The masses need to be satisfied. They, everyone/we, need is food and shelter, in the most basic sense. The emotional and psychological needs are beyond definition. Also, a cause of much woe in the world. Of course, you need to start with the physical, and build to the mental and metaphysical. Unfortunately, every discussion of how to engineer the good "citizen"(person), leads to the inevitable journey into distopia. But, I consider those more failings of the system in regards to people than an impossibility of a system. Later...maybe.
It would be relatively cheap to feed those that are hungry. Though, the international community is being prevented from feeding people by those who have power in certain areas
To return, the best plan would be to create enclaves of sustainable agriculture around large scale agriculture areas that can provide work and food. The problem is that the surrounding poor invade the areas that are to be developed/developed areas within poor countries. Attempts to open industrial parks in places like Indonesia have run into massive squatter problems. It doesn't help that Indonesia was/is extremely corrupt and the people are not being thought about...not that transnationals think about such things. Summary: Yes, widespread government action is needed to have a comprehensive enough plan.
There are hungry and homeless everywhere, except the suburbs, in America. That would largely be a consequence of the price of space in America, and most places. And, NIMBY(Not in my backyard). Who wants to help people next to their house? I feel that I cannot truly attack these selfish actions until I have my own family, or advocate that such "negative" things be moved near my family that I do not live near (aka mom, dad, sister). But, on principle, I find that people who do not accept facts and such as disappointing, but people are people.
I must pause here on this post for reflection....and yes, it does seem somewhat communist or socialist and self-righteous. But, capitalism/consumerism is not the answer as it has been shown to not take the true cost of inputs into account. I do understand economics...sorry.
7 comments:
The problem with widespread government action is that it is rarely done well, and often leads to new problems which are dealt with too slowly. People for so long have been trying to build top-down structures to control/improve people(depending on the situation). The best way, in my opinion, is to try a more bottom-up development(or at least on a smaller level). When Buckminster Fuller decided he wanted to help humanity, he realized that both corporations and governments were insufficient to the task, and oftentimes antagonistic. He decided that building technological artifacts that were forward-looking and improved people's lives without demanding anything more from them(the people...you know this, you read the book). I know you've also read De Soto(is it Sota?)'s book about property rights/micro-finance in the developing world(I also believe their was an article in the Washington Post with the past month about development in Africa). You need to help people help themselves, but also help them in such a way that it is natural/doesn't necessarily take more work.
The real problem is can we actually help other countries before we help ourselves. The current American consciousness is needs a paradigm shift. We're still fighting the same battles that were fought when the first farmer said to some guys "Help me build this fence around my crops and protect them from those other guys and I'll let you have some." Maybe I'm a little too pessimistic because of things going on these days. The people who seek to control us have been mastering their techniques for many many years and sadly I see too many who have fallen under the spell.
If it is not the govt. or corporations, then it must be the community. I don't believe a giant global map ball that details pop. and resources (buck's ball thing) will stir people's conscience. People are to worried about living their own self-centered lives to help the world. I am not judging, my life is self-centered too. What does it take to create the paradigm shift? "It takes a village to raise a child." No, it takes an education system geared to properly raise one to raise one. Who controls the education system...the govt, but not totally. Experience an educational system as an adult and you will see how resources and socio-economics play a role. Money should, at first, be thrown at the system. The best (teachers and children) are being wasted, and the worst have excuses.
The sad truth that is many parents do not deserve to raise a child...not without a system that educates the parents in ways the system failed them before.
It is not that people can be enlightened by just being told the facts of things. The facts have been available for awhile(if one can ignore those who would seek to hide the facts, or make you believe what they say are the "real" facts). It will take changing the way people think about their actions/their position in the world.
We are all self-centered. I've failed myself and others and multiple occaisions(not that I consider myself a miserable human being). I've also done beneficial things. I believe that part of the focus needs to be on the little things, which will lead to bigger/better things being done. As Daniel Quinn says in "Ishmael" and other books, once people are secure, they start thinking about the things that they really want to do. As the country moves towards economic ruin(or people feel that it is), they start worrying more and more about just taking care of themselves and less and less about doing what is right/good(the way I often feel).
Just throwing money at education isn't an easy fix. Part of the problem I see, especially with legislation like No Child Left Behind, is the goal of teaching facts, not teaching children/people how to learn(momentarily stepping away from the validity of the "facts" being taught). When people are just taught to memorize and repeat, they do not develop the most important characteristic of a citizen of a "good" democracy...the ability to think and question. If you can teach people the reasoning behind actions/formulas/certain lines of thinking, they learn how to examine new information without being told what they are supposed to think about that new information. Once you learn the basics of Euclidean geometry, you can understand how more complicated proofs are developed(well, maybe not completely, but at least you understand the idea). We should be teaching all children the basics of logic, rhetoic, and critical thinking, combined with ideas of civil responsibility that go beyond rooting for your country and paying your taxes(a lot to ask, I know).
We also need to understand that not all people are going to be able to learn the same things at the same pace(did you know that 50% of the people are below average?). Bob Somerby at www.dailyhowler.com has been getting into this line of thought. If a student is in 6th grade, but has a 3rd grade reading level, how is that student going to be able to read the history book written at a 6th grade level or higher? He is not, will get frustrated, and will be hurt even more. Higher education is also important, but not everyone really needs it. Jobs that don't need a college diploma require one. This causes people to go to school for the piece of paper, either not learning because they don't really care, or getting dragged into a mountain of debt for no good reason.
Part of what I think we need is a more reasonable wage structure. People deserve a living wage because the jobs that people do "at the bottom" are very important to a functioning society(connects to your Hawaii comments). I'll stop for now, but not before mentioning that I have a link on my blog to a report showing that 18 super wealthy families are the main force(if not only, I haven't had a chance to read the whole thing) behind the lobbying effort to eliminate the estate tax.
I would be interested to see what the actual guidelines for NCLB are. Are they just facts? So many kids are not learning math at a proper pace. The thought process involved in working with fractions and beyond is extremely important. It is easy to forget that you actually had to learn what we now take for granted.
This one elementary school I visited had an interesting reading set up. Everyday for like an hour and a half the entire school would have "reading" time/class. At this time the students would go to groups based on reading ability. So if a 5th grader was reading at a 2nd grade level, he would work with that group. If a thrid grader could read at a fifth grade level, then he/she would go with that group. No one is forgotten and pushed to read at a level beyond them and the gifted are able to excel.
It is not about ruin, it is about the realization that you will never have everything you want.
maybe we need more stringent laws on things like getting married and reproduction.
i agree with a living wage in theory. but wonder how it would adversely affect people like me. as a physician i may make just enough money to afford to send my kid or kids to private school/university. a living wage for workers at the bottom may cut into my own wage (either via taxes or cost of living expenses or both) so much that i may be unable to afford it. or maybe just my own freedom. i can no longer afford to take that trip to china i always wanted to make.
You shouldn't need to be determined to send your kids to private school. By the time you have kids, your wife would have to be a doctor too to afford it probably, wihtout scholarship...short anectdote.
There is a contest run here in Hawaii by a non-profit that sends two winning public schools and two winning private schools to Japan. It is a quiz type thing. If private schools win more than two categories, then the second, or third, place public school would go (don't know the exact method the private school teams are not allowed to go, but it is far). The president of the org was having a conversation with a parent who was upset because her son couldn't go because his team, from a private schoool, won but was one chosen to be replaced by a public school. The catch is that she is a public school teacher and sent her kid to a private school but complains. The private schools would mostly win, because they have an inherent advantage over the public schools. That is why the president of the org doesn't allow more than 2 each, he is trying to benefit everyone, not just the kids already with an advantage.
We should work to eliminate the disparity. Yes, taxes will go up.
im not speaking about me personally or specifically. just the general mindset of an upper middle class american
i dont have preferences, public, private, or whatever. i think one should go with the best setups and situations for the given scenario.
Post a Comment