
0
Points
94
Location
Dover PA
There are some really thoughtful and intelligent people on this site. I am humbled.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top