With all the debate recently for amending the United States Constitution in favor of recognizing marriage as a union between a man and woman, perhaps a more appropriate amendment should guarantee each citizen of the United States the right to food, clothing, shelter and medical care. Poverty is defined as the condition of being poor or lacking the necessary means of support to live or meet needs. Today we read of enormous corporate tax breaks, outsourcing of jobs overseas and outrageous salaries "earned" by athletes/entertainers. More recently came the revelation of the $200 billion dollars spent by the U.S. on the war in Iraq. In the meantime, the number of those in poverty continues to increase. The Old Testament of the Bible often makes references to the promised land flowing with milk and honey. All one has to do in this country is take a trip to the grocery story or department store and bear witness to the fact that if anywhere was close to exhibiting the characteristics of "the promised land", this country is it. Yet somehow we are still unable to meet the four basic needs every citizen has. Some would argue that this proposal is an extension of Socialism/Communism. Nothing could be further from the truth. Socialism/Communism is a political or economic theory in which community members own all property, resources, and the means of production, and control the distribution of goods. No one is suggesting the replacement of Capitalism; an economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately owned, and prices are chiefly determined by open competition in a free market. What is being suggested is that in this land of surplus "milk and honey", there is absolutely no reason why the four basic needs of every U.S. citizen cannot be met. Some would argue that food stamps, thrift stores, public housing and medicaid already meet these needs but in the words of President John F. Kennedy, "this country is divided between those who have never had it so good and those who know we can do better". I think we can do better. Resolved, it shall be the right of every United States citizen (in order to further guarantee the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness) to receive food, clothing, shelter and medical care that is adequate to meet their basic needs.

That would call for social security reforms... the kind Clinton did not get through. The US is just too liberal for this kind of system I'm afraid. If you cling to capitalism into it's extreme, then you will have to face the existance of an impoverished class that cannot meet the minimal standards of living, simply because the government does not WANT to take care of those. To the corporations they are an economically uninteresting group (low education, low motivation, low spendings) so all that remain to take an interest in them are charity groups, often religiously based.

It are also these groups that are most likely to feel subversive sympathies, even when nationalism is spoonfed from kindergarten up. If there are terrorists in the US itself, there's where you'll find em.

Too conservative I hope you mean .

And I hope if they're voting on this amendment that they vote for the outlawing of divorce. All for the sanctity of marriage, of course. Bad Rush Limbaugh, Bad!

They tried this in the USSR, and it didn't work out too well.

And what does the; "this", relate to Lawson?

Or was their no point...
as these things are to 'articulate' for people like yourself?

I would suggest something but i am sure I would be called a leftist, communist, or stupid and ignorant for my words.... and as such will not waste my time.....

I'll assume you're talking about the soviet union's social system. Good in theory, but the whole system was based on everyone giving it their best effort. Unfortunately, farmers didn't see a need to produce more when they did not profit from it... The government was corrupt... The heavy industry was not built around quality, but more around quantity... In the end it had to collapse. I'll point out that in China that same system seems to be able to maintain itself (despite best efforts of the US to reform it to a free market economy, a reform that has proven an economic disaster for ex-soviet states).

But this is all beside the point. The topicstarter was referring to providing basic means of existance as a government task... for instance so that people don't have to freeze to death on the streets when the temperatures go down. A thing unheared of in our country (except for the odd drunk or junk who was too far out to reach their shelters).
Most european countries have some system like this, one of the most extensive being the Dutch one. Quite costly, granted, but it provides everyone with a means to live. And seriously, is that not a task for the leaders those same people chose?

I think that the governments should stop spending money on sending things into space and instead sort on the problems on earth. Just think how those millions could have helped starving children in Africa

Either that or put space into practical use. Orbital solar power stations for instance would be a feasable clean energy source (above cloudlevel solar power is constant and therefor reliable).
Or orbital farming stations. (Dung/fertilliser from waste recycling stations is sent in, fresh meat and grain comes out)
Or asteroid mining stations in the asteroid belt between mars and jupiter. Wealth of minerals there...

I know, I play too much space games

\
\How about we stop blowing shit up...... hell space has a good premise to it... blowing shit up only means people are dying

There is no poverty in the USA. Anyone who thinks there is obviously hasn't visited a third world country. Our homeless people have it better than a lot of people around the world.

Thats interesting...

So are you claiming that homeless people, living in the gutter - are not in POVERTY, but are financially secure, and its just a big "act"?

It would be interesting to hear their side of the story...


Seperate to this, the LRA (Labour Research Association) actually placed the 2001 US Poverty Rate at 11.7%
Refer: http://www.laborresearch.org/charts.php?id=10

So tell me Synikul, do you really believe the US Census Bureau that "irrelevant" to your ideology? OR WHY do you claim there's no poverty in the US?

How about your both right...
and instead we address things such as these...