Socialism is an idea

Could we live in a world, in a society in which one percent of the population must resign itself to being not obscenely wealthy but instead merely fantastically wealthy, in order that the remaining ninety-nine percent of the population might have a share in the security of knowing that, if nothing else, at least their basic need for food, shelter and medical care will be met?

Could we live in a world, in a society in which people are free to pursue their dreams, be it for greater wealth or merely the satisfaction only of fulfilling their dream, but that whatever circumstances of life unfold have the security of knowing that, if nothing else, at least their basic needs will be met?

Published in: on March 20, 2017 at 8:10 am  Comments (1)  
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Homelessness is Unacceptable

Why does the wealthiest nation on Earth not even have safety measures in place for those who suddenly find themselves without basic necessities for survival?

There are many dozens of ways (especially in a Capitalist society) that an individual or a family might find themselves without access to shelter, meals, some place to safely store a few possessions.

How can anyone be expected to pick themselves up and carry on when they’re already so busy asking questions like,

Where is the next meal coming from?
Where am I going to sleep tonight?  Is it safe?
…will my children be safe?
Where can we bathe, shower and wash our clothes?
How can we get money for basic necessities while trying to get out of this?
Is there any medical facility that will treat me? What about transportation?
How can I find work and access the internet, or try to start a new career?
What can I put for ‘Home Address’ on this banking or job application?
Most of all, how can we stay together and be safe?

No one, in any civil and wealthy and technologically advanced society should find themselves faced with these questions…

…and have no ready answer available to them.

How can any government, on the one hand, boast about having a powerful military to protect the “freedom” of the people while not even having a structural plan for ensuring that no one should become forgotten and destitute?

How can any nation beam with pride when it can’t (or won’t) even see to the basic needs of its own people?

More on Understanding Homelessness

Published in: on November 27, 2016 at 7:48 am  Comments (3)  
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Machine Economics

There is a kind of simplified mentality revealing that machines cost far less money to deploy than their human counterparts.  This makes good economic sense for business.  Yet there’s a lingering characteristic of machines that never quite factors into the equation.  Machines do not get paid.  That is to say, they have zero purchasing power.  The result of this, it would seem, is that they are unlikely to spend any amount of money, anywhere, in any other sector of the economy… ever.  Which leads me to wonder if this doesn’t, or shouldn’t, at least in some ways alter the calculus of production/distribution/logistics (even service where it applies) especially if we’re thinking in more holistic economic terms.

Is it possible that we even need to think in terms of human/machine parity, or societal equilibrium?  Does the notion of an Unconditional Basic Income have merit in the rapidly emerging socio-economic paradigm?

There’s another thing.  They don’t pay taxes either, machines.  Of course, I’m sure that little nuance can be gotten around by other means in good time.

Published in: on May 13, 2014 at 10:16 am  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , , , , , ,