Some have ignorantly and incorrectly labeled Barack Obama a socialist. I would instead argue that Barack Obama has read, studied, and learned from the work of psychologist Abraham Maslow.
I say this because to have a functioning democracy, we need a functioning citizenry. A functioning citizenry requires physically healthy and economically secure citizens. When people are securely housed and have enough to eat, they make better choices. Stability in the United States and the world would means that almost everyone – has enough to eat, stable housing, good health care, and decent education. See:
http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/int…
Or, for the basics of a society where growth is inevitable, and the quality of life is good for pretty much everyone, follow the above link regarding the teaching of the Maslow philosophy:
We should teach people to be authentic, to be aware of their inner selves and to hear their inner-feeling voices.
. We should teach people to transcend their cultural conditioning and become world citizens.
. We should help people discover their vocation in life, their calling, fate or destiny. This is especially focused on finding the right career and the right mate.
. We should teach people that life is precious, that there is joy to be experienced in life, and if people are open to seeing the good and joyous in all kinds of situations, it makes life worth living.
. We must accept the person as he or she is and help the person learn their inner nature. From real knowledge of aptitudes and limitations we can know what to build upon, what potentials are really there.
. We must see that the person’s basic needs are satisfied. This includes safety, belongingness, and esteem needs.
. We should refreshen consciousness, teaching the person to appreciate beauty and the other good things in nature and in living.
. We should teach people that controls are good, and complete abandon is bad. It takes control to improve the quality of life in all areas.
. We should teach people to transcend the trifling problems and grapple with the serious problems in life. These include the problems of injustice, of pain, suffering, and death.
. We must teach people to be good choosers. They must be given practice in making good choices.
Choices made out of fear of homelessness, and in hunger will NOT be good choices. The lure of the streets and of drugs is greatest to those who live in fear and want. In a society driven by fear and want, and stemming from insecurity over basic needs, the only growth industries will be prisons and law enforcement. That is what we now have.
Policies that ensure that basic human needs are met lead to safe societies, economic growth, and a secure future for our children. As a 60 year old, I am more concerned with the society I leave behind, then I am with what I own myself.
When McCain’s campaign contacted Samuel Joseph the Plumber’s Helper at home, gave him talking points, and sent him to a McCain campaign event, they conned Samuel Joseph into being a shill.
When John McCain stated “Joe the Plumber did not ask Barack Obama to come to his house…” John McCain destroyed any and all respect I had or could have had for him. It was McCain’s minions who told Samuel Joseph the Plumber’s Helper where to go and what to say – Barack Obama never went to that man’s house. McCain lied, was deliberately misleading, and I cannot believe that McCain did not know.
Further, progressive taxation, like Maslow’s philosophy, seeks to lift the lowest, so that basic needs are met, creating safety and a stable growth base for all.
Giving more to those who need nothing at all and cannot possibly use up what they already have impoverishes society as a whole, locks down capitol, and creates plutocracy and oligarchy cheating my children of a postive society in their future.
Fairness benefits us all.
I think your last sentence sums it up wonderfully and is also a great slogan!
<
p>I was just thinking this morning that, in the tradition current GOP strategy, McCain is actually projecting. He accuses Obama of “dangerous ideas” (i.e. socialism, which isn’t!) when it is he, himself, who is the purveyor of deeply dangerous ideas and theories: privatizing health insurance, keeping tax cuts for the wealthy, relying solely on the “surge” to bring peace in Iraq, planning to tilt the Supreme Court even further toward an unbalanced ideological monopoly. His plans constitute a clear and present danger to our country that no fear and smear campaign could adequately illustrate.
<
p>We need a return to fairness, equality and common sense.
<
p>FYI, Maslow was a socialist.
Thanks for another cite about a great thinkers positive ideas.
When people are securely housed and have enough to eat, they make better choices.
<
p>May I extend your line of thinking to be that once basic needs are provided for, a person will make a series of better choices which will free them from dependency on charity or the state?
<
p>Certainly, it’s not that simple. Some are mentally ill or deficient and incapable of ever caring for there own needs. Others are capable but are trapped in a system that with one hand rewards them with a housing voucher that moves them out of a shelter, but slaps them with the other hand by letting them know that if they do get a job that pays more than a certain amount (and not very much), they will lose their housing.
<
p>For less thank $16B per year, we could provide for the basic needs of the 200,000 MA families living in poverty. This would provide each family with:
<
p>$24,000 for health insurance
$18,000 for rent
$15,000 for food
$6,000 for utilities
and
$15,000 salary — about what an army recruit makes
<
p>For $20B we could provide each with a car and a computer. This seems like short change to eliminate poverty in MA. With complete control of government in the hands of the Democrats, why hasn’t this problem been solved already?
<
p>As all their needs would be met, could we then expect that all able adults would make the “better choices” needed to move out of poverty within 3-5 years. These better choices would include:
<
p>- Improving social skills
U.S. Census data shows that the poverty rate of married couples is 1/6 of that for single women and 1/3 of that for single men.
<
p>- Learning to budget and save
A specific amount of their salary would need to be saved, given to charity, and of course, paid in taxes.
<
p>- Job training
Free tuition (as is already provided to those who are connected into public services) for training specific to high need jobs — health care, special education teachers, software engineering, trades etc.. (Today, beneficiaries of this program can take any course, and they can end up with non-marketable programs of study)
<
p>- Treat any addictions or other ailments
<
p>- Work at a job or volunteer to build a resume
<
p>What would this take? Is 3-5 years reasonable? The program would take effect for all residents as of a certain date. All who move into the state after that would be on a waiting list. As some moved off the list, others would come on. Once you took, you’d go to the end of the list before getting a second dip. There would be some who would only need assistance for a year, so the wait list could start pulling after only a year.
<
p>I don’t think this would work. For some, yes. For most, no.
<
p>After all, we provide free education. But it doesn’t mean people are educated. There is still free will, which unfortunately some use against themselves.
<
p>The only choice is to remove freedoms. Is that a fair deal? We’ll provide for all your needs, but in exchange, you live where we tell you, work at a job we give you, etc..?
<
p>
What adults want is paid work that feels useful where they feel competent. Competent adults take care of children.
<
p>Children do not, cannot take care of themselves when babies, toddlers, and young – but need to be taught to do so and provided with both safe nurturing, and real productive work and activity.
<
p>Now, as for the those who cannot care for themselves, because of infirmity, illness, injury, extreme cognitive limits, it is the duty of the competent to care for them.
<
p>Folk who are starving are infirm, and will focus only on food. This is not rocket science.
<
p>Folk who have never succeeded or been trained in being productive and responsible will, mostly, not learn these things by osmosis.
<
p>One of my concerns about modern urban life and education is the lack of real work, productive activity, visible, learning cause and effect. But that is for another post at another time, I think.
<
p>Fortunately for me I did not have a “normal” urban upbringing.
Maybe you’ve misread my post?
<
p>First off, I’m not talking about those adults who cannot care for themselves. We are in agreement on that.
<
p>Nor am I debating your assumptions about what happens when physiological needs are not met. There are better theories out there than Maslow’s but that’s not important.
<
p>I am saying let’s provide for all the basic needs and let’s do so for a substantial period of time. I suggest 3-5 is a substantial enough period of time for a person free from the Maslow’s deficiency needs to take the corrective action necessary that they don’t again find themselves unprepared to care for their own basic needs.
<
p>You recognize that there are reasons that lead to poverty. You assert that being hungry and unsheltered leads to poor decisions.
<
p>I suggest — let’s remove the basic worries. We do that with shelters and kitchens. We go a little farther with public housing, but that system — as it’s currently administered — traps people because if they become productive, they immediately lose their housing.
<
p>Let’s move beyond that. Rather than taking someone off the rolls, let’s instead keep them on for a substantial period of time so they develop skills and experience and confidence.
<
p>Skills, experience and confidence then become their safety net against hardship.
<
p> What adults want is paid work that feels useful where they feel competent.
<
p>Absolutely. But there’s no shortcut that I know of. When I graduated from college, I had no car and there was no public transportation. So, I worked at Burger King during the day and McDonald’s at night until I saved enough money to buy a car. That was followed by a series of small steps getting slightly better paying jobs and getting retrained (my degree of study was not highly marketable).
<
p>Look, someone may love to study art history, but the fact is they will have a hard time getting a job with that degree. I don’t want to sell people on wishes. I want them to build competency in a skill so that they can get work. Once they’re working, they have the freedom to do anything — include change jobs.
<
p>It’s clear people don’t have the skills to get a paying job where they are competent at. I suggest paying them a “salary” not in lieu of work, but rather so that they have an income for incidentals while they go take the necessary steps to procure employment or otherwise get their lives back on track.
<
p>I agree with you about another thing — urban centers have become detached from a broader reality. That’s why I suggest removing some personal freedoms (i.e. choice of where to live) in exchange for the state basically being the “parents house” that the adult/family go back to live with for a few years.
….there are still more complications. I am currently reading a very interesting study of the WPA.
<
p>I find, too, that “CORI” issues really have a huge impact on employment. More later; just wanted to let you know i really appreciate your thoughtful response.
I read a report yesterday, and I’m sorry that I didn’t bookmark it. It presented two hypothetical cases of low-income families.
<
p>In a 2-parent household with two children aged 3 and 6 living in Boston, the family would need to earn $53K a year in order cover costs. But, because of lower housing costs, a single mom with the same two children living in Worcester would need to make only $23K per year.
<
p>In the first case, the conditions included both parents had jobs making $13/hr. I imagine that one doesn’t need to live in Boston in order to find a job which pays $13/hr. For unskilled workers jobs in the $9/hr range are likely more plentiful which might mean that only one parent has to work if they would only move out of Boston.
<
p>Thanks for the discussion. Looking forward to continuing.
The author, Nick Taylor mentioned the Oglethorp graduation address by FDR. A quote from it:
<
p>
For the whole address: http://newdeal.feri.org/speech…
<
p>Interestingly, at page 65, Taylor described FDR’s campaign in words that really strikingly resemble Obama’s campaign:
<
p>
<
p>FDR is described as going further, though, by Taylor. Taylor bookmarks the following quote after the comment that Republicans have become the new Tories:
<
p>