Looking for people smarter than a 5th grader whats your solution to end poverty in USA ASAP?

Question

Money is just paper & ink authorized by congress to print! Corporations currently get the biggest handouts free money 100 fold over any poor people of legal citizenship in USA!

ASAP solution congress should have on the table. http://www.usbig.net/

At least 16 fourth grade drop-outs have responded with economic 101 degrees! What you have been tought is wrong!

With 24 answers in there is still room for a better solution than what i suggest. Most want to bash cause in fact their lives lack under out current structure.

Answer 1

Shorter term solutions:

--Correct our national security policy so that it is less about *questionable* warfare and troops on the ground (very VERY expensive, both economically and morally), and more about fixing *flagrant* flaws and holes in ALL of our airports, ports, and railroads, as well as about a Policy of Retaliation.

Simply put, it is both less expensive and easier to sustain if we simply *use bombs and missles* to blast the Arabs into the Stone Age *every time* ANY Westerner dies at the hands of a Muslim. Most of the terrorists do in fact live on a *peninsula*, hello?

Point is, poorly conceived warfare and unplanned occupations are bankrupting us. We need to go cheaper and meaner, cut our losses and *at once Maximize theirs* until the survivors realize they are NOT going to win this one, EVER.

--Raise taxes on the Corporate Rich, and at once END or at least suspend corporate-welfare type handouts to multi-million and multi-billion dollar companies. Not small businesses mind you, but the biggest and richest of the filthy rich....like what happened with the *airlines* having their hands out post 9-11 (never mind that half of them were on the verge of bankruptcy anyway beforehand).

--Double the Minimum Wage AND also double the "generosity" (reward structure) of the Earned Income Tax Credit. Make the EITC easy to get and *available* to ANY law-abiding *citizen* here in the United States.

--Support Trade Tariffs on China (for artificially creating a massive trade deficit courtesy of their propping up the Yuan), and also on the Wahabbi Arabist States of OPEC (for using OUR money to fund *their* terror, and for creating an anti-competitive situation regarding the trade of petroleum).

--USE the extra money earned to fully fund and *reform* and *EXPAND* our national, social safety nets. And do all three of these things, don't just *throw money* at the problem. Fully fund, and reform (cutting off as much aid as possible to illegal immigrants, and to convicted felons, and to repeat, unrepentant *violent and abusive* drug addicts), and also *expand* (so that, for example, Social Security *can* also cover younger people who are survivors of losing a parent through *divorce* as well as untimely death) benefits.

--Likewise, fully fund, reform, and *expand* the role of public schools in the lives of citizens. Don't just throw money at the problem--even though teachers and principals and school counselors are *grossly* underpaid for the critical nature of their work. Reform the system so that *chronic* problems of bullying, kids not learning basic skills, obesity and health issues among younger and youger kids, and on and on, are all addressed in not just *new* ways but in *effective* ways.

You can have all of the adult-level, collegiate education going on in the world, and it won't mean a damned thing if kids are "graduating" high school unable to read their bills or balance their checkbooks or drive cars or defend themselves from muggers or understand what a ballot does in an election or understand how the science and technology around them works....

Longer term solutions:

--We do need to move from an Income Tax based structure to an Income Consumption Tax based structure. Would it blur the lines between "income tax" and "sales tax" as concept? Sure. But it would also deeply encourage people *to SAVE their money*, or to at least invest it versus getting deeper and deeper into revolving door debts

And while we are reforming the Tax Code....we *do* need to make it simpler, in the sense at least of closing off ALL of the loopholes and clauses that the richest of the rich, the CEOs and their armies of lawyers and accountants and bookkeepers use and abuse to cheat their way out of paying what they *do* rightfully own. Really, anyone who has *read* _Business Week_ magazine at all in the past *decade* knows how much "legal" tax evasion goes on with corporations and their tricky books.

I'd be all *for* making a Flat Tax structure out of this, that would fit on a post card, provided that in general *private individuals* paid one low rate, while * for-profit corporate persons* paid another *much higher rate*. I'd say 15% for private citizens, and 50% for the CEOs and corporations.

And *no* it would NOT bankrupt the rich guys, these are millionaires and *billionaires* we are talking about here. They can afford it--they have afforded much worse, like their 90% tax rate they *gladly paid* during World War II.

--Pass a Constitutional Amendment (most likely via State Legislatures) that would have the effect of *locking* welfare-types of payouts to *individual citizens* and to *corporate persons* to the exact same amount. Simply put, if you want to hand out $100 billion in your yearly budget to the companies and corporations, that *will and MUST be* the exact same amount that social welfare programs for private, individual citizens would get. And vice versa. If you want to cut welfare spending on private citizens to the bone and deny all benefits and perks, you *will and MUST* do the same exact thing to Big Business. No more hypocrisy on the "welfare/handout" issue. If you cut off private citizens, cut off Big Business as well, and if you hand-out largesse to Big Business, do it for *real people* too, not just the filthiest rich of the filthy rich CEOs.

--Again, this would most likely require a back-doored Constitutional Amendment to work....but we *NEED* to redefine or at least clarify a few things about what it means to be a *citizen here*. As in, a LEGAL citizen. Personally I'd clarify the issue as:

1) You're a legal citizen if you are here *legally* in respect of Rule of Law, and that if you aren't here legally you can and should be expected to be thrown out by *any citizen* at any time. Enough handcuffing the states on this issue! And *ENOUGH* jibber-jabber from the Mexicans about their wanting to "conquer" these "occupied lands" of America. We have California, Texas, Arizona and New Mexico as states in OUR nation, NOT YOURS for legitimate reasons. It's done already, deal with it, respect the Law and learn some English already!

2) That as a citizen, your Freedom of Religion depends *heavily* on being non-violent and on NOT being out to take over the world. Really, any "faith" with a geo-political agenda of world conquest, jihad, or evangelical takeover should and *MUST* be demoted to being a mere politcal party, and as such, considered a *threat* to the further integrity of Western Civilization, of which we are a part.

And yes, I get it that people, *lots* of people would piss and moan about that. But really. Don't we already *require* legal immigrants to swear an Oath on becoming Naturalized Citizens? Don't people already *demand* that the words "Under God" remain in the Pledge of Allegiance in spite of their not originally being there in the first place?

What is so wrong with requiring that your citizenship and some of your basic freedoms *depend on* your Respect of Rule of Law, and *depend on* your Not Being a Violent Threat to the Nation? Every other nation in the world already does this to some degree, it's just basic common sense...

Or to flip it around, *we are being Retarded* for NOT doing this. But how would this fix poverty? Simply put, it would allow us to *define* who is an American and who needs our help, versus who *isn't* and who does not. It's triage because we *should* have the good sense to realize that we cannot possibly *save everyone all over the world* while other nations leave their citizens in squalor.

--We need, quite possibly by Constitutional Amendment, to *reassert* our Sovereignty as a nation and to *reassert* control over what goes on economically on our soil. Reform the Federal Reserve System *until we ourselves* control our own money supply (instead of letting Big Banking do it). Nationalize the trade, refinement and *use* of Petroleum so that Big Oil doesn't end up being the *ruin* of both our nation and its economy, over and over again....

And basically state, as a principle, that we *are* going, as policy, to do what other free, Western nations of the world already do: that we are going to act on the assumption that we *all* need to be on the same team, and that America should be *pro-citizen* first, at all times.

Meaning you do tax the piss out of petroleum to protect both our environment from global warming, and our economy from Peak Oil. Meaning you do tax, fine, and otherwise *punish* CEOs and corporations alike for outsourcing and tax evasion, up to and including *revoking the whole legal notion of corporate personhood* so that the Powers That Be *can* be broken down, as Microsoft should have been, as OPEC should have been, as Wal-Mart should be, for aspiring to cartel or monopoly power.

--And you reinforce and do what you can to revive *labor unions* after 26+ years of attacks, union bashing, and worse. You *give* ordinary working people some say in their lives again versus the *overwhelmingly abusive* CEOs, HMOs, and outsourcers of all sorts.

Will this completely eradicate poverty? No....there will still be some few people out there who just *won't get it*. But at least the systems will be in place such that, if you *don't want* to be poor anymore, you won't be stuck there courtesy of income cliffing, widespread discrimination and massive systems failure due to funding pettiness. And if you are stuck there, at least you won't die homeless in a gutter.....

Sorry to go on so....I do have MORE ideas still. Email me if you'd like to know more.

Thanks so much for your time and patience! ^_^

Answer 2

Education is a good idea and also end the greed. there is more than enough to go around in this country. the problem is that too few people are holding most of it. I agree that we all need to fend for ourselves but too much of anything is not good. I want to be comfortable but I don't want to walk over people to get there. "Take what you need and you leave the rest" is the best advice I could give this country. I may just be humble but I don't need much more than the food on my table and the roof over my head but it works for me. I would like to see the Oprahs and the Hiltoons use what they really need and give the rest away. i mean really now. C'mon people get real. Spending more than I make in three years on a dress that you plan to only wear once for a photo opportunity is awful and those people will be judged.

Answer 3

What little you know about our monetary system...

Congress (and the President) has nothing to do with the authorization of money making, it is the Federal Reserve that holds sole power for monetary policy.

Congress and President control Fiscal Policy.

Oh, and we live in a capitalistic country, big business always wins out, not poor uneducated people who want free handouts.

Besides, do you really think big business is gonna give up their slice of pie? They will just extend the cost to the customer, then the only ones that win is the gov't (taxes). Think about it, to win an election, mass amounts of money has to be spent. The politicians and their friends are the ones that own the big businesses. So do you think these policy makers are gonna write policies to take money out of their pocket (this applies to both Rep and Dem). The ones that will pay will be the middle class.

Maybe you should move to the EU, my socialist friend.

Answer 4

4th Grader: 3% Blinded by: cencozoic Discover I : both answers Discover II: 12,000 feet (6.400 meters) Discover III: The highest level of proficiency a character can attain in his or her profession is Grand Master Games: dry Healthcare: grocery store Healthcare II: durning the perios Healthcare III: What is the latest recommendation regarding processed meats Hot music: Three Days Grace Hot Video: false HSW: people with flat feet HSW II: animal shelters HSW III: jumper cables Jeopardy: What is Utah Magic Music: American Bad *** Music: The Chi Liters Pop Music: flase SYC: Hendrick de Keyser Ticket: Go Mavericks Weekends: Art Linkletter Point She Said:: Mystique-X Men the Last Stand Point D&M: Wolverine Palate: sardines Give A Little: Gavin Degraw Sleuth thunderstruck WRVE mct 630 remember 930 honor 1100 rebel yell 410 gramps 710 nothing River Facebook: thanks vets B95 625 925 Back to work 425 FLY 92 8 summer jam 10 summer jam 3pm summer jam 7pm summer jam magic 9 pool 12 hat 3 7 soon

Answer 5

First thing first stop throwing so much money to the stars, baseball players, soccer players like Beckham, movie stars, basketball players, etc. Yes they have talents no doubt about that but are they really worth all that money, no they not so this is why poverty is so high, and also we need to stop all that the soth cost of living is lower that's bull, I work for bills I cant even enjoy my paycheck every week, the south dont pay s--t.

Answer 6

I suppose you can be smarter than a 5th grader to believe this concept, but not smarter than anyone who knows Economics 101. Printing money with no basis (as you stated above) causes inflation. The more money that is made available, the more worthless it becomes. There are examples of 1,000% inflation in South America because of this.

I agree with the concept of a minimum level for cost of living. If it's $20,000, then everyone should get a flat $20,000 deduction from their taxes (you don't pay tax until you get above this level). This presumes you need the minimum amount to live off of.

The government can provide food and housing, but you must work for the government to earn this privelege. No hand outs for anyone who wants to sit on their butt and buck the system. There are plenty of neighborhoods that need to be cleaned up. We shouldn't be paying Union City Worker rates for this when there are plenty of welfare recipients that should be doing it in exchange for the government's support.

Answer 7

Most people who defend a rise in federal minimum wage bemoan the current wage as to low for a person to realistically be able to live on. I agree; living on 5.15 per hour is not possible in most parts of the country. Some people may spend their first hour worth of wages on gas to get too and from work. However, a very small percentage of the US population actually works for minimum wage, and those that do are usually students.

As a tool to raise incomes above the poverty level raising minimum wage is a poor tool. A rise in minimum wage will lead to a decrease in the use of unskilled labor, since close substitutes (capital) will be relatively less expensive. Such a change will cause unemployment to rise. Also, prices will rise as companies compensate for the industry wide increase in input costs. The best case long run scenario puts the poor in the same position that they were in; but a more likely outcome is that they will be worse off.

A better alternative to raising minimum wage is to make the Earned Income Tax Credit more generous. The EITC is a refundable tax credit that works to reduce or eliminate taxes paid in lower income brackets. In effect it is a subsidy for lower wages. Making the EITC more generous helps the poor, but does not affect people who do not need assistance (mainly students). The effect of the tax is not felt by the employers, so they will not feel the need to change their production composition or raise prices.

Why aren’t the democrats talking about changing the EITC? Poor people don’t vote in large numbers, so the democrats aren’t concerned with actual effect, they would rather look like they care. Most people don’t know what the EITC is, and don’t understand how it would work.

There are certainly issues with making the EITC more generous... But if you justify raising the minimum wage to help the poor you may want to look into the EITC.

Answer 8

Corporations hire thousands of workers. If the corporation is projected to fall under EXTREME conditions when it usually is successful, then thousands of workers are jobless.

Money is an intermediate to supply and demand. Without money, people can still trade object for object. Money jsut becomes a universal exchange unit.

Answer 9

uh, you apparently haven't thought through the consequences of what you're advocating via the link you posted.

That's such a great idea, let's give everyone a guaranteed income, no matter what they do or how much they contribute...LOL

That's never been tried in the USA before...so let's do it ASAP...or better yet, why don't you go to a country where it has been tried? I hear that it's a 'workers paradise'

Answer 10

Realistically, there is no way to end poverty. What we need to do is focus our attention off from the drug addicts - no more SSI for them! Put them on an island somewhere and let them drug themselves to death, and that would free up billions that we could be spending on feeding the children, schools, etc.
And before anyone gets all high and might on me , my sister was a drug addict. It is a choice, it may be a disease, but IT IS A CHOICE! I have zero use, and even less tolerance for druggies! They do nothing but destroy the lives of everyone they come into contact with. Why should my tax dollars pay for their habbit!

Answer 11

Increase the quality of education in the United States.