Money For Life

mission_viejo_california asked:


improving the global environment a more important foreign-policy goal than combating world hunger.

In one recent survey in Australia, environmental concern came in as absolutely the most important priority for the leaders of the world, before eliminating poverty or dealing with terrorism, human-rights issues, and HIV/AIDS. In another survey, the United States, China, South Korea, and Australia found improving the global environment a more important foreign-policy goal than combating world hunger. South Korea put it first on its list of the top sixteen global threats.

Why are we so singularly focused on climate change when there are many other areas where the need is also great and we could do so much more with our effort?

Al Gore gives us two reasons. First, it is a planetary emergency: “At stake is the survival of our civilization and the habitability of the Earth.” Yet this turns out to be far from the truth. As we saw above, this is not what the science is telling us for the temperature rise over the coming century. If anything, the science tells us that fewer people will die with moderately more heat. Of course, Gore has several other arguments, which we will also address below.

Gore’s second reason is probably more telling and closer to the truth. He tells us how global warming can give meaning to our lives.
The climate crisis also offers us the chance to experience what very few generations in history have had the privilege of knowing: a generational mission; the exhilaration of a compelling moral purpose; a shared and unifying cause; the thrill of being forced by circumstances to put aside the pettiness and conflict that so often stifle the restless human need for transcendence; the opportunity to rise. . . . When we rise, we will experience an epiphany as we discover that this crisis is not really about politics at all. It is a moral and spiritual challenge.
He explains how global warming can give us a moral imperative, like the one Lincoln had for fighting slavery or Roosevelt had against fascism or Johnson had for the rights of minorities.

It seems unrealistic to expect that climate change will give us such singularity of purpose. If anything, the ten-year drawn-out battles around the relatively minor restrictions of Kyoto show us that anything costing individual nations trillions of dollars will be strongly contested and lead to strife rather than serenity.

But perhaps more important, should we go for the exhilaration of a generational mission just because it makes us feel good? Should it not actually be because we are doing the best our generation can do? And this, of course, brings us right back to asking whether there are greater opportunities for us to engage first.

To be fair, Gore does point out that there are many other generational missions:
The understanding we will gain [from tackling climate change] will give us the moral capacity to take on other related challenges that are also desperately in need of being redefined as moral imperatives with practical solutions: HIV/AIDS and other pandemics that are ravaging so many; global poverty; the ongoing redistribution of wealth globally from the poor to the wealthy; the ongoing genocide in Darfur; the ongoing famine in Niger and elsewhere; chronic civil wars; the destruction of ocean fisheries; families that don’t function; communities that don’t commune; the erosion of democracy in America; and the refeudalization of the public forum.

But as the list goes on, it becomes clear that it is in need of realistic prioritization. Gore essentially tells us we should fix all things from climate change to democracy. And it would be beautiful if we could do so. But so far, we haven’t addressed any of these very well. Perhaps it would be wise to start thinking about which we should do first.

Gore tells us that we need to hear the voices of the future speaking to us now. We have to imagine them asking: What were you thinking? Didn’t you care about our future? He is absolutely right.

Do we want future generations to say that we have spent trillions of dollars and perhaps done a little good for rich people in a hundred years? Or do we want future generations to thank us for giving billions of poor people a new beginning and a better life, which will enable them to better deal with whatever challenges the future holds?

In other words, do we just want to feel good, or do we actually want to do good?

Madison

mizz mixtape asked:


I think he just pulled a Puffy/ P. Diddy/ Sean Combs/ Diddy….

lol he released this statement about his name change:

“I am changing my name because Master P is who I used to be, I call it my childhood and P. Miller marks my manhood. I wouldn’t change my past because it has groomed me to be the man I am today. Growing up has nothing to do with age. People grow up mentally and spiritually through life experiences, but when you come from hip-hop it is almost impossible to get past the stereo-type it associates you with. I will always love hip-hop; it plays a major role in who I am today. I have branched out into so many different arenas that range from being the first African-American to have a clothing line at Wal-Mart, to writing books, and speaking on Capitol Hill, but all of that gets overshadowed because I come from the hip hop industry. It’s important for young hip-hop artists to know that they are not limited to one career, they can educate themselves, and prepare for life after hip-hop the same way pro-athletes prepare themselves for life after sports. Also, know that you can branch out into other avenues if you are multi-talented or have other dreams. My dream was to enter corporate America, my son’s dream is to go to college and play basketball, and Will Smith’s was to be a famous actor. Many of us can begin new careers, take advantage of different opportunities and still remain true to hip-hop.

There are a lot of people out there, who are afraid to grow up and change, but I’m not and P. Miller is the evolution of me, Percy Miller the entrepreneur, the businessman. My goal is to educate the hip-hop culture now and if they don’t get it, then hopefully their kids will get it and understand. My fellow hip-hop artists should know that we can’t rap forever. I’m glad I’m in a position in my life where I don’t have to put out music because I’ve prepared myself for the future. To build the generational wealth we have to educate our families. That’s why my son is going to college. Fifteen years later I’m still successful because I’ve realized the importance of education, growing up, and responsibility.”

Jack

Obama Bin Spending Spree asked:


We started the war on poverty 45 years ago and yet the end result has been a massive increase to our Federal Debt and generational poverty resulting in rampant drug use, increased prison population, hopelessness in inner cities and urban decay. BTW, this is not a racial thing either as I grew up in Detroit in a mixed ethnic/racial family and I know just as many whites on welfare as I do blacks and latinos.

I simply do not know how Liberals can possibly claim to have monopoly on “Caring” when they never examin the results of their policies only their intentions. I believe Liberals are cruel because they convince the weak minded that they have a right to expect Government to care for all of their needs when anyone with a calculator knows that we are TWELVE TRILLION DOLLARS IN DEBT and that amount is growing at a record rate! (BTW, I don’t want anyone to blame Military spending or the war because it is simply not factually accurate if you examine what we spend on entitlements verses the Military.)

Common sense says that we simply cannot continue to go deeper and deeper into debt and that we will continually find people to finance that debt. When that day comes and we have to say to the people on Welfare and Social Security that the check won’t be in the mail what have Liberals done to prepare these people for that time?

Liberals convincing people that the party will never end simply isn’t realistic and telling people that they have a “Right” to health care when they know that Medicare/Medicaid are nearly broke! They are within only a couple of years from expending more than they take in through payroll taxes therefore on collision with bankruptcy!

The idea that we can simply “Tax the Rich” as an answer is simply not factually acurate because even if we tax the rich at 90% or 95% we still could never reduce our debt and cover the costs of a single payer or socialized medicine for every person. We will eventually hit a point of litterally needing to confiscate wealth rather than simple taxation and eventually that well will run dry as well.

The Liberal spending policies beginning with FDR continuing with LBJ and even the massive expansion by that “Cmpassionate Conservative” George W. Bush have essentially destroyed any hope of your children having a decent quality of life. Essentially my parent’s generation the Baby Boomers have broken the covenant of ensuring that the next generation is better off than their own. Every generation beginning with mine will be worse and worse off because of the feeling of entitlement by the previous generation and the willingness to spend the future.
Onlooker: Your comments simply are not based in reality. To claim we have not or do not spend enough is simply silly at best and ignorant at worst.

http://www.heritage.org/research/Education/images/b2179_chart5.gif

I grew up in Detroit where in 2005 they spent $13,529.00 PER STUDENT and achieved a graduation rate of only 24.9% while in Idaho where I live now were we spend literally LESS THAN HALF of that amount and have a graduation rate of 83%. BTW, don’t blame the additional cost in Detroit on security either…because the Detroit Police Department has provided all public school security since the mid-1980’s when I was in school!

For you to say we haven’t spent enough is absolutely hilarious!
In addition…I would love to see where you get your numbers from on second thought…since I suspect they came out of your butt I will pass.

FACT: We spend only 21% on the Military INCLUDING THE WAR IN IRAQ and we spend 54% on entitlement spending!
Drixnot: Your claims regarding Social Security while true for the moment do not hold up in a few years…sorry but it’s true. However your inane attack about so called “Hate Radio” (Which is untrue regardless) is simply not based in reality.

How about the former head of the Government Accountability Office David Walker A CLINTON APPOINTEE for a source? So you are OBVIOUSLY the one with your head in a bodily orifice, not me!!!!!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OS2fI2p9iVs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIgrxpp97OQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXr_Ga_n0pY&feature=related

So…STFU!
Drixnot: If you do actually have a degree in accounting…I WOULD ASK MY COLLEGE FOR A REFUND IF I WERE YOU!
Drixnot: They are in fact videos PUT OUT BY THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!! Just because you can happen to watch them on YouTube doesn’t mean crap!!! Why don’t you ACTUALLY WATCH THEM INSTEAD OF CONTINUING WITH YOUR INANE ATTACK!
Drixnot: In addition, you are correct that the money was paid in…BUT THE GOVERNMENT SPENT IT!!! Now it’s a Ponzi Scheme and if you deny that…I simply cannot help you. In addition, of course people die before they get benefits, because the age is established BASED ON LIFE EXPECTANCY!!! If our life expectancy were 100 you would have to wait until you were 98 to get Social Security! Why do you think the age requirement for full benefits keeps being raised?
Drixnot: Either you are not smart enough to understand what I am saying or you are intentionally ignoring all of the data. If you are going to refuse to watch something simply because they link is Youtube…then you are truly a DUMBA$$! While it is true that much of what is on Youtube is for entertainment purpose, not everything there is make believe and while I am sure the videos are posted at some official place somewhere…I quite frankly don’t give a SHlT about your inane opinion enough to go digging! If you are so ignorant as to simply ignore the data I am putting for then you are the hockey helmet wearing retard quite frankly!

Caden

Cherie S asked:


Take a stand and DO what you preach! Since you make more than me, send me 25% of what you earn in excess of $50K. Start the redistribution of wealth without waiting for your party to do it for you. Or aren’t you willing to do so? If not–I believe that makes you a hypocrite.
11 answers so far- and no one is willing to help poor little me out. Gee–I see a trend here with libs not wanting to GIVE.
toffeefan–I DO work with recipients of welfare. I see moms who show their daughters how to ‘work’ the system. I do agree with you however, it IS a catch-22. With serious reform we can get people to work and make it more profitable for them to work. Making $7.50/hr and paying $5.75/hr for daycare doesn’t cut it, but neither does robbing Peter (me) to pay Paul. The point of the question is to see if YOU are willing to GIVE to someone less fortunate–the only answers I am getting is NOT ME–let the GOVERNMENT do it.

Justin

honesty&wisdom asked:


i worked at an apartment complex where we had REAL rich people living. i’m not talking about nickel and diming drug dealers or rappers with a few g’s in the bank. i’m talking about people with generational wealth. they would own real estate in different areas of the country and they played the stock market. i mean, the real deal. these people wore beat up sneakers and even bought some of their clothes at target. they bought nice toys and clothes for their kids, but they didn’t break the bank on $100 shoes for their kids. i get so sick of watching rappers on tv wearing thousand dollar chains when they really don’t have any real wealth. its just like when puffy started he was wearing shiny suits, but when the real money started to roll in, he switched up to designer duds that were toned down. am i the only one tired of seeing broke rappers (and broke people in general) trying to pretend to be rich by wearing their “wealth”? is it me, or does it just reek of desperation?
and don’t even get me started on gold teeth…
too, i never said that wealthy people were nice. i just said they don’t need to flaunt their wealth to prove anything to anyone. leona helmsley was stupid for leaving that money to her dog, i agree.
i just feel that if you get a lot of money its not necessary to get a gold chain with your name on it. let’s be honest, most rappers don’t make that much. they may get an up front amount of $10k or $20k, so for them to floss in videos in rented jaguars and rented houses is just stupid. and depending on how much they sell, they may have to pay back part of their advance. i just think its a waste of money and they look stupid at the same time. how many times do you hear about rappers that blow their advances and are still living with their parents when all is said and done?

Kaden

Pink Robot asked:


‘Consider these figures from the Economic Policy Institute. In 1979, the top 1 percent of wage earners made 9.4 times as much, on average, as the bottom 90 percent of the populace. This ratio had remained virtually unchanged since the end of World War II.

Meanwhile, the top 0.1 percent made 21 times as much as the bottom 90 percent - again, a ratio that had barely budged in the postwar period.

Since then, the income ratio of the top 1 percent relative to the bottom 90 percent has doubled, making it about the same as what the ratio of the top 0.1 percent to the bottom 90 percent was for the first 35 years of the postwar period.

That’s startling enough, but the most radical redistribution of income has been at the very top of the economic pyramid. The top 0.1 percent now enjoys a wage ratio about 70 times that of the bottom 90 percent - an astounding generational transfer of literally trillions of dollars from nine out of 10 Americans to the superrich.’

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/oct/21/campos-wealth-on-move—to-the-rich/

Isaiah

diamondgirl asked:


It used to be a “tennis bracelet” was a sign of style of style, class, and wealth. Nowadays, sometimes people don’t even know what a tennis bracelet is–perhaps this is a generational thing, so are tennis bracelets out of style/not popular anymore?

Steven

roughruggedraw asked:


Why are people of all races offended by the idea of reparations for Blacks?

Jewish people who suffered the holocaust got an entire nation.

Blacks were denied the right to pass along generational wealth to their offspring.

Many of the people and corporations today still benefit from slavery.

Current civil rights laws never addressed the wrong suffered by descendants of slaves. As a matter of fact, after the civil rights movement which many blacks were jailed, beaten, and killed, the laws were written to include all the other races that hadn’t suffered the same injustice. The number one minority group at the time of this legislation was white women. Because the laws outlawing discrimination and allowing affirmative action were for every minority group including women. It specifically never addressed the nonpayment of wages and atrocities suffered at the hands of the descendants of slavery.

I truthfully would like an open discussion regarding this.
I understand that many of you don’t believe that Blacks today suffer from slavery. But the fact remains that 1) many of the descendants were denied generational wealth 2) many Blacks still earn significantly less than their white counterparts and 3) no official apology has ever been made specifically to Blacks and no specific attempt to remedy the problem.

Adrian

Pink Robot asked:


For example, the past 30 years have featured a massive redistribution of wealth in America from everybody else to the top 1 percent, and, much more radically, the top one-tenth of 1 percent (that is, the richest thousandth) of Americans.

Consider these figures from the Economic Policy Institute. In 1979, the top 1 percent of wage earners made 9.4 times as much, on average, as the bottom 90 percent of the populace. This ratio had remained virtually unchanged since the end of World War II.

Meanwhile, the top 0.1 percent made 21 times as much as the bottom 90 percent - again, a ratio that had barely budged in the postwar period.

Since then, the income ratio of the top 1 percent relative to the bottom 90 percent has doubled, making it about the same as what the ratio of the top 0.1 percent to the bottom 90 percent was for the first 35 years of the postwar period.

That’s startling enough, but the most radical redistribution of income has been at the very top of the economic pyramid. The top 0.1 percent now enjoys a wage ratio about 70 times that of the bottom 90 percent - an astounding generational transfer of literally trillions of dollars from nine out of 10 Americans to the superrich.

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/oct/21/campos-wealth-on-move—to-the-rich/

Austin

Lyn asked:


My husband & I are quite open when talking to my in-laws about money. We feel we do quite well financially and are proud of our accomplishments. The problem is my in-laws. When we feel we cannot afford something we get a lecture I like to call “Why do you have negative wealth, shame on you for not saving more!” But if we accomplish a financial goal, we get the “Money isn’t everything” speech. What is it about this generation and money?? BTW the in-laws are well into their 60’s and very well off and they always open the money discussions.

Anthony