Discussion Of "the Concept Of Jobs And Money"

[Mariel33]

Moderation note: The first 25 posts in this topic were split from “Will The United States Be A Fascist State By 2020?” because they are about a different topic.

 

 

I find this so ironic!

As I wrote earlier, there is a significant segment of the populace who share the sentiment that they were being ignored by the government, particularly under the Obama administration. So, they went to the polls, not the streets, and prevailed through the democratic process. Now the “democrats” (what irony) are in the streets protesting against a free and fair election!

 

These ignored people are the ones who work full-time jobs but make just enough that they do not qualify for benefits such as food stamp and welfare programs. They have friends and neighbors getting government assistance while they themselves are being financially “punished” for working. They don’t want to remove assistance to the poor; they want to increase assistance for the middle class.

 

That is the sentiment that Trump has managed to tap into, and he has some proposals that appeals to the working middle class :

 

1).  The Trump Tax Plan will collapse the current seven tax brackets to three brackets, Less than $75,000: 12%, More than $75,000 but less than $225,000: 25%, More than $225,000: 33%. The Tax Foundation determined that, on average, taxpayers will receive a tax cut of $1,818 under the Trump Plan, but a tax increase of $176 under the Clinton plan.  [Tax Foundation, Sept. 23, 2016]

 

2).  The Trump Tax Plan will increase the economy and grow jobs by almost 2 million, while Hillary Clinton’s tax plan will shrink the economy and lose 300,000 jobs. In combination with the total economic reform agenda, the Trump economic plan will create at least 25 million jobs over the next 10 years. [Tax Foundation, Jan. 26, 2016]

 

3). Under the Trump Plan Americans will be able to take an above-the-line deduction for children under age 13 that will be capped at state average for age of child, and for eldercare for a dependent. The exclusion will not be available to taxpayers with total income over $500,000 Married-Joint /$250,000 Single, and because of the cap on the size of the benefit, working and middle class families will see the largest percentage reduction in their taxable income.

 

4). The Trump Plan will repeal the “death tax”, but capital gains held until death and valued over $10 million will be subject to tax to exempt small businesses and family farms. To prevent abuse, contributions of appreciated assets into a private charity established by the decedent or the decedent’s relatives will be disallowed

 

All of these things (and more) appeal to the “forgotten” working middle class.

 

The lesson for the democrats and liberals is: ignore an entire class of people and you will pay the price.

 Can you now see the irony of your post?

No - reality is the need for routine, and Republicans and Democrats are both wrong for believing in the concept of jobs and money (though to be fair to Democrats, they only believe out of necessity, so that they can have a say in how society works). Edited November 22, 2016 by CraigD

[OceanBreeze]

No - reality is the need for routine, and Republicans and Democrats are both wrong for believing in the concept of jobs and money (though to be fair to Democrats, they only believe out of necessity, so that they can have a say in how society works).

 

Sorry, I don’t understand what you mean by:  *reality is the need for routine* would you mind explaining?

 

As for this: *Republicans and Democrats are both wrong for believing in the concept of jobs and money* I take it you don’t believe in such a concept?

 

May I ask what concept you do believe in? I am genuinely interested in knowing.

 

Perhaps you dream of a world where everyone is provided for with no need to work and not a care in the world. Such a world was described by H.G. Wells, in his novel The Time Machine. I’m sure you have read it, or at least seen the movie.

But far from being a utopian paradise, because the Eloi really don’t need to exert themselves to do anything, they have basically stopped thinking for themselves. There is no impetus to innovate, they live in a climate of complete indifference.

 

Of course, that is hardly a utopia, and that isn’t even considering the Morlocks!

[Mariel33]

Sorry, I don’t understand what you mean by:  *reality is the need for routine* would you mind explaining?

 

As for this: *Republicans and Democrats are both wrong for believing in the concept of jobs and money* I take it you don’t believe in such a concept?

 

May I ask what concept you do believe in? I am genuinely interested in knowing.

 

Perhaps you dream of a world where everyone is provided for with no need to work and not a care in the world. Such a world was described by H.G. Wells, in his novel The Time Machine. I’m sure you have read it, or at least seen the movie.

But far from being a utopian paradise, because the Eloi really don’t need to exert themselves to do anything, they have basically stopped thinking for themselves. There is no impetus to innovate, they live in a climate of complete indifference.

 

Of course, that is hardly a utopia, and that isn’t even considering the Morlocks!

Reality is activity, but change as well. Society (including the US administration, Wall Street, Republicans and Democrats) is about ignoring people's right to sensible degrees of change, which is why violence is a regular part of life.

People need activity to preoccupy them, but jobs is an extreme mode of lifestyle that's unhealthy to the human mind.

What people should do is arrange themselves so that they can have a routine, day to day, but at the same time not feel restricted and exploited. All people need to respect this right, no matter where they live on the planet. 

 

Of course, this means being against wealth and economy, but then that's the point: progress requires compromise.

No one should have to do the same activity, but the price of this ability means 100% interaction across the world (meaning no national sense whatsoever).

[Maine farmer]

No - reality is the need for routine, and Republicans and Democrats are both wrong for believing in the concept of jobs and money (though to be fair to Democrats, they only believe out of necessity, so that they can have a say in how society works).

The concepts of jobs and money are quite ancient, aren't they.  Even hunter-gatherers have jobs!  Basic survival requires working, otherwise one would die of starvation or exposure.  Additionally, it has been my observation that jobs are essential to mental and physical health.  When I see someone in trouble, it is often a result of them having too much time on their hands.

 

As for money, I half slept through my Anthropology classes ( and somehow managed a solid B grade) but I seem to recall that concept is about as old as civilization itself.

 

Personally, I would like to not have to worry about money.  Without property taxes and other bills to pay, I could just farm for my own families survival and not produce any extra for selling just so I can buy stuff I don't need and pay income taxes to support people who don't want to work for anything.  

 

I have grown quite weary of complaints about people being unemployed when a lot of  farmers I know can find reliable help without importing workers.  We don't employ any workers on our farm, largely due to the lack of qualified, willing workers, but also because of the government paperwork requirements, and the payroll taxes. My back and knees might hurt, but my I have fewer headaches.

[Mariel33]

The concepts of jobs and money are quite ancient, aren't they.  Even hunter-gatherers have jobs!  Basic survival requires working, otherwise one would die of starvation or exposure.  Additionally, it has been my observation that jobs are essential to mental and physical health.  When I see someone in trouble, it is often a result of them having too much time on their hands.

 

As for money, I half slept through my Anthropology classes ( and somehow managed a solid B grade) but I seem to recall that concept is about as old as civilization itself.

 

Personally, I would like to not have to worry about money.  Without property taxes and other bills to pay, I could just farm for my own families survival and not produce any extra for selling just so I can buy stuff I don't need and pay income taxes to support people who don't want to work for anything.  

 

I have grown quite weary of complaints about people being unemployed when a lot of  farmers I know can find reliable help without importing workers.  We don't employ any workers on our farm, largely due to the lack of qualified, willing workers, but also because of the government paperwork requirements, and the payroll taxes. My back and knees might hurt, but my I have fewer headaches.

Jobs are nothing but because of separation between peoples - because of lack of responsibility and respect.

[Maine farmer]

Jobs are nothing but because of separation between peoples - because of lack of responsibility and respect.

WOW!!

 

Your whole life must be remarkably different than my own.

 

Having been raised in a farming family, I was put to work as soon as I could pick up a shovel.  It was not forced labor.  The whole family was involved in the farm, and we wanted to be.  I remember being eager to learn new skills and take on new jobs, and gain the trust of my parents to the point that I was given more responsibility.  I was often my father's shadow, and constantly peppering him with questions about work, about nature, about science, about life.

 

Jobs are opportunity for learning, for growing, for having self respect as well as the respect of others.  Jobs can give you a sense of accomplishment, a sense of purpose, and a sense of meaning.

[Mariel33]

WOW!!

 

Your whole life must be remarkably different than my own.

 

Having been raised in a farming family, I was put to work as soon as I could pick up a shovel.  It was not forced labor.  The whole family was involved in the farm, and we wanted to be.  I remember being eager to learn new skills and take on new jobs, and gain the trust of my parents to the point that I was given more responsibility.  I was often my father's shadow, and constantly peppering him with questions about work, about nature, about science, about life.

 

Jobs are opportunity for learning, for growing, for having self respect as well as the respect of others.  Jobs can give you a sense of accomplishment, a sense of purpose, and a sense of meaning.

Indeed - I disagree.

Jobs are because of no foundation of respect. Intelligent living has nothing to do with doing the same thing again and again.

Edited November 20, 2016 by Mariel33

[Maine farmer]

My jobs are not doing the same thing again and again.  My days may have certain daily tasks, but I have new challenges almost daily.  Recently the feed mixer wore to the point of breaking and I had to have it running, and I fixed it.

 

The mind needs challenges to overcome, or it stagnates.

 

Have you never experienced the feeling of euphoria from figuring out a solution to a difficult problem?  

 

Becoming educated and learning how to form an intelligent opinion could be considered a type of "job"

 

Or were you born knowing everything?

[Mariel33]

My jobs are not doing the same thing again and again.  My days may have certain daily tasks, but I have new challenges almost daily.  Recently the feed mixer wore to the point of breaking and I had to have it running, and I fixed it.

 

The mind needs challenges to overcome, or it stagnates.

 

Have you never experienced the feeling of euphoria from figuring out a solution to a difficult problem?  

 

Becoming educated and learning how to form an intelligent opinion could be considered a type of "job"

 

Or were you born knowing everything?

 

Creating a perfect civilisation is a challenge - one which involves taking into account all people's needs.

As long as reality is administrations, banks and economies, not everyone will have their needs taken into account (making economies and wealth corrupt).

Edited November 20, 2016 by Mariel33

[Maine farmer]

Creating a perfect civilisation is a challenge - one which involves taking into account all people's needs.

As long as reality is administrations, banks and economies, not everyone will have their needs taken into account (making economies and wealth corrupt).

Perfection may be the ultimate challenge!  Especially when it is nearly impossible to get people to agree on what constitutes perfection.  

 

I knew a perfectionist once who tried to help me with some chores on the farm.  He was so focused on accomplishing perfection that he ended up not accomplishing anything.  

 

I don't know of any system where everyone's needs are taken into account.  Someone will always feel like they are not getting treated fairly.  

 

Did you hear the story of the man who got everything he ever wanted?  He lived a very boring life. 

 

It can be good to want.

[Mariel33]

Perfection may be the ultimate challenge!  Especially when it is nearly impossible to get people to agree on what constitutes perfection.  

 

I knew a perfectionist once who tried to help me with some chores on the farm.  He was so focused on accomplishing perfection that he ended up not accomplishing anything.  

 

I don't know of any system where everyone's needs are taken into account.  Someone will always feel like they are not getting treated fairly.  

 

Did you hear the story of the man who got everything he ever wanted?  He lived a very boring life. 

 

It can be good to want.

 

You're effectively saying that contradiction is right, which I suppose is fair on the basis that people who are aware of contradiction are willing to accept the consequences of it.

If people get upset at Washington because their needs aren't taken into account, yet those very same people expect others to tolerate contradiction, is that unethical?  

[Maine farmer]

In my opinion, it all depends upon how you define "needs".  Many people confuse "wants" with "needs".  When it comes down to the basic necessities of life, we should reserve welfare for those who are genuinely unable to provide those needs for themselves.  I would prefer a type of "workfare" for those who cannot find sustainable occupations, and that work should include some form of education.  

 

Getting upset is no more unethical than any other emotion.  To me unethical is defined by the intent to harm others.

[OceanBreeze]

Indeed - I disagree.

Jobs are because of no foundation of respect. Intelligent living has nothing to do with doing the same thing again and again.

 

Do you think all *jobs* are nothing but stuffing envelopes?

 

How about scientific researchers (the same people who gave you the Internet) are they not participants in "intelligent living"?

[Mariel33]

Do you think all *jobs* are nothing but stuffing envelopes?

 

How about scientific researchers (the same people who gave you the Internet) are they not participants in "intelligent living"? Capitalism means restricting people to roles, which is immoral.

 

If people reject status (why capitalism exists), in turn rejecting wealth and territory, people wouldn't need the internet anymore.

The internet exists because people have been restricted to roles, which is immoral.

Edited November 20, 2016 by Mariel33

[Maine farmer]

If people reject status (why capitalism exists), in turn rejecting wealth and territory, people wouldn't need the internet anymore.

The internet exists because people have been restricted to roles, which is immoral.

As an observer of animal behavior, (bovine, feline, and canine mostly) I can tell you status exists in other animals.  Any herd of cattle has dominant cows, for example, and when you introduce new cows into the herd, they will fight to determine their place within the herd.  

 

I don't believe capitalism exists because of status.  Capitalism is merely a method people can use to do business and exchange products, services and ideas by assigning  values of what is being exchanged.

 

The people I know and do business with have not been restricted to their roles, rather they have chosen for themselves the occupations for which they had compatible aptitudes and attitudes.  

 

I myself went to college to study engineering, but chose after college to return to the farm.

[Mariel33]

As an observer of animal behavior, (bovine, feline, and canine mostly) I can tell you status exists in other animals.  Any herd of cattle has dominant cows, for example, and when you introduce new cows into the herd, they will fight to determine their place within the herd.  

 

I don't believe capitalism exists because of status.  Capitalism is merely a method people can use to do business and exchange products, services and ideas by assigning  values of what is being exchanged.

 

The people I know and do business with have not been restricted to their roles, rather they have chosen for themselves the occupations for which they had compatible aptitudes and attitudes.  

 

I myself went to college to study engineering, but chose after college to return to the farm.

Can capitalism exist without any human-to-human violence?

Edited November 20, 2016 by Mariel33

[Maine farmer]

Can capitalism exist without any human-to-human violence?

Of course it can.  It is the Humans who are to blame for the violence, not the method of economic organization.

 

War is not a recent invention of humanity either.  We are tribal in our origins.