How to eliminate poverty.

This discussion is an attempt to induce from the facts how a 1st world country could socio-economically eliminate poverty. Every political group believes that eliminating poverty is a good idea.

Modern civilisation can easily eliminate poverty that is not caused by crime or accidents as the gdp per capita indicates. It can also reduce crime considerably, but that discussion can take place in another thread. Commonly in this thread people make irresponsible sweeping assumptions about other posters, this is due to petty foibles which are irrational ideas you have. Ask other posters questions before making sweeping assumptions, for instance I sound very much like a socialist, I am not I am a realist, at this point socialists will believe that I am insulting socialism and saying it is not realistic. I am a realist so you must prove to me the merits of your argument and cannot make any sweeping assumptions. Here is a brief list of things which would decrease poverty.

Maintenance of the market economy. Market economies are much more efficient than planned economies.

Minimum wage respective of what funds a person needs to keep themselves out of poverty. This could be in the form of food stamps and state accomodation and any money a person can earn above minimum wage will be in the form of money. No one will get state accomodation unless they have a job. The state will seek to make the accomodation as economical as possible whilst staying clear of anything that might cause crime or poverty.

Welfare will only go to under 16s, this will be extensive and be aimed entirely at ensuring the person can get a job when they have finnished their education. Parents will not get paid for having children, the money will go to the children to ensure the parents spend the money on their children.

Schools will be privatised.

A good idea would be to train orphans from infancy to work in special forces and as elite pilots as a special warrior-class in the military. Some people might disagree with this.

The government will privatise it's job centres and job advertising/searching agencies.

Hospitals will be privatised.

Insurance companies will be privatised and everyone with a job must pay a small sum of salary to insurance

Tax should be decreased.

>>6
Poor people do not send their kids to private school because they have to pay for it under a planned economy and cannot afford the right to have an education system that must compete in a market economy. Giving children money that their parents can used to send them to a private school is every responsible parent's dream. Private enterprises are inherantly non-discriminative as otherwise they would unnecessarily lose money. In order to eliminate poverty all children will have an education, the market system means that there will always be schools willing to take the cash grant for taking in another pupil.

Everyone will have insurance, privatised hospitals get cash from insurers for treating citizens. Worst case scenario, even though a child gets free education and mentorring in how to make a living for some reason they can not even get a job flipping burgers in a 1st world economy and cannot afford insurance. The hospital assumes this person has insurance and treats him, when they find out he does not have insurance he is taken to court and must work as a hospital cleaner to pay off his debt. The hospital of course will be extremely efficient due to the all pervasive justice system and the pressures of a market economy.

That's right, give the child the money. It is illegal for a kid to buy alcohol, so why give the parents the child's money? If we are to eliminate poverty a heavy crack down on irresponsible parents is an absolute neccesity. You cannot eliminate institutional poverty and still let people parent their childrne without ensuring they are responsible.

No, the process would be indiscriminate of race gender and physical ability, they would be trained from infancy to be specialists, they would be a vital resource to the military that few other nations could match and with skills few other civilians would possess. They would be free to leave of course since they would be citizens, but I doubt many will give up their lifestyle.

You would be free to have insurance or not, but since you would most likely find yourself in debt some time in your life if you do not have insurance, everyone would decide to get insurance. You would be free to select from a variety of insurance companies, if you feel one is screwing you over, you simply withdraw your application and start paying the other company.

Good, don't expect businesses to be ethical. Criticise them like you're marx on methamphetamine. The more effective the justice system, the more liberty there is. However never forget that businesses are a liberty and a right, people should have as much economic freedom as possible.

I have the determination of an extremist, but as you can see I have rationally answerred all your queries and am acknowledging your criticism. My determination comes from the obvious and irrefutable fact that someone will always be in control of aspects of our society and the more we can control our own lives the better, especially our money.