[FoRK] The bee sting theory of poverty

Stephen D. Williams sdw at lig.net
Mon Jun 28 21:43:49 PDT 2010

On 6/28/10 9:09 PM, Jeff Bone wrote:
> On Jun 28, 2010, at 22:20, Russell Turpin <russell.turpin at gmail.com> 
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 9:52 PM, Stephen D. Williams <sdw at lig.net> 
>> wrote:
>>>> Until you start attempting to define baseline or come up with 
>>>> practical
>>>> mechanisms, then it becomes nonsense.
>> Jeff Bone:
>>> Seems like these should be a good start:
>>>   * Clean, safe, & functional living space
>>>   * Food
>>>   * Basic business and exercise acceptable clothing
>>>   * Health care
>>>   * An education past high school
>>>   * Internet
>>>   * Outdoor play / exercise space (parks, trails, sidewalks)
>> Jeff has it completely right, here.
> To be clear, Russell, you are quoting me quoting Stephen.  I did not 
> assert those things.  I would not.

Could not perhaps? ;-)
I don't think you quoted those, not on FoRK.

> I still think his list is silly beyond belief and will be either 
> quaint or opulent within a generation.

You are still stuck on thinking I was thinking that such a list would be 
static.  I don't.  However, a list of some kind still should exist.
What is your rationale for asserting that the list is silly and to imply 
that such a list can't be constructed?
That the list will change and be viewed as insufficient or superfluous 
by different people at different times with different experiences?  So what?

There is reasonable room to quibble in the middle, but not at the 
extremes.  You are starving, or you aren't.  You spend all of your time 
trying to stay alive or you don't.  You can read and write and use the 
Internet or you can't.  Etc.

> And I still think the whole idea of such entitlements is ludicrous, 
> and misses

Misses what?
They aren't necessarily entitlements.  They are a baseline.  Perhaps 
like the "poverty line".  Perhaps the baseline measure is just used to 
rate the success of a community, region, or culture.  The status of a 
country perhaps, something beyond First vs. Third.

In the planned constructive efficient community concept, it was a "weak 
entitlement" in the sense that it was a community baseline for those 
that participated.  In other words, proper participants could expect 
that the baseline could be obtained with a reasonable subset of their 
income and time in that community.
> "Exercise acceptable clothing."
> Gov't Spandex for EVERYONE!  It's a badic human right!

Only for you.  ;-)
And it isn't the Gov't providing this stuff, necessarily or preferentially.
My point with that wording is that, as a baseline, people need clothes 
for at least:

    * General protection from the elements / modesty
    * Working / school formalities / uniforms
    * Misc. which includes exercise/sports-compatible clothing.

> jb 


More information about the FoRK mailing list