Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Care to explain what parts of it were "extreme exaggerations"? I think that he's right on the money, wit hall of it.
The part about double digit inflation. And also the part (implied) about 6M manufacturing jobs going to the Chinese. Most of our manufacturing jobs were eliminated through automation.
Most people don't really make min. wage even BLS data shows that only about 1% of the working population make min. wage. The real group is in the 9-10/hr bracket. IMO that income is a living wage. The issue IMO is the shift in what qualifies as living over the past 15-20 years. In the past when you had a child it was when you were in a relationship (not necessarily married, but there was a father and a mother present). Today it seems that this is not the case. A single parent is no more likely to succeed raising 1-2 children on $12 an hour than they are on $10 an hour. It just isn't really possible to raise a family on that income. But....in most parts of the US 2 adults working full time making 9-10 an hour can raise a kid or two.
IMO the gap in wealth and income is partially because wealthy and higher income people are more likely to remain in a relationship which is cost efficient. 2 working adults making $13 an hour make above the household median income in the US. Now obviously this discussion is very different in the very high COL areas, but the majority of the US does not live in NYC, DC, San Fran, LA, or Boston.
I also think it is possible to live on min. wage or near min. wage. You just need roommates. I had 2 roommates and lived off of 15k/yr for 2 years which is actually slightly lower than the federal min. wage and this was in east Orlando not some small town in Alabama.
The general concept here is correct. Researchers at the liberal leaning Brookings Institution have confirmed what you're saying here.
It is easier to be lazy and blame the person who is poor without looking at why they are poor before pointing an accusing finger.
That cuts both ways. It's easy for the poor person to blame forces "out there" beyond their control instead of looking at their own beahvior....such as the 41% out of wedlock birth rate....which is an economic and social disaster. Even liberals are starting to admit it.
Wow. It's unbelievable how Puritanical some people on these threads are. "If you're poor, it's your own fault." "You get sick, too bad, so sad." "Lost your job? Sorry, your problem." "No health insurance and you've been diagnosed with cancer AND you lost your job? Well, didn't you think about saving (hundreds of thousands of dollars+) for your own health insurance/treatment? How irresponsible!"
I think the thing that p*sses people off, myself included, is there are no strings attached to any government aid given. There used to be strings attached to receiving welfare and other government benefits. Then in the late 1960s, they got rid of it in the name of not violating people's rights. All it did was breed more long term, intergernational poverty. Charities tend to attach strings to what is given and I think that is a good thing. Humans don't like to be told what to do, especially when their habits are bad.
I also think the examples you give, while they certainly happen, are the exception, not the rule. But you will never agree. You only see what you want to see.
It's called entitlement. Some people think they should live off of others because somehow they are born on third base. Then of course they literally create a situation where they are miserable and everyone in this country is then blackmailed to have to subsidize low aspiration individuals.
I know, right? Must be nice for some people to be so perfect Wages are stagnant, food prices are outrageous and the cost of living is rising dramatically, but it's totally poor people's fault they're poor. If they just wanted it more, they could make a better life for themselves...
Since when did expecting people to not have kids out of wedlock at a 41% rate become "expecting perfection"?????
The part about double digit inflation. And also the part (implied) about 6M manufacturing jobs going to the Chinese. Most of our manufacturing jobs were eliminated through automation.
Both automation and offshoring were a bipartisan thing. Lots of that happened during Clinton time.
Yet here people say that it's a lie that the democrats are similar to the republicans. It's not a lie. It's that these people have been lied to about this economy and this world. They literally don't know how it works. They just want to assume what they think they deserve based on their self created notions that don't stand economics 101.
That cuts both ways. It's easy for the poor person to blame forces "out there" beyond their control instead of looking at their own beahvior....such as the 41% out of wedlock birth rate....which is an economic and social disaster. Even liberals are starting to admit it.
The point is that the liberal upper class can't care less about this. THey want a dependent class and votes. The liberal middle class and ordinary ones are hilariously foolish. Their party isn't on their side.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.