English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I hate it when average wage statistics etc are touted by politicians as being a suitable measure of improvements in living standards and the good state of a society.

I believe that the overall quality of a society should take into account more.

My personal belief is that any member of a society deserves to be looked after. After all, if they are not provided with some benefit for belonging to a society why should they follow the rules?

If you believe that governments should not pay unemployment or other welfare, I believe you are acting without any respect to the value of the lives of the less able or vulnerable members of your society.

Again. If you show no respect for their lives and livelihood, why should they respect you or your property?

2006-07-04 22:22:23 · 6 answers · asked by Jeremy D 5 in Politics & Government Politics

mpltmiller doesnt actually agree with me. He is pretty much saying the opposite of what I believe.

One of the downsides of capitalism is that it creates an illusion of equal opportunity. So people who are rich can claim to deserve it, and at the same time say that anyone who is poor has just made bad choices or just not worked hard enough.

2006-07-05 01:34:07 · update #1

6 answers

First place to measure is the government itself.Its wealth and posterity.
Then look at the people can they access and afford good medical cover.
Can they get and afford good education.
Do they have and can they afford sufficient supplies of food , water,.
Do they live in an healthy environment, sanitation, shelter, infrastructure, etc are all these things evenly distributed among the people.
What is the population gap between the haves and have nots?

2006-07-04 22:37:46 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I agree with you!

People who go on welfare are "less able" because they are lazy!

I think anyone who goes on welfare should sign a document stating that they are not capable of supporting them selves or their family and their only resort is to rely on the government to force other individuals in the society to support them.

They need to follow the rules of the society because I say so! If they are not punished by the government for crimes than the industrious people of the world will punish them (they have already proved their laziness and unwillingness to work I don't see them working harder to take my stuff than I am to keep them from having it)

People make choices in life. I have chosen to save much of my income ever sense I started working so I will be prepared for an emergency.

By not saving money and instead buying pot or beer or cell phones or what ever it is poor people buy these days they are choosing to be poor!!! Life is a choice and anyone can work hard and get ahead, but if we reward poor people for giving up and living off the state, They will!

My father was a janitor, and I plan to be a millionaire (according to my finical plan I will be)

2006-07-04 23:05:27 · answer #2 · answered by MP US Army 7 · 0 0

living standards should be based on how much a family can afford in essential items.

in china 10$ can buy you a weeks worth of food.

if you provide welfare and those recieving can not still afford shelter or food you need to reevaluate

2006-07-04 22:37:48 · answer #3 · answered by JCCamel 2 · 0 0

There are all sorts of ways to measure it. There is a so called liveable city contest where ll the big cities' prices (service, housing... etc.) are examined. I would say the minimum wage is a good way to see better.

2006-07-04 22:47:03 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Amount of food being thrown to the refuse Bins

2006-07-04 22:26:43 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

the best way to measure the living standards of people in one country is measure the gross domestic product of one country and goods that consumed by its people for last year or period.

2006-07-04 22:28:08 · answer #6 · answered by cl zon 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers