DO YOU THINK SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS SHOULD BE REDUCED?

good points, Shelagh.

"The Will to RisK" was the title I had placed on my first book. The title was changed at the request of the publisher.

The title, "The Will To Risk" was appropriate for the content of the book. Having the desire and being willing to lay everything on the line to succeed was necessary. Many people want to "play it safe". They want to retain their security and risk little, just in case things don't work out. That is not a commitment. The high risk jobs pay the most, whereas the most secure jobs pay the least. Even in the stock market, the safest investment returns the least when the market booms.

Each person must assess their goals. How badly do they want it and how willing are they to take the necessary risks to achieve their goals/dreams.

Life in general is a gamble. The choices we make involve risk, and that includes marriage.

Writing a book exposes the author to risks. Will they be criticized for what they wrote and/or how they wrote it? Will it sell? Will they wait to be picked by a publisher or take the risk of going it alone? I admire people who are willing to take a risk. How can one admire a person who is not willing to stick their neck out for something? Even a turtle can't get anywhere without sticking its neck out.

Quote :

It has little to do with social security but a lot to do with risk-taking -- which was your point. Risk-takers, according to you, have a beneficial effect by raising the poor up via jobs.

No, I said rich people have a beneficial effect by creating jobs. This was in response to David's saying that rich people get rich by exploiting the poor and their cheap labor.

I consider self-publishing to be the least reliable route for authors who want their books to be read by a wide audience and make money. Of course some self-publishers will be successful. And? Does that mean they do so by exploiting others' cheap labor?

I'm with you Abe about the risks of publishing. I never imagined the variety of reactions from people once my first book was published. I never imagined my own respnse to all that followed. The circumstances at the time were unusual and I was an easy mark for poor advice. So, many of the decisions I made might be made differently. However, my life has been enriched; overall, the decision to enter the world of authorship was a correct one.

LC wrote:

Quote :

The rich have always gotten rich on the plight of the poor. ...
The shameful truth is that you need the poor because they can generate a good economy through cheap labour.

This is some serious class warfare rhetoric. I'd suggest the opposite: that the rich get rich by taking risks and working hard, and when they're successful, raise the poor up via jobs.

Taking risks? Are we talking dangerous jobs here? Perhaps put the poor down the mines?

The answer is not jobs LC, it is affordable education. There are many hard working folk who are paid so little they they can never climb out of poverty no matter how hard they try. The best paid jobs are gained via educational qualifications that is a fact.

The poor short of a miracle will never get well paid jobs due to the fact that they are poor and cannot
afford the education needed to secure a good post.

The sad thing is class warfare is still with us. Those who have little or no money are placed in a lower class.
Education cost's money and in the US unless you are rich or an outstanding sportsman you won't get a college scholarship.
In the UK we have free education up to a point, but to get into a university you need money and the loans the government give leave the students with huge debts and don't fully cover all the cost's involved.

Of course education is important, but you can still have a glut of college educated people and no jobs for them. China has this going on right now; lots of grads, no jobs, so they live together in crowded apartments while seeking work, or just go back home, where plenty of low-level jobs still exist.

This is just one of many articles on the subject.

http://www.today.ucla.edu/portal/ut/few-jobs-for-college-grads-in-154818.aspx?ncid=10387

It is an old saying "The Rich get Richer and the poor get poorer."
Exploiting the poor still does happen believe it or not. Without the poor there would be no cheap labor opportunities. Poor people are desperate for cash and will do work for lower than average wages. Ask the imigration office if you don't believe me they encounter these folk daily. Sure many are illegally in the US but they are exploited by many who should know better.
Well known branded trainers made by child labor in the third world is another example.
Automobile Companies move manufacturing plants abroad because the labor is cheaper in poorer countries.

David,

You have a very good grasp of the problem.
Thank you for your excellent explanation.

I imagine wages in 3rd world coutnries are cheaper because living is cheaper. As for illegal immigrants, I don't care what they work for here, they apparently couldn't find anything back home. So I don't consider them exploited. Especially when they're supported in so many non-wage ways (public services).

When the educated in those countries can't find jobs there and settle for the non-educational type jobs, will education still be the key?

LC wrote:

I imagine wages in 3rd world coutnries are cheaper because living is cheaper. As for illegal immigrants, I don't care what they work for here, they apparently couldn't find anything back home. So I don't consider them exploited. Especially when they're supported in so many non-wage ways (public services).

When the educated in those countries can't find jobs there and settle for the non-educational type jobs, will education still be the key?

We know youth helps.

Engineers are in demand. We need more doctors and nurses.

We forget our mislabled noble history.
A nation once thinking it was a great empire went out and journeyed to undiscovered lands. There they discovered native folk who seemed to have valuable assets land, gold, diamonds. These folk were considered primitive and thus did not deserve the right to posess these assets so the great noble empire exploited them and made the poor native folk lower class citizens in the great noble empire. This action angered the natives who suddenly found themselves homeless and violence resulted. These folk were done over and made poor by a richer nation in the name of progress.
I'm sure you recognise the scenario from history.
It still goes on to this day.

Well said David.
It once again proves that what we learn from history, is that we don't learn from history. We keep hitting the "repeat" button.

I think that when we look at the past, we see what we believe to be reality. It enters our mindset as "the way things are" and we forget that we have the power to change. Once enough of us begin to look at what is around us in the present moment, we will have the power to envision, and help create, a different future.

Just me, again

Ann

Ann,
I believe as you. We are not in the universe, but rather the universe is in us. We are co-creators. Our thoughts stimulate the actions that cause things to happen. The law of attraction creates, it draws us toward good or evil. It can make us healthy or sick, rich or poor. We are drawn to that which dominates our minds.
Being in a positive state of mind is healthy for mind and body and influences the world around us. Instead of pointing fingers, we need to look within. Our world is within us.
Didn't mean to sound preachy, just wanted to share my thoughts.

Abe F. March wrote:

Ann,
I believe as you. We are not in the universe, but rather the universe is in us. We are co-creators. Our thoughts stimulate the actions that cause things to happen. The law of attraction creates, it draws us toward good or evil. It can make us healthy or sick, rich or poor. We are drawn to that which dominates our minds.
Being in a positive state of mind is healthy for mind and body and influences the world around us. Instead of pointing fingers, we need to look within. Our world is within us.
Didn't mean to sound preachy, just wanted to share my thoughts.

Ann

Quote :

We forget our mislabled noble history.
A nation once thinking it was a great empire went out and journeyed to undiscovered lands. There they discovered native folk who seemed to have valuable assets land, gold, diamonds. These folk were considered primitive and thus did not deserve the right to posess these assets so the great noble empire exploited them and made the poor native folk lower class citizens in the great noble empire. This action angered the natives who suddenly found themselves homeless and violence resulted. These folk were done over and made poor by a richer nation in the name of progress.
I'm sure you recognise the scenario from history.
It still goes on to this day.

Actually, you've lost me. Are you referring to colonialism, which started, as far as I know, with the ancient Romans? If so, I'm still lost, because everyone benefited from that, including you -do you consider yourself rich? Was your original comment about rich countries/poor countries, then? I thought it was about rich people/poor people within one country.

I alos don't hold any of the guilt you obviously do about colonialism, maybe that's a factor in my misunderstanding of your posts.

dmondeo wrote:

We forget our mislabled noble history.
A nation once thinking it was a great empire went out and journeyed to undiscovered lands. There they discovered native folk who seemed to have valuable assets land, gold, diamonds. These folk were considered primitive and thus did not deserve the right to posess these assets so the great noble empire exploited them and made the poor native folk lower class citizens in the great noble empire. This action angered the natives who suddenly found themselves homeless and violence resulted. These folk were done over and made poor by a richer nation in the name of progress.
I'm sure you recognise the scenario from history.
It still goes on to this day.

Ah, the Commonwealth of nations, the native folk were common and the Imperialists took their wealth. But what a price we paid! We gave away our most important asset: British citizenship. How could we be so foolish? Did we know what we were doing?

"The British at home had to come to terms with an unforeseen legacy of their imperial past - the large inflow of migrants, mostly from South Asia."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/modern/endofempire_overview_01.shtml

We don't always see it, but the universe is balanced in its own way. There is always a gift in a challenge; a challenge in a gift.

LC wrote:

Actually, you've lost me. Are you referring to colonialism, which started, as far as I know, with the ancient Romans? If so, I'm still lost, because everyone benefited from that, including you -do you consider yourself rich? Was your original comment about rich countries/poor countries, then? I thought it was about rich people/poor people within one country.

I alos don't hold any of the guilt you obviously do about colonialism, maybe that's a factor in my misunderstanding of your posts.

I'm not expecting guilt from you LC. This is a global phenominom not just one country.
I just seem to have a point of veiw that conflicts with yours, I do appologise. I was referring to an age old tradition of conquering the weak. A tradition that is practiced in different forms even in the 21st century.
It somehow seemed loosely related to the topic.
Please forgive me if you feel I have wandered off topic.

David,

No need to apologize, you merely stated facts. Facts are always welcome.

Staying on topic on the Chatter Box? There's a novelty.

Quote :

I was referring to an age old tradition of conquering the weak. A tradition that is practiced in different forms even in the 21st century.

Yes, I know. The strong conquer the weak daily. This is what you were talking about, right?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110203/ap_on_he_me/af_somalia_drought

I am weak and have been conquered by LC.......doh!

David,

I hope not!