Do you think there could be a second Great Depression?

[LizzieMaine]

As we have all seen, America's greatest strengths are decaying into naked weaknesses. Perhaps America, and much of the "West", needs to completely reimagine its purpose on this Earth in order to stymie the inevitable fall.

As long as the majority of Americans judge a "good life" by the size of the house they live in, the cars they drive, the labels on the clothes they wear, and the number of shiny gizmos they conceal about their person, can you imagine that ever happening? The depression -- the collapse -- has to come first.

 

[William Stratford]

As long as the majority of Americans judge a "good life" by the size of the house they live in, the cars they drive, the labels on the clothes they wear, and the number of shiny gizmos they conceal about their person, can you imagine that ever happening? The depression -- the collapse -- has to come first.

It could even be that the mass of wealth we have access to today is itself corrupting us - giving us what we want resulting in us becoming spoiled brats by having our every whim increasingly catered to...ever focusing us more on self and consumption, alienating us from each other and from the desire to preserve and pass on to the next generation. We (the human race) are basically stuffing the next generation because we think it is all about us and our freedom to consume.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I think a big part of the problem is that, basically, we've lost the moral balance that kept the lust for wealth from overwhelming everything else. Everybody knows "the love of money is the root of all evil," but nobody really *believes* it anymore except we fanatics, doomsayers, Jeremiahs, and crackpots. People have become so convinced that "morality" means being obsessed with what your neighbors are doing in the bedroom that they go out of their way to avoid taking any kind of a moral stand on any issue. And when you have a moral vacuum at the heart of your society, *something* has to fill it. We can look around us and see what that is.

You can't pin the blame on a single generation -- the WW2 Generation, after all, was the same generation that sold its soul for a split-level in Levittown and a new Mercury, and we all know how the Boomers ended up. There are young people today who seem to sense that there's something deeply wrong with today's society, but they're afraid to take a real stand short of signing online petitions or wearing a t-shirt, because that's, like, so judgemental or something. But until people are willing to BE judgemental, to stand up and say, "no, this is WRONG because it's WRONG," nothing is ever going to change.

 

[Undertow]

The depression -- the collapse -- has to come first.

I'm terrified that you're right. What goes up must come down. The time is ripe for collapse - doesn't mean it will happen, but well wishes and denial doesn't mean it can't, either.

There are people who are actively working to be more sustainable...but I think it's too little and too late. Even on this board, a surviving corner of the Make Do and Mend ethic, we often see modern folks who ridicule the very ideas of consuming less, or having morals, or showing restraint.

I mean this sincerely: it doesn't matter what your politics are, or how much money you make, or what you worship - when you realize you literally cannot feed yourself without a grocery store, you realize how helpless you are in the face of a collapse.

And just to be clear, a Depression or a collapse doesn't have to mean we all die in some kind of fiery explosion with people eating each other's brains in the streets (kinda like what's happening today anyway). In fact, most collapses are slow and thorough reckonings that are only appreciated in hindsight.

So yeah, this could all be hot wind and the West is going to pull through. We'll all be sipping champagne in five years at our backyard BBQ parties. But just in case, we might want to learn how to plant a garden, slaughter an animal and barter with staples like coffee, salt, sugar and rice. [huh]

 

[William Stratford]

until people are willing to BE judgemental, to stand up and say, "no, this is WRONG because it's WRONG," nothing is ever going to change.

Indeed.

The only thing we are allowed to condemn today is condemnation itself....

 

[rue]

I mean this sincerely: it doesn't matter what your politics are, or how much money you make, or what you worship - when you realize you literally cannot feed yourself without a grocery store, you realize how helpless you are in the face of a collapse.



But just in case, we might want to learn how to plant a garden, slaughter an animal and barter with staples like coffee, salt, sugar and rice. [huh]

Yup

and

Yup.

 

[V.C. Brunswick]

As long as the majority of Americans judge a "good life" by the size of the house they live in, the cars they drive, the labels on the clothes they wear, and the number of shiny gizmos they conceal about their person, can you imagine that ever happening? The depression -- the collapse -- has to come first.

To me the pivotal point in our Nation's history was Katrina and the subsequent finger-pointing in its aftermath. You know it's all over and that we're doomed as a people when a natural disaster can be politicized like Katrina was. Though it wasn't the first time in our history, I remember back in the '80s when some people blamed underground nuclear testing for earthquakes.

 

[PrettySquareGal]

Indeed.

The only thing we are allowed to condemn today is condemnation itself....

YES YES YES!

I am soooo tired of people saying "Why you hating?" or "Hater!" when I point out a perceived injustice or affront. We're not supposed to have "negative" opinions or be sad lest we get medicated. Make sure you have a duck lipped perma smile! "Sophisticated" and "evolved" people are above condemnation.

 

[PrettySquareGal]

Yet, as soon as any government or regional institution requests/requires I apply this tax, I would refuse. I don't trust people with my money. I believe there is, and always will be, entirely too much corruption in the taking or surrendering of resources (including one's currency).

Agree 100%.

 

[Son_of_Atropos]

You're right of course, that no-one, from a purely utilitarian standpoint, "deserves" anything. But we're not talking in abstracts. The discussion here is about realities. People are starving … not abstract, skinny or pot-bellied Africans, people in your country, in mine, in the country in which I currently reside (honestly, a ridiculous number, given the wealth of this place). There is a real danger in taking what you learned in John Stuart Mill 101, and applying it to the real world.

It's commonly accepted that, though these tendencies are not absent in "lower" animals, the enhanced development of the frontal lobes in primates have led (perhaps as a consequence to the increase in problem solving abilities also occasioned) to the development of what we call "emotions". One of these has been termed "compassion". It's development is one of the major reasons we tend to believe, for example, that a runt or unwanted should not be left on a hillside ("exposed") to die, and that if such a thing is done, that we feel very bad about it. Why is it, you think, that most people watching the play root for Oedipus, at least 'til he marries his Ma?

While there is no evidence that true altruism exists in any animal society (the "selfish gene" puts paid to that!), and while I have ambivalent feelings about the notion of "society" as commonly construed and especially as construed by the established major religious groups, and while I certainly think many efforts to help the poor are misguided (my view: teach a man to fish/help himself - and want to fish/help himself! -, rather than simply giving him fish), I don't think I could ever get to the point where my reasoned publicly stated position was "f*ck it; let them starve".

How shall the world solve the hunger problem? What is your realistic solution?

To the posters here, the majority is for pro-government but I ask , "Is your money going to children, an actual needy person, or most likely to a politician's pocket?"

 

[V.C. Brunswick]

To the posters here, the majority is for pro-government but I ask , "Is your money going to children, an actual needy person, or most likely to a politician's pocket?"

Bear in mind that seventy cents out every tax dollar that government spends on welfare programs (or anything else for that matter) is eaten away by "administrative overhead."

 

[Son_of_Atropos]

No, that's absolutely wrong. There was one rather famous case where a writer managed to end up with a tax rate over 100% in the seventies or early eighties, but we had a completely different tax system in place then that by that time had become so patched up that peculiar and unintended effects cropped up. Our tax system was completely redone in the early '90s and right now around 50% is the most anyone pays as an income tax for any part of their income. I specialised in tax law in law school, so I'm pretty familiar with our system even if I don't work with it anymore.

And I do not recall saying that I think Sweden should pay for all the poor in the world. I said that I think that it is all our responsibility to do so, and that your attempt to somehow export the problem to the UN (or me, or Sweden or Sheeplady) is nothing but a lame excuse that--in my eyes--does not free you from moral responsibility for the suffering in the world.



Really, when you do this--basically calling me and Sheeplady names--what exactly in your conduct do you find becoming a gentleman? One can disagree with someone without resorting to that kind of rather weak attempt at bullyism.

You are not coming across in a very flattering light, dear man.

Thanks for clearing up that income tax question. I guess we were both sorta right. Maybe you could clear this other thing up, I heard in Europe that the average work week is only 30 hours? Is that true? Furthermore, what are the immigration laws like for Sweden? Is there a long waiting list?

I'm sorry, I called you a sap. I just misconstrued your statement, "Me, personally, I worry less about that someone might get too much from the system than that some may get too little.

Anyway, I'm fine with being relieved from some of my wealth any which way, but then I'm a Christian and find the likelihood of a camel passing through the eye of a needle rather poor odds."

Oh and I never attributed the idea that Sweden should pay for all the world's poor. That was my idea. Sweden would just be the stop gap until the U.N. program could get rolling. You know there would probably have to be at least a few years what for the all the sub-committees, committees, and committees on committees that it would be awhile before the U.N. program could get on its feet. Therefore, I thought Sweden had one of the best social programs in the world and they could hold their own for a little bit. Naturally, there would have to be a world tax on everyone to compensate Sweden and then the U.N. But I guess we could just soak the rich for that world tax too. Because a gigantic, multinational, government entity ensuring that everyone is getting their fair of the pie would work out just fine and achieve all of its goals under budget. Right? Right?

 

[Son_of_Atropos]

I'm terrified that you're right. What goes up must come down. The time is ripe for collapse - doesn't mean it will happen, but well wishes and denial doesn't mean it can't, either.

There are people who are actively working to be more sustainable...but I think it's too little and too late. Even on this board, a surviving corner of the Make Do and Mend ethic, we often see modern folks who ridicule the very ideas of consuming less, or having morals, or showing restraint.

I mean this sincerely: it doesn't matter what your politics are, or how much money you make, or what you worship - when you realize you literally cannot feed yourself without a grocery store, you realize how helpless you are in the face of a collapse.

And just to be clear, a Depression or a collapse doesn't have to mean we all die in some kind of fiery explosion with people eating each other's brains in the streets (kinda like what's happening today anyway). In fact, most collapses are slow and thorough reckonings that are only appreciated in hindsight.

So yeah, this could all be hot wind and the West is going to pull through. We'll all be sipping champagne in five years at our backyard BBQ parties. But just in case, we might want to learn how to plant a garden, slaughter an animal and barter with staples like coffee, salt, sugar and rice. [huh]

The 1990s, this generation's roaring 20's?

 

[LizzieMaine]

To the posters here, the majority is for pro-government but I ask , "Is your money going to children, an actual needy person, or most likely to a politician's pocket?"

As someone who survived childhood thanks to Government relief, I didn't get fat by any means -- there were nights I went to bed hungry because the check didn't last a full month -- but I survived. I have no trouble whatever with doing whatever needs to be done, by Government or individual means, to ensure that kids who need help today get the same chance I did.

 

[Miss Moonlight]

As someone who survived childhood thanks to Government relief, I didn't get fat by any means -- there were nights I went to bed hungry because the check didn't last a full month -- but I survived. I have no trouble whatever with doing whatever needs to be done, by Government or individual means, to ensure that kids who need help today get the same chance I did.

I feel the same way- but it was my sister who needed relief when her husband decided he didn't want the responsibility- his words- of three kids and a wife, and he got another woman pregnant then left the state, and has never paid a dime of child support, and it doesn't matter how many legal steps she takes- he always avoids it. Her kids were 3, 6, and 10 at the time and they would have starved without welfare, because none of us could help enough- we all did what we could. Now, years later, she's gone to college, has a career in midwifery, is a productive citizen, and she never could have done it without government help. I'm perfectly fine that my tax money (when I worked) went to her and the people like her that I have known. In my 20 years of having known people who had to take welfare, only one was a fraud, and that was taken care of. People are so worried that someone is getting something for free, they don't stop to look at actual statistics and facts. We end up spending $45k on drug tests (Florida did, that is) for welfare recipients and saving nothing because people are so afraid that they're all frauds, when only 2.6% of them failed the tests. We end up cutting people off with the assumption that they'll get used to it and stop trying instead of realizing that *most* people would almost rather lose an arm than take assistance... but sometimes they have to.

 

[Ginandtonic]

I don't post allot on here, but I enjoy reading it from time to time. I feel like were in a depression. Haven't been able to find work now almost 6 months, and thats after working part time minimum wage for a few months, and then a year of being unemployed. It's bad out there right now.

 

[Undertow]

The 1990s, this generation's roaring 20's?

It would certainly appear that way. Perhaps a little more stretched out though; say, 1990-2008. That includes the dot-com bubble in Silicon Valley, the housing bubble and the first bank bubble (the second and third bank bubbles haven't popped yet - but they will).

We have yet to reconcile the derivatives market which is currently trading around $200tril. and obviously couldn't be backed in the result of a crash - not even if every person in the world tossed in all of their cash. That's the second bubble.

The third bubble is the banks themselves. Once that bubble bursts, well...

 

[Flicka]

I'm sorry, I called you a sap. I just misconstrued your statement, "Me, personally, I worry less about that someone might get too much from the system than that some may get too little.

Anyway, I'm fine with being relieved from some of my wealth any which way, but then I'm a Christian and find the likelihood of a camel passing through the eye of a needle rather poor odds."

Actually, you probably understood me right, but I still appreciate the apology.

Thanks for clearing up that income tax question. I guess we were both sorta right. Maybe you could clear this other thing up, I heard in Europe that the average work week is only 30 hours? Is that true? Furthermore, what are the immigration laws like for Sweden? Is there a long waiting list?

'Europe' consists of a great many countries. Even when taken rather narrowly in the sense of the European Union, we are talking about 27 different countries, so I really couldn't speak for all of them. In Sweden, anyway, the normal work week is 40 hours and has been for almost a hundred years. I think that's pretty standard for Europe. We don't have a 'waiting list'; our immigration is mostly based on humanitarian necessities, ie refugees. You can't really tell someone who has managed to flee from somewhere where they risked being murdered for their ethnicity, for example, to wait. The criteria are pretty strict, but considering what a small country we are (9 million people) we take our share of refugees. One interesting fact that is often mentioned is that the single town of Södertälje (pop ≈65,000 people) took in more refugees from Iraq than the entire North American continent. So yes, we do our share. Add to that that, within the EU, people are pretty much free to migrate as they please, so we get some people from the poorer European countries as well.

As someone who survived childhood thanks to Government relief, I didn't get fat by any means -- there were nights I went to bed hungry because the check didn't last a full month -- but I survived. I have no trouble whatever with doing whatever needs to be done, by Government or individual means, to ensure that kids who need help today get the same chance I did.

I agree. We had housing benefits in periods when I grew up. We were three children and my father refused to help after the divorce and we didn't get fat either, despite my mother working full time as a nurse. Without that and free education (yes, at university level too), I have no idea where I or my sisters would be. As it is, we are nice contributing citizens; I'm a lawyer, one sister is an economist and the other is a doctor. When I think of the fact that my grandfather worked from he was 8 years old and barely went to school, and compare that with the opportunities I've had, I'm pretty proud of what a society can accomplish if it puts its mind to it.

The reason I'm in favour of the government organising things, is because I have no faith, no faith whatsoever, in the common man's altruism.

 

[William Stratford]

The reason I'm in favour of the government organising things, is because I have no faith, no faith whatsoever, in the common man's altruism.

Are govts these days not also selected by, and made up of, "the common man"?

 

[Flicka]

Are govts these days not also selected by, and made up of, "the common man"?

Yes, but it's the common man acting as a group, where you will find people with conflicting interests. I like to think we get a little of the effect of Rawls' veil of ignorance that way.