[thymaster]

When BlackBerry was in power, they did a much better job keeping the city of Waterloo composed. Compared to Apple and Google's greed there is an upset in balance at Silicon Valley.

CNN Message: The poor kids of Silicon Valley

[RH1Pearl]

I wasn't aware BlackBerry was a Non-profit Company

[nuff_said]

Not trying to single out Apple or Google directly but here is another example of the negative sides of Capitalism. Before someone comes up with the argument of working hard and reaping the rewards I agree with you, but truthfully it's more than that. We're reaching a breaking point of how wealth is organised and generally accepted. Unfortunately by the time the general population gets together and demands better it will be too late.

[anon(5990673)]

When BlackBerry was in power, they did a much better job keeping the city of Waterloo composed. Compared to Apple and Google's greed there is an upset in balance at Silicon Valley.

CNN Message: The poor kids of Silicon Valley

This is really sad, if only USA would focus on its own people the amount it spend in Military and giving away money to countries that don't deserve it.

[thymaster]

There's a thing called social responsibility. I guess you don't know what that means because you're brainwashed by the greed of capitalism that you can care less about the issue of poverty or homelessness.

I wasn't aware BlackBerry was a Non-profit Company

[Troy Tiscareno]

There are 20+ million illegal immigrants in the US, and a sizable portion of them are in California. It's largely they who are sleeping in garages.

Don't get too bent out of shape until you know the WHOLE story, including the parts that the media doesn't mention because they would make their story less attention-grabbing.

Apple and Google pump incredible amounts of money back into their communities - their workers are some of the highest-paid workers there are. That doesn't mean that it's Apple or Google's problem to solve the big social problems of the day - that's presumably what we've elected our government for.

[BB_Junky]

Well said Troy!!

[kellyTKD]

When BlackBerry was in power, they did a much better job keeping the city of Waterloo composed. Compared to Apple and Google's greed there is an upset in balance at Silicon Valley.

This isn't a problem when you lay off most of your employees over a couple of years.

[nuff_said]

There are 20+ million illegal immigrants in the US, and a sizable portion of them are in California. It's largely they who are sleeping in garages.

Don't get too bent out of shape until you know the WHOLE story, including the parts that the media doesn't mention because they would make their story less attention-grabbing.

Apple and Google pump incredible amounts of money back into their communities - their workers are some of the highest-paid workers there are. That doesn't mean that it's Apple or Google's problem to solve the big social problems of the day - that's presumably what we've elected our government for.

I read a lot of your arguments and tend to generally agree with you Troy but this is where I disagree. Apple, Google, Microsoft, FB, ExxonMobil, PepsiCo, any one else you can think of in the top 1% can do so much more to help. I don't doubt these organizations give a lot back to their community and kudos to them. But when you give less than 1% of your quarterly profits your not doing enough. Some of these businesses make more than some countries GDP. Is it their job to solve the world's problems? No it's not but that doesn't mean they shouldn't look into it. These companies are more powerful that some world governments.

[hoonigan99]

There are 20+ million illegal immigrants in the US, and a sizable portion of them are in California. It's largely they who are sleeping in garages.

Don't get too bent out of shape until you know the WHOLE story, including the parts that the media doesn't mention because they would make their story less attention-grabbing.

Apple and Google pump incredible amounts of money back into their communities - their workers are some of the highest-paid workers there are. That doesn't mean that it's Apple or Google's problem to solve the big social problems of the day - that's presumably what we've elected our government for.

While they are treating their employees great, the high pay is the problem! This leads to a huge chunk of the population that makes more money than they can reasonably spend, so they spend on whatever costs most, or whatever new luxuries arise. This drives up the cost for everyone because companies want their share of all that tech money, so they increase rents, raise food prices, raise tuitions, everything gets more expensive.

There are far too many capitalist to the bones people in here to really have a constructive discussion on this issue, but it is a problem and it should be addressed. I was disappointed in the video/presentation they did not go into more detail on the concept of basic minimum earnings, although, given the American audience it's intended for it makes sense.

Pilot projects have been done, and actually quite successful, where each individual over 18 would be guaranteed a small annual income, say 15-20k without working, and any income earned from a job was on top of that. The amazing thing was that most people still worked, but the difference was if you worked at fast food before, you couldn't afford to live, but if you did it now, with the living grant you could afford to live and even save or put children into sports, etc. Crime went down, reliance on food banks and subsidized housing went down, the benefits are there, and the city was much better off. Now I'll wait for the harsh criticism and demands I go to north Korea if it'd suit me better. But I'll leave you with this

By enabling all to do well, society will flourish. By enabling only those who can, we leave behind those who would.

BB for Life

[TGR1]

When BlackBerry was in power, they did a much better job keeping the city of Waterloo composed. Compared to Apple and Google's greed there is an upset in balance at Silicon Valley.

CNN Message: The poor kids of Silicon Valley

RIM/BlackBerry was never as successful or as big as the powerhouses of Silicon Valley today. And last I looked Silicon Valley was made up of a lot more companies than Apple and Google. But as for too many of CB posters, it's so satisfying to pick on them, isn't it?

That is the reality of huge success. Incomes go sky high and immediately all landlords and vendors want in on the gold rush too. And how can one possibly blame them? But not everyone is a success and many fall into the awful conditions. You all should read up about how Rome was like in its glory days of bread and circuses.

This is California. Expensive as all hell but being the working poor here means you don't have to worry about freezing to death most of the time and there is so much affluence and waste random individuals can pick out something of a living. It's better than to root oneself up and take on the East Coast right now, for sure (even if it is a tad nippy at night here in San Diego and the state is broke). FWIW, Oregon is seeing a lot of ex-Californians on their medicare now.

It's not a problem I can see any two companies can solve, nor should they.

[PantherBlitz]

This is a tech blog we should narrow our comments to technology, but since this story points its finger at tech companies I guess some discussion is OK. Apple and Google already add money to the community but who is to say they are not doing enough? I don't want to sound too harsh but as pointed out earlier the cases in that video open up more questions than they answer. My heart breaks when I see kids victimized by the adults around them but is it fair to insinuate that the entities most responsible for a remedy are tech companies?

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

Not trying to single out Apple or Google directly but here is another example of the negative sides of Capitalism. Before someone comes up with the argument of working hard and reaping the rewards I agree with you, but truthfully it's more than that. We're reaching a breaking point of how wealth is organised and generally accepted. Unfortunately by the time the general population gets together and demands better it will be too late.

What systems would you like to use?

There have been all sorts of social, economic and political systems... which do you think brings about the general good for mankind? Pretty sure the common denominator is always how humans treat one another....

[Prem WatsApp]

What systems would you like to use?

There have been all sorts of social, economic and political systems... which do you think brings about the general good for mankind? Pretty sure the common denominator is always how humans treat one another....

Look up Silvio Gesell.

Money that shrinks, and has to be spent, leads to an incredible boom that's visible in the physical world. Until the Austrian national bank shut it down...

The hoarding of money is the problem, and that it can be stored and withheld (with interest!), until you sell your lettuce cheaper because you'd otherwise lose it (wilts and goes rotten). Now imagine money that perishes the same way, you'd spend it, buy durable, long-lasting physical goods, improve your lifestyle, and that starts a happy monetary merry-go-round...

(that's just the basics in plain English...)


�   "Oh Classic, you are the fairest here so true. But Passport is a thousand times more powerful than you..." (no offense, Classic is a great device, when it's charged)   �

[hoonigan99]

What systems would you like to use?

There have been all sorts of social, economic and political systems... which do you think brings about the general good for mankind? Pretty sure the common denominator is always how humans treat one another....

The system I mentioned above is one which should be explored, the use of a mandatory minimum income. The government would provide each citizen over 18 a small annual income (say 10-20k) which would afford them the necessities of life such as food and shelter. From there each person can have a job (maintain the current minimum wage) in order to provide themselves/family a better living, opportunity to save, discretionary spending money. You can say people will just be lazy and not work, but how many people are going to choose to sit at home doing nothing all year and living in poverty (with this low income you can't necessarily afford luxuries such as internet, smartphones, cable etc)

This theory would boost the lowest class to a livable state, reduce reliance on (and therefore recover some $$ from) low income housing programs, shelters, food shelters/banks etc. And would even stimulate the economy by allowing more people to pursue small business ventures (which make up 65% of news jobs more than half of the economy).

Obviously there would need to be controls put in place, and rules such as if you make more than $80k or $120k a year (or whatever) you do not get this subsidy, but instead get a tax break or something. Limit the number of possible recipients at a registered address (to eliminate the issue of 4-10 immigrants, or other, living together in a house to minimize expenses and abusing a system like this) It would be an expensive venture for government to pursue, but it would sure produce a better country if you can lessen the severity of poverty (and eliminate a large portion of it) instead of spending that money on wars.

BB for Life

[Prem WatsApp]

The system I mentioned above is one which should be explored, the use of a mandatory minimum income. The government would provide each citizen over 18 a small annual income (say 10-20k) which would afford them the necessities of life such as food and shelter. From there each person can have a job (maintain the current minimum wage) in order to provide themselves/family a better living, opportunity to save, discretionary spending money. You can say people will just be lazy and not work, but how many people are going to choose to sit at home doing nothing all year and living in poverty (with this low income you can't necessarily afford luxuries such as internet, smartphones, cable etc)

This theory would boost the lowest class to a livable state, reduce reliance on (and therefore recover some $$ from) low income housing programs, shelters, food shelters/banks etc. And would even stimulate the economy by allowing more people to pursue small business ventures (which make up 65% of news jobs more than half of the economy).

Obviously there would need to be controls put in place, and rules such as if you make more than $80k or $120k a year (or whatever) you do not get this subsidy, but instead get a tax break or something. Limit the number of possible recipients at a registered address (to eliminate the issue of 4-10 immigrants, or other, living together in a house to minimize expenses and abusing a system like this) It would be an expensive venture for government to pursue, but it would sure produce a better country if you can lessen the severity of poverty (and eliminate a large portion of it) instead of spending that money on wars.

BB for Life

Yep, agree, once the "existential" pressure is taken away, minds work and create much better and much more...

No, no silly old communism, your (creative) energy will have to be spend somewhere on something, even if it's just tending your garden and sharing your veggies with the community. Or start a small venture, and expand it rapidly. But how to do it, if you've got nothing to invest or work with?

Plus, remove all that useless petty crime... :-)


�   "Oh Classic, you are the fairest here so true. But Passport is a thousand times more powerful than you..." (no offense, Classic is a great device, when it's charged)   �

[desporterizer]

And where is "government" supposed to get the cash to finance supplemental income for 200 million people? Folks should spend more time studying economics before proposing radical economic policies.

Posted via CB10

[Dave Bourque]

And where is "government" supposed to get the cash to finance supplemental income for 200 million people? Folks should spend more time studying economics before proposing radical economic policies.

Posted via CB10

A small spending cut of the US military would cover that.

Posted via CB10

[thymaster]

How about starting with Apple $178 billion cash stashed away overseas to avoid getting taxed on the way back home. This is an example of modern day Scourge. That taxed money could have been used to help build schools so your kids could have an education, fund affordable housing to cut down this growing homeless issue and create more jobs so people wouldn't have to beg.

And where is "government" supposed to get the cash to finance supplemental income for 200 million people? Folks should spend more time studying economics before proposing radical economic policies.

Posted via CB10

[hoonigan99]

Yep, agree, once the "existential" pressure is taken away, minds work and create much better and much more...

No, no silly old communism, your (creative) energy will have to be spend somewhere on something, even if it's just tending your garden and sharing your veggies with the community. Or start a small venture, and expand it rapidly. But how to do it, if you've got nothing to invest or work with?

Plus, remove all that useless petty crime... :-)


�   "Oh Classic, you are the fairest here so true. But Passport is a thousand times more powerful than you..." (no offense, Classic is a great device, when it's charged)   �

Exactly, there are major benefits, and you are absolutely right, it is not in an effort to provide simplicity and tranquility to your life or even to give you spare time. This policy would allow everyone the basic needs of survival (food and shelter) so that they can pursue an education or career or business in something that is beneficial to them and their community.

Spending cuts on military endevours would be necessary, as would raised taxes on high earning corporations and very high earners. We need to circulate the money in our economy, it cannot be hoarded.

BB for Life

[Dave Bourque]

Exactly, there are major benefits, and you are absolutely right, it is not in an effort to provide simplicity and tranquility to your life or even to give you spare time. This policy would allow everyone the basic needs of survival (food and shelter) so that they can pursue an education or career or business in something that is beneficial to them and their community.

Spending cuts on military endevours would be necessary, as would raised taxes on high earning corporations and very high earners. We need to circulate the money in our economy, it cannot be hoarded.

BB for Life

In the golden age of growth for the US (which is the 50-60s) the high earners were taxed like crazy. But now people believe taxes are evil period which is exactly what rich people want the peasants to believe.

Posted via CB10

[jupiter8]

In the golden age of growth for the US (which is the 50-60s) the high earners were taxed like crazy. But now people believe taxes are evil period which is exactly what rich people want the peasants to believe.

Posted via CB10

Peasants (socialists) don't pay any taxes. They just take, and take, and take. And want more of other people's money.

Posted via CB10

[TgeekB]

It's a me society. But what people don't understand is that "me" can't survive without everyone else. It's sad really and the reason this won't continue forever.

SQC100-4 Classic running 10.3.1.2267

[Dave Bourque]

Peasants (socialists) don't pay any taxes. They just take, and take, and take. And want more of other people's money.

Posted via CB10

Bahaha. They pay the most taxes bud.

Posted via CB10

[Dave Bourque]

Peasants (socialists) don't pay any taxes. They just take, and take, and take. And want more of other people's money.

Posted via CB10

The rich are the biggest takers... some of them get tax breaks that are in the negative... Meaning they get money back instead of paying taxes.

Posted via CB10