More than a third of California households have virtually no savings, are at risk of financial ruin, report says (home, high school)

[RosieSD]

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

That's a false dichotomy. The only choices are NOT 1)Increasing entitlement program spending, or 2)Hating poor people.

Interesting. Tell me more about your plans for helping people in poverty.

[RosieSD]

Originally Posted by radiolibre99

The problem is both liberal and conservative. The country is experiencing an issue where high skilled labor and pedigreed jobs pay the most in this economy but many people cannot fill those jobs due to lack of skills or credentials. They instead work in the other half of the economy which is low wage service sector work. This is where you see most of the issues of low savings, inability to pay the high rents, etc.

This is happening all over the country in the major cities. This is the difficult part. Raising wages might just make everything else go up making it moot. Raising taxes for social programs might scare some business or wealthy people away, IDK.

Individually the solution is to improve your skill set to better compete for the higher paying jobs to afford the state you're in.

It's hard to have any answers in this highly charged political climate because we are engaging in a conflict of visions on a national scale.

I agree with you 100%.

My personal opinion (and I'm sure others will disagree) is that education and educational access is the linchpin to everything.

I grew up in an extremely poor family on the East Coast. But, from an early age, my parents told me that going to college was a given, not a choice. Everything in our family revolved around that.

My high school wasn't the best, but I still found teachers who helped me learn. Studying and getting good grades was my top job, although I also worked after school and during the summers to put a little money away towards college.

Then, in 11th grade, my school counselor told me "you shouldn't even be thinking about college because your family is too poor."

To which my mother said, "Prove him wrong."

I did, getting both a bachelor's and a masters degrees. It wasn't easy -- I worked 30 hours a week while attending college in minimum wage jobs, and, yes, I also took out student loans. By the way, I graduated from college with $18,000 in student loans (and this is back in the 70s, when dinosaurs roamed the earth). My first job out of college (this was during a recession) paid $7800 a year. Yet, I managed to pay all of the loans off in five years with no real problem. It was no different than having a car loan

I am telling this story because education changed everything for me and my family. And, aside from providing the school buildings and teachers, and helping me finance my education, the government did not give me that education. I got it myself.

And, before anyone says that this is impossible today, or that California schools are so screwed up that no kid is ready to college, let me tell you this: I never forgot that school counselor who dismissed my college dreams. In my 40s, I went back to school and became a school counselor myself.

I mainly worked with low income students. Many of whom came from FAR worse circumstances than I did, such as homelessness and being in foster care. The kids - regardless of their circumstances - who understood that education was the way up, all did very well in college and beyond here in California.

So, I think maintaining a public education system, job training programs, and financial aid for college should be the most important goal of both our Federal AND State governments.

But, even then, the government doesn't give anyone an education. YOU give yourself an education. Even in the worst school, if you are motivated to learn, you will find a way to make it happen.

[radiolibre99]

I agree and improving the occupational center to help people get into trades is important too. It's all about improving your skill set. There are a ton of good paying jobs out there it's just people lack skills.

[RosieSD]

Originally Posted by radiolibre99

RosieSD you can run to whatever state, it will only alleviate immediate issues. The long term problem is that a person might lack skills to maintain a middle income career. Texas for one is a state that opened its arms wide to economic migrants from other states and people quickly find out that their lives are only marginally better and the people taking advantage of the economic miracle are highly skilled or credentialed for the professional jobs.

Who are entering CA and enjoying the best fruits of CA? The people who can fill the best jobs that pay the most.

Now there is an elephant in the room that might explain some of the issues regarding to low wages; illegal immigration. But I know those economic migrants are off limits while citizens who migrate due to financial reasons need to pull their bootstraps up or leave.

I agree again. However, that's why I don't have a problem with letting undocumented kids be educated in our schools or giving them in-state tuition at public universities. That helps reduce the chance that they and their families will end up living in poverty (and using government assistance programs like Medi-Cal) down the line.

Please note: I do not condone illegal immigration (I live within walking distance of the Mexican border) and I think sanctuary cities are silly. I am just a realist. For the most part, these kids didn't choose to come here, but since they are here, it is better for our society that we educate them rather than leave them uneducated. After all, college educated people don't generally end up in Mexican drug cartels.

I've often thought that it might be a workable idea to give DACA kids the option of citizenship if they agree to (1) spend two years doing full time community service (i.e., picking up trash, tutoring kids). I'd compensate them for their time. AND/OR (2) join the U.S. military and complete a full enlistment (obviously no everyone would qualify for this option) AND/OR (3) become educated in a high need field, such as teaching or medical, and agree to work for a year in a high need area (it's amazing how many parts of the U.S. do not have enough doctors and nurses).

Like everyone else, I think that if I ruled the world, it would be a better place. But no one has appointed me Queen yet.

[taimaishu]

CA is in fact the 6th largest economy. Which is pretty amazing considering how all the Red States keep begging CA for money by way of Federal Aid. While screaming they hate socialism on front the the TV.

Heck, even states like TX have been known to beg CA companies to move there. Pathetic and Sad!

Can't these backward hick states do their own stuff? Why beg?

[radiolibre99]

Agreed RosieSD. But I'm all for closing the border and ending this mass wave that's affected our economy in a grave way. Other than that we agree that the best way to get people into those higher paying jobs is education. But not just push for college but trade schools. People don't have to go to four year colleges

[radiolibre99]

Originally Posted by taimaishu

CA is in fact the 6th largest economy. Which is pretty amazing considering how all the Red States keep begging CA for money by way of Federal Aid. While screaming they hate socialism on front the the TV.

Heck, even states like TX have been known to beg CA companies to move there. Pathetic and Sad!

Can't these backward hick states do their own stuff? Why beg?

Haven't you filled your troll quota today?

[RosieSD]

Originally Posted by radiolibre99

I agree and improving the occupational center to help people get into trades is important too. It's all about improving your skill set. There are a ton of good paying jobs out there it's just people lack skills.

Oh yes, I totally agree with you here! We're putting way too emphasis on the idea that everyone should go to four years of college.

I can't tell you how many students I worked with who were not cut out for another four years of formal schooling. They would have been much better served being pointed towards the military, a job training program, or an apprenticeship program rather than being pushed lockstep into college, only to drop out without a degree or job skills but saddled with student loans.

Yet, parents would bite my head off if I even suggested those as a possibility because "everyone needs to go to college." (That's one of the reasons that I eventually stopped working as a school counselor and went into private counseling).

I also think colleges could do a better job of helping kids prepare for the world of work. I'm not talking about only offering career-oriented majors (I think there is value in ALL college majors). Rather, I'm talking about helping students understand how what they're learning can translate into work skills and requiring all students to complete at least one internship or work experience before graduation. But that's getting beyond the topic of this discussion (savings), so...

[CaliRestoration]

Originally Posted by radiolibre99

I dont get why liberals have created that dichotomy. Conservatives don't want to see people in poverty. Many believe in a base level safety net just not increasing it to where it becomes unsustainable. Conservatives believe in creating a better economic climate to foster growth and attract investment and jobs. It's up to the individual to do the rest.

It's just a different vision for the same goal. When did they become the heartless enemies of the people?

The reason they use that argument is because it dehumanizes the other side, and takes focus off the real problem at hand. Basically "You're bad, so we shouldn't listen to you."

The problem isn't "conservatives hating poor people", the problem is what is the correct balance between socialized aid versus letting someone take their life into their own hands. It's obvious the Democrat way (extremely high entitlement spending, low personal responsibility) has been an utter failure. All one has to do is take one look at the inner cities across America (where primarily Democrat elected officials run things), and the poverty rates are through the roof despite record spending on welfare programs.

I believe giving more incentive for people to "get off" welfare is the key here, but it's too politically and ideologically against how Democrats/leftist think, that it will never happen.

[radiolibre99]

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

The reason they use that argument is because it dehumanizes the other side, and takes focus off the real problem at hand. Basically "You're bad, so we shouldn't listen to you."

The problem isn't "conservatives hating poor people", the problem is what is the correct balance between socialized aid versus letting someone take their life into their own hands. It's obvious the Democrat way (extremely high entitlement spending, low personal responsibility) has been an utter failure. All one has to do is take one look at the inner cities across America (where primarily Democrat elected officials run things), and the poverty rates are through the roof despite record spending on welfare programs.

I believe giving more incentive for people to "get off" welfare is the key here, but it's too politically and ideologically against how Democrats/leftist think, that it will never happen.

A Conflict of Visions by Thomas Sowell. It changed my whole worldview.