NationStates Jolt Archive

The song. Honestly, I could see this happening in the next decade or two. Discuss.

Feed the homeless to the hungry. 2 birds, 1 stone. :cool:

Soylent green.

That's all I'm saying.

Em, wuh?

Em, wuh?
Dead Kennedys - Kill The Poor
Efficiency and progress is ours once more
Now that we have the Neutron bomb
It's nice and quick and clean and gets things done

Away with excess enemy
But no less value to property
No sense in war but perfect sense at home...

The sun beams down on a brand new day
No more welfare tax to pay
Unsightly slums gone up in flashing light
Jobless millions whisked away
At last we have more room to play
All systems go to kill the poor tonight

Gonna
Kill kill kill kill
Kill the poor
Kill kill kill kill
Kill the poor ...
Tonight

Behold the sparkle of champagne
The crime rate's gone
Feel free again
O' life's a dream with you, Miss Lily White

Jane Fonda on the screen today
Convinced the liberals it's okay
So let's get dressed and dance away the night

While they
Kill kill kill kill
Kill the poor
Kill kill kill kill
Kill the poor ... Tonight

I, for one, cannot see the poor being wiped out with neutron bombs.

The cost of using nuclear weapons, or any weapons for that matter, on the poor is probably far greater than the amount we spend on social programs for them. Economically speaking, it's probably disadvantageous to kill them due to the cost.

It could be argued that the poor are already being killed - by indifference, as opposed to inaction.

Nah, killing the poor would be wrong. That's not to say that the poor should go on living in a state of listlessness. People are poor because they either a)don't appreciate what they do have and/or b)think it's someone else's responsibility to make them un-poor.

Several Saw-like scenarios are coming to mind as a way of dealing with the problem of poverty, but I don't think people would go for that either.

I'm going to have this song in my head for weeks....*sigh* again :mad:

The song. Honestly, I could see this happening in the next decade or two. Discuss.

Let me guess. You are american....

Let me guess. You are american....

I'd say that the combination of having the dollar as his nation's currency, the stars and stripes as his nation's flag and the motto of "No TV or beer make Homer go crazy...", we can assume him to be from the USA.

I'd say that the combination of having the dollar as his nation's currency, the stars and stripes as his nation's flag and the motto of "No TV or beer make Homer go crazy...", we can assume him to be from the USA.

Hence the savagely capitalist comments...(I hadnt looked at his nation)

I, for one, cannot see the poor being wiped out with neutron bombs.

Particularly those which kill people but leaving all the buildings standing.

For anyone who thinks the poor will be persecuted, I would honestly like to know why. Just because someone writes a stupid song does not mean the poor are going to be wiped out. I don't see this exterminate-the-poor plan on anyone's agenda.

I'd prefer to Arm the Homeless personally.

Feed the homeless to the hungry. 2 birds, 1 stone. :cool:
We should probably irradiate them so that they won't spoil. But then we could just stack them up in the Wal-mart parking lots until we needed them.

Although the irradiation would keep us from exporting them to some countries, it would give the EU a source of meat that is free from the mad cow disease.

Clearly the best way to do things is to arm them, place them in a giant arena and have a big fight to the death for a chicken sandwich. With all the revenues from people paying to see this, it could be a great little earner.

Though there's downsides, like those filthy hippies who preach nonsensical hypocrisy of no violence yet they're killing themselves by smoking pot and also being a burden to society. Note that I mean smoking pot and being a burden to society are two different ideas in once sentence, which isn't allowed. But hey. Oooh, sentence fragment.

Back to my suggestion. By doing this, we can also use the homeless for firearms testing, and as an incentive for other homeless people to be less of a burden on society and begin working harder so avoid being targeted. Though who are homeless but unjustly so can be exempted from the Arena of Entertaining Death.

Yeah, I have a name for it now.

Feed the homeless to the hungry. 2 birds, 1 stone. :cool:

Nah. Eat the Rich.

Ask yourself, who is likely to taste better: those fed on a good diet and raised in warm conditions, or those who went hungry and felt the cold?

Nah. Eat the Rich.

Ask yourself, who is likely to taste better: those fed on a good diet and raised in warm conditions, or those who went hungry and felt the cold?

Good point, and by eating the rich there would be the extra money they left.

Heh, the War on Poverty :D

Well, after the poor were killed America's slums could be restocked with poor from third world countries who would show their masters some respect and stop going on about their "rights" and how the government is supposed to promote the "general welfare" of the people. Of course we look after the general welfare. Ex-generals who work for Haliburton make a fortune!

Heh. Reminds me of A Modest Proposal (http://art-bin.com/art/omodest.html) by Swift.

Well, after the poor were killed America's slums could be restocked with poor from third world countries who would show their masters some respect and stop going on about their "rights" and how the government is supposed to promote the "general welfare" of the people. Of course we look after the general welfare. Ex-generals who work for Haliburton make a fortune!

Nah eventually they'd get rebellious as well. The slums of America have better living conditions than most of Africa. At least New York city isn't running rampant with Malaria 24/7.

Nah. Eat the Rich.
Since we're doing songs, why not:


They say music is the food of love,
Let's see if you’re hungry enough,
Take a bite, take another, just like a good boy would…
Get a sweet thing on the side,
Home cooking, homicide,
Side order, could be your daughter,
Finger licking good…

[Chorus]
Come on baby, eat the rich,
Put the bite on the son of a bitch,
Don't mess up, don't you give me no switch…
C'mon baby and eat the rich,
C'mon baby and eat the rich…

Sittin' down in a restaurant,
Tell the waiter just what you want,
Is that the meat, you wanted to eat?,
How would you ever know?…
Hash browns an' bacon strips,
I love the way that you lick your lips,
No fooling, I can see you drooling,
Feel the hunger grow…

[Chorus]
Come on baby, eat the rich,
Put the bite on the son of a bitch,
Don't mess up, don't you give me no switch…
C'mon baby and eat the rich,
C'mon baby and eat the rich…
C'mon honey, here’s your supper,
C'mon baby, bite that sucka!…

[Solo]

I’ll eat you, baby you eat me,
Eat two, baby get one free,
Shetland pony, or extra pepperoni,
Just pick up the phone…
Eat Greek, or eat Chinese,
Eat salad, or scarf up grease,
You're on the shelf, you eat yourself,
Come on, and bite my bone…

[Chorus]
Come on baby, eat the rich,
Bite down on the son of a bitch,
Don't mess around, don't you give me no switch…
C'mon baby and eat the rich,
C'mon baby and eat the rich…
Sittin’ here in a hired tuxedo,
You wanna see my bacon torpedo!…

Eat it baby! Eat the Rich!
Eat it baby! Eat the Rich!
Eat it baby! Eat the Rich!
Eat it baby! Eat the Riiiich!

Nah eventually they'd get rebellious as well. The slums of America have better living conditions than most of Africa. At least New York city isn't running rampant with Malaria 24/7.

Hell, more like most of the world. A poor person in the US is middle/upper middle class in many countries...

Soylent green.

That's all I'm saying.

my cereal smells like grandma...

I think that abortion should be covered by medicaid and other social medical programs. Poor women should not be forced, by lack of finances, to continue unwanted pregancies, thus bringing more impoverished children into the world. Poverty tends to be generational and those that manage to escape it's grasp are the exception, not the rule. So, if tax payer funded abortions is what it takes, then I am all for it. Some would call that killing the poor, but I call it liberating them.

Instead of underestimating the resilience of the poor, maybe we should be worrying about our own.
People like ourselves, with home computers, nice cars, etc., we are "glasshouse flowers", compared to those who live in slums. I bet that any of us wouldn't last long if we were thrown into their place. There is little you can take away from the poor, beyond their life and family. That's why they value life and family much more than Mr. Bush, Mr. Blair and all of us together. Life, for them, is simple and they can be easily satisfied. Good health and food on the table is all they need. The rest is a bonus. How many of us can say that?

Because of their difficulties, poor people face up to challenges with much more determination. Ever heard of poor people suffering from depression? No, depression is a "glasshouse flower" disease. We go to psychologists and take anti-depressants (well, some do, I refuse to do it). Poor people can't afford to feel down so they lift their head and carry on, as nothing had happened.

Also, the poor aren't dying. They are enlarging in numbers all over the globe and will continue to do so. In the rich West, the gap between poor and rich is rising. Right now this means both ranks are enlarging, while the middle class is wiped out. Once this is done, the rich will dye and their fortunes will be divided into oblivion, unless they merge through same-class marriages. From then onwards, there will be very few chances to jump from the poor class to the high, since there is no middle. Sounds familiar? That's because, in the future, Capitalism will work exactly like Monarchies did for centuries. The only chance for someone to become a millionaire, if you're not born one, will be through gambling.

That, of course, if our global economy doesn't collapse before for lack of water, energy, food, bad weather, global warming or whatever reason (inevitably it will happen). Then, the last ones to go will be the poorest because they have better survival skills and they need very little to survive. They'll be hunting, scavenging and growing food. We'll be eating our money. That's why the rich hate the poor. The rich are clearly an inferior and weaker specimen.

The song. Honestly, I could see this happening in the next decade or two. Discuss.
Efficiency and progress is ours once more,
Now that we have the neutron bomb...

That song?

That, of course, if our global economy doesn't collapse before for lack of water, energy, food, bad weather, global warming or whatever reason (inevitably it will happen). Then, the last ones to go will be the poorest because they have better survival skills and they need very little to survive. They'll be hunting, scavenging and growing food. We'll be eating our money. That's why the rich hate the poor. The rich are clearly an inferior and weaker specimen.
How do you account for all the poor that are drug users? The rich are weaker, but they are also on average, smarter and hardworking. This compensates for their weakness.

Ask yourself, who is likely to taste better: those fed on a good diet and raised in warm conditions, or those who went hungry and felt the cold?
Considering that most people eat food produced from factory farms, I think that the poor would be more popular. Misery just tastes so goddamn good, you know?

This thread reminds me of a friend I had who believed the solution to poverty was to gather all the poor people in one place and nuke them.

Excellent, a thread about the Dead Kennedys' best song.

Anywho, I can see the poor being killed, but not in the way it's described in the song. To kill all of the poor would cause wages to rise, and that would be unacceptable. What could happen is that the poor could be pitted against each other in ways similar to how plantation owners had slaves watch over other slaves. The poor who misbehave can be killed as warnings to the other poor. Since it would be nationwide, there would be less opportunity to escape.

How do you account for all the poor that are drug users? The rich are weaker, but they are also on average, smarter and hardworking. This compensates for their weakness.

The only way to resolve this is a rich vs. poor cage match to the death.

In the rich corner we have Daddy "Zombie Eyes" Warbucks vs. small Phillipino kid who lives in a dump. And the fight begins! Daddy Warbucks approaches and tentively salts and peppers the kid, softening him up for ingestion. The Phillipino kid lulls Daddy into a false sense of security by lying on the ground and slowly dying from preventable diseases. And in an incredible move, Daddy Warbucks pays the refferee to declare him the winner! We have a victory! And the crowd goes wild! And the kid is still dying, but nobody cares! Wait, wait! Daddy Warbucks is paying for the kid to get treated in the United States! What a hero! Too bad about the other five hundred million kids in the world without access to proper medical treatment, but let's have a close up of Daddy Warbucks playing God, that's what counts. Well, I think we've finally proved once and for all that the rich are superior to the poor, so screw 'em. Well, that's what Daddy Warbucks normally does when he's in the Phillipines, but let's not go into that.

Nah, the best way is gas. Get all the non-poor folk to stay out of the poor areas, then drop a few canisters of sarin or whatever on them. Make sure there are fans or respirators or something to stop the gas blowing onto rich folk. And don't kill all the poor at once, use them to get rid of the dead ones and THEN kill them. Bulldozers may be useful, as may oxygen furnaces or crematoria. Actually, a nuclear weapon would be good for disposing of the bodies if they were shipped to some remote location.

How do you account for all the poor that are drug users? The rich are weaker, but they are also on average, smarter and hardworking. This compensates for their weakness.

As if drug addiction was a poor's disease... p-l-e-a-s-e. And your idea that rich people are smarter and hardworking is as ridiculous. Poor people work longer hours on average.

What the Hell. Kill them all and let god sort them out.

We need those of simple minds to do simple jobs in return for simple pleasures. It's simple.

The poor do happen to be consumers, and are quite willing to purchase all sorts of things. Nobody who wants to make any money would ever consider killing them. In fact, I've yet to see any rationale for systematically killing anybody, ever. It never makes money, it's inefficient and it's a total waste. What would make a rational person want to do that anyways?

In fact, I've yet to see any rationale for systematically killing anybody, ever. It never makes money, it's inefficient and it's a total waste.

Gladiatorial combat excluded, obviously.

Gladiatorial combat excluded, obviously.
Well naturally, forgive me for not mentioning that.

Well naturally, forgive me for not mentioning that.

And possibly snuff movies.

Excellent, a thread about the Dead Kennedys' best song.
Pshah. Their best song was either Holiday in Cambodia or California Uber Alles.

Pshah. Their best song was either Holiday in Cambodia or California Uber Alles.

Kill The Poor's always been better than California Uber Alles.

Pshah. Their best song was either Holiday in Cambodia or California Uber Alles.Nah, I think those two and "Too Drunk To Fuck" are overrated.

Ya, I'm a Yank. And I am poor. My dad makes less than $30K a year, and my mom is on unemployment to due mental illness.

Wow! JB has dropped in and commented on his own song! But wait- I thought you were from Colorado or somethin? And my dad thinks you're gay. He likes your music, but says you have a girly sounding voice...

joking

:sniper:
the poor :gundge:
:mp5:

Wow! JB has dropped in and commented on his own song! But wait- I thought you were from Colorado or somethin? And my dad thinks you're gay. He likes your music, but says you have a girly sounding voice...

joking

:sniper:
the poor :gundge:
:mp5:<shrug> I thought he was gay for a while, too, but he isn't.

[QUOTE=Assis]Ever heard of poor people suffering from depression?
QUOTE]

Of course I have! I worked in a food bank and many many of our recipients were clinically depressed. My mother-in-law has lived below the poverty line her entire adult life. She has also been clinically depressed her entire adult life. Which came first, the depression or the poverty? I don't know. But ALOT OF POOR PEOPLE ARE DEPRESSED. In fact, I think its safe to say that mental illness is a significant contributing factor to homelessness and poverty.

Of course I have! I worked in a food bank and many many of our recipients were clinically depressed. My mother-in-law has lived below the poverty line her entire adult life. She has also been clinically depressed her entire adult life. Which came first, the depression or the poverty? I don't know. But ALOT OF POOR PEOPLE ARE DEPRESSED. In fact, I think its safe to say that mental illness is a significant contributing factor to homelessness and poverty.

When I think of the poor, I think Asia, Africa's or South America, not those living in the US or Europe. The difference is that the poor in developed countries are under much more psychologic pressure, because they are living in capitalist environments surrounded by inaccessible wealth, advertising selling them dreams, etc., while those in Africa or Brazil often have very restricted access to those kinds of "images" and peer pressure. Also, the poor in western countries generally have a better quality of life than they would in Africa or Brazil.

If you go to a slum in Brazil or a village in Africa, you may find plenty of misery but people are extremely resilient and often demonstrate a courage lacking in their educated western counterparts. Maybe it's a certain ignorance (don't mistake with intelligence), maybe it's the sun, maybe it's the fact that, as I said before, there is little more they can loose.

I suppose we are thinking of different levels of wealth (or lack of), so apologies if I didn't make myself clear...

Couldn't happen, capitalism kinda relies on poor people to do shit jobs.

The rich wouldn't be shooting themselves in the foot, they'd be blowing their fucking head off.

Indeed, capitalism cannot survive without people who will work for the low(er) wages. However, not knowing the exact situation in the U.S. right now, I wonder what it means to say one is poor over there?

Are the poor those out on the streets without homes or jobs, are the poor working people who struggle to pay the rent and have trouble getting (medical) insurance or are they all people below a certain income per year?

Are the poor those out on the streets without homes or jobs, are the poor working people who struggle to pay the rent and have trouble getting (medical) insurance or are they all people below a certain income per year?We have examples of all three categories here. Typically, though, when talking about the poor we refer to the second category, those who are one paycheck away from being homeless.

Gladiatorial combat excluded, obviously.
Nope, in the long run money was lost overall in that enterprise. Unless you gambled.

Nope, in the long run money was lost overall in that enterprise. Unless you gambled.

By whom was the money lost?

By whom was the money lost?

Probably by the slave owners, who had to feed and train them.

Probably by the slave owners, who had to feed and train them.

You believe they weren't compensated in any way for supplying the gladiators?

Couldn't happen, capitalism kinda relies on poor people to do shit jobs.

The rich wouldn't be shooting themselves in the foot, they'd be blowing their fucking head off.

As a matter of interest, how do you define 'rich'? What is the cutoff point?

20k per annum? 35k? 50k?

Indeed, capitalism cannot survive without people who will work for the low(er) wages. However, not knowing the exact situation in the U.S. right now, I wonder what it means to say one is poor over there?

Are the poor those out on the streets without homes or jobs, are the poor working people who struggle to pay the rent and have trouble getting (medical) insurance or are they all people below a certain income per year?

Not even remotely true. By 1900's standards, there are no poor people in the USA and yet in 1900 any economist would have confidantly told you that there will always be poverty.

Capitalism ensures that some group will be relatively poor compared to others whereas communism guarantees that the entire group will be (absolutely) poor relative to the resources available to them.

Not even remotely true. By 1900's standards, there are no poor people in the USA...

Really? People living in a cardboard box possessing only the clothes they stand-up in wouldn't have been considered poor in the 1900's?

Not even remotely true. By 1900's standards, there are no poor people in the USA and yet in 1900 any economist would have confidantly told you that there will always be poverty.

How about over 1.000.000 children living in US streets? Amazing how Capitalists have such a distorted, self-centred, view of the world around them...

Capitalism ensures that some group will be relatively poor compared to others whereas communism guarantees that the entire group will be (absolutely) poor relative to the resources available to them.

The difference is that Communism and Socialism have only failed on eradicating poverty due to corruption and inefficiency not being properly tackled, while Capitalism simply accepted poverty as inevitable from the beginning.