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.
the rest of your post isn't realistic. but this snippet is obviously unrealistic but highlights the pyramid scheme. can't find a 'good' job? are those bad jobs lower pay because the person isn't educated? if it is, then you're right. otherwise, you just pointed out the problem. it's like saying everyone's goal should be the town mayor because it's the only position that pays decent.
it's perfectly reasonable that harder and especially more complex jobs with more responsiblity should pay a lot more and they usually are. but it's too unbalanced as it is right now. there are people who get paid millions more than is probably fair or equitable and those who barely make enough to survive. you have to have incentive to be productive and keep people productive but too much imbalance on either extreme will result in taking advantage and trouble.
japan is a good example of more equitable wage distribution. they have a larger middle class. their ceo's are wealthy but reasonably wealthy, not grossly wealthy. this does not mean that a street sweeper should get paid the same as a doctor or ceo etc. it just means that if people are not paid enough for their work, they will not want to or be disgruntled.
How is it unrealistic?
If we scale back the size of gov't at the size it was when regan took office, then most income taxes could be abolished except on the richest people.
Of course the jobs where people have no education pay the lowest because they dropped out of school, and have no education. anyone can do the job so naturally it will pay lower. How is telling people if they want a decent job to go to a 2 year community college unrealisitic. If that is the case then america is doomed because all the other first world countries are educating their people. By your logic if we lived 100 years ago you would be arguing that no one should try to graduate from high school or try ot be literate because it is too hard, that is a bogus argument. If you don't even try to graduate from college 2 or 4 year then society should leave you on you a($ because your lazy and don't put no effort.
I know function alcoholics and oxycotin addicts in 4 year college programs so it can't really be that hard.
"but it's too unbalanced as it is right now. there are people who get paid millions more than is probably fair or equitable and those who barely make enough to survive. you have to have incentive to be productive and keep people productive but too much imbalance on either extreme will result in taking advantage and trouble."
You want a socialist society like sweden, you realize the average swede is considered poor by american standards? No car, no house, 1 tv if any. The only european country better off than usa is norway and that is all oil money. Take away the oil and small population and you have a completely uncopyable model. By the way min. wage in norway means you cannot even live in a major city because everything is so expensive.
How is it unbalanced. The only real unbalance I see is when ceos who drive their companies into the grounds get paid big bonuses to leave to save further trouble. This is a left over from the 80s and 90s when hostile takeovers meant many ceos were left jobless with ZERO compensation at all, so no ceo goes into a job without receiving this kind of "insurance". Plus when your a ceo it can be years before you find a new job.
Japans economy has not grown in more than 15 years because of their policies and they have 0 immigration and a declining population. Japan only has a large middle class because they have no immigrants in their schools no immigrants in their nation no one comes to japan poor, lots of inherited money, and there are virtually no high school drop outs and something like 68% of japs have post secondary training as compared to americas 30%.
Even at that the average japanese wage is considered poor by american standards. "american poor" have no clue how good they got it.
If we scale back the size of gov't at the size it was when regan took office
The size of the 1980 federal budget was barely $600 billion.
The current size of the Pentagon is over $800 billion.
Not gonna happen.
Quote:
"american poor" have no clue how good they got it.
Really, now. Let's say you are a fairly poor person in America working a job with no health insurance, and you find out you have cancer. And no way to pay for your treatments. Then you get turned down for public medical assistance because you "make too much."
You don't "have it good" by any means. In fact, you have it pretty bad. Perhaps what is worse is this sort of insecurity is quite common. It's a huge source of stress. Not to mention that many poor people in America live in areas where violence is prevalent, and where the murder rate is quite high. That's another detraction from people "having it good."
I think it's fair to say that being poor is not much fun at all, actually.
If we scale back the size of gov't at the size it was when regan took office, then most income taxes could be abolished except on the richest people.
Of course the jobs where people have no education pay the lowest because they dropped out of school, and have no education. anyone can do the job so naturally it will pay lower. How is telling people if they want a decent job to go to a 2 year community college unrealisitic. If that is the case then america is doomed because all the other first world countries are educating their people. By your logic if we lived 100 years ago you would be arguing that no one should try to graduate from high school or try ot be literate because it is too hard, that is a bogus argument. If you don't even try to graduate from college 2 or 4 year then society should leave you on you a($ because your lazy and don't put no effort.
I know function alcoholics and oxycotin addicts in 4 year college programs so it can't really be that hard.
"but it's too unbalanced as it is right now. there are people who get paid millions more than is probably fair or equitable and those who barely make enough to survive. you have to have incentive to be productive and keep people productive but too much imbalance on either extreme will result in taking advantage and trouble."
You want a socialist society like sweden, you realize the average swede is considered poor by american standards? No car, no house, 1 tv if any. The only european country better off than usa is norway and that is all oil money. Take away the oil and small population and you have a completely uncopyable model. By the way min. wage in norway means you cannot even live in a major city because everything is so expensive.
How is it unbalanced. The only real unbalance I see is when ceos who drive their companies into the grounds get paid big bonuses to leave to save further trouble. This is a left over from the 80s and 90s when hostile takeovers meant many ceos were left jobless with ZERO compensation at all, so no ceo goes into a job without receiving this kind of "insurance". Plus when your a ceo it can be years before you find a new job.
Japans economy has not grown in more than 15 years because of their policies and they have 0 immigration and a declining population. Japan only has a large middle class because they have no immigrants in their schools no immigrants in their nation no one comes to japan poor, lots of inherited money, and there are virtually no high school drop outs and something like 68% of japs have post secondary training as compared to americas 30%.
Even at that the average japanese wage is considered poor by american standards. "american poor" have no clue how good they got it.
it seems you think everything is fine the way it is except for corporate welfare/bonuses and taxes. fine. what is there to argue now?
you dissaprove of taxes or welfare. a society like that can work too.
everyone just gets exactly what they personally earn. you just need more likeminded to make it reality with votes.
i just have to tell ya, i don't think it's gonna be much different than what it is today. i think your idea, though it sounds right, would hardly change a thing. there will be poor and rich so what are you upset about now?
your tax dollars spent on others? did they prevent you from attaining your job or getting your education? did it prevent you from doing anything?
so when your parents get old and you happen to die before you can take care of them, they are just sol i suppose. how about all the public institutions and roads etc people use? no one is obligated to pay for those either?
i think your idea is kind of juvenile and petty. yes, welfare reform needs to constantly be improved and reformed according to the economy and demographics.
for instance, why should illegal immigrants be rewarded for breaking the law and provided services etc.
well, you know why all this happens? because it's a competitive market that you think is perfect and that's just a byproduct of it. this means joe blow may want to hire those who will accept lower wages for his business so it becomes a huge can of opened worms and it keeps on keeping on.
see? the system is and will not be perfect because that is impossible. all that can be done is just maintenance and changes made as they are needed along the way.
If we scale back the size of gov't at the size it was when regan took office, then most income taxes could be abolished except on the richest people.
Of course the jobs where people have no education pay the lowest because they dropped out of school, and have no education. anyone can do the job so naturally it will pay lower. How is telling people if they want a decent job to go to a 2 year community college unrealisitic. If that is the case then america is doomed because all the other first world countries are educating their people. By your logic if we lived 100 years ago you would be arguing that no one should try to graduate from high school or try ot be literate because it is too hard, that is a bogus argument. If you don't even try to graduate from college 2 or 4 year then society should leave you on you a($ because your lazy and don't put no effort.
I know function alcoholics and oxycotin addicts in 4 year college programs so it can't really be that hard.
"but it's too unbalanced as it is right now. there are people who get paid millions more than is probably fair or equitable and those who barely make enough to survive. you have to have incentive to be productive and keep people productive but too much imbalance on either extreme will result in taking advantage and trouble."
You want a socialist society like sweden, you realize the average swede is considered poor by american standards? No car, no house, 1 tv if any. The only european country better off than usa is norway and that is all oil money. Take away the oil and small population and you have a completely uncopyable model. By the way min. wage in norway means you cannot even live in a major city because everything is so expensive.
How is it unbalanced. The only real unbalance I see is when ceos who drive their companies into the grounds get paid big bonuses to leave to save further trouble. This is a left over from the 80s and 90s when hostile takeovers meant many ceos were left jobless with ZERO compensation at all, so no ceo goes into a job without receiving this kind of "insurance". Plus when your a ceo it can be years before you find a new job.
Japans economy has not grown in more than 15 years because of their policies and they have 0 immigration and a declining population. Japan only has a large middle class because they have no immigrants in their schools no immigrants in their nation no one comes to japan poor, lots of inherited money, and there are virtually no high school drop outs and something like 68% of japs have post secondary training as compared to americas 30%.
Even at that the average japanese wage is considered poor by american standards. "american poor" have no clue how good they got it.
I'm willing to bet that 1) you've never been to Sweden and 2) you've never met a Swedish person.
Shocking really, how people can basically get away with basically posting lies. I'm sure many will (choose) to believe you too, which is sad in itself.
The poor here have it worse than pretty much any other developed nation. Try being poor AND sick here, with no insurance. Few qualify for Medicare. At least the poor in other countries have a better chance of clawing themselves out of poverty, partly because education isn't so expensive. Going to school in other countries also stands a far better chance of landing you a decent job; here it's a lottery. Also, I don't know any other developed country on earth where getting sick could basically ruin you financially. Yeah, they have it soooooo good.
heh, why are they being marginalized? if they are, then they have a right to milk a system to survive.
i've seen plenty of scum work cushy in jobs that i could have done but i was not hired. i worked three months in a temp agency at a corporation and worked harder than most other employees and i was still not hired because the managers didn't like me. there was absolutely no objective or technical reason why i would not be hired vs others there. it probably was some racial prejudice involved in that particular situation but that is not unusual, among other human biases and quirks. it's unfortunate that so many degenerate people make up a bulk of the work force but that is a reality. i cannot stand the idea that people get criticized for not having a job yet the ugly seedy truth is society plays favoritism in the hiring process. even worse, if they don't like you, they will do things to force you to quit or get you fired. sometimes, they need no reason to let you go.
those who deserve jobs isn't always everyone who has one. it's just not that simple.
My oldest neice just finished a temp position for an energy company and the work she was doing was putting the regular employees to shame. The supervisor even told her that many people in the office do not do half of the work she was doing. There was a position availible but they did not hire her for the job. I guess they prefer those people their barely doing minimal work just to earn a check. I used to be a temp for the Post office and I saw the same thing. Us temps would do way more work than regular employees.
welfare is many things to many people.
for some a means of stealing from the government.for some a career.
for all involved-- there is money is poverty.
My oldest neice just finished a temp position for an energy company and the work she was doing was putting the regular employees to shame. The supervisor even told her that many people in the office do not do half of the work she was doing. There was a position availible but they did not hire her for the job. I guess they prefer those people their barely doing minimal work just to earn a check. I used to be a temp for the Post office and I saw the same thing. Us temps would do way more work than regular employees.
Somehow this thread has gotten transformed from people's mistaken ideas about welfare to generalized grousing about the way things are. This is actually appropriate because all the whining about welfare isn't actually based on knowledge of the details and costs of all of our public assistance programs.
You're right that many people are getting a raw deal, but it has nothing to do with welfare.
In the case of your niece we don't necessarily know why she didn't get the job, but it's possible that the employer has some rigid hiring standards that she doesn't meet. In addition, most temp agencies have a contract that makes the employer liable for a heft fee if the temp is hired for a permanent job, and it's possible that the employer wanted to avoid that. It's a rare employer who will either challenge that policy or pay the fee to keep even an outstanding temporary employee.
I'm willing to bet that 1) you've never been to Sweden and 2) you've never met a Swedish person.
Shocking really, how people can basically get away with basically posting lies. I'm sure many will (choose) to believe you too, which is sad in itself.
The poor here have it worse than pretty much any other developed nation. Try being poor AND sick here, with no insurance. Few qualify for Medicare. At least the poor in other countries have a better chance of clawing themselves out of poverty, partly because education isn't so expensive. Going to school in other countries also stands a far better chance of landing you a decent job; here it's a lottery. Also, I don't know any other developed country on earth where getting sick could basically ruin you financially. Yeah, they have it soooooo good.
1. I been to sweden on a visit from norway where I stayed for good time
2. I meet many swedes. Ps. sweden is not even the best Scandinavian country it is norway and I lived there too, not as good as america.
All you can pull is the poor and sick card, really how many people who are poor get sick and die because they are poor. At least in america you have a chance to get rich and buy good care. If you live in sweden your stuck on crumb bumb gov't insurance, or like in norway where your something like 300% more likely to die of prostate cancer than in america. Thats funny americans who have no healthcare are more likely to survive prostate cancer than norwegians who are the richest socialist state and ought have unlimited free healthcare for everyone. It just proves the healthcare myth that is socialism. Is the us system perfect, no because there is a gap of no coverage for those with preexisting conditions largely, but if you have cancer you will not survive anywhere else if you die in america, canadians come to america for cancer treatment.
As well health illnesses are the third leading causes of financial bankruptcy in canada. Odds are if you get sick enough that you cannot function at work your going broke anyways from inability to pay your bills. also realize that most universal healthcare practices death panels of doctors who decided if you live or die, who can refuse you treatment for being a smoker, who can pull the plug on you any time with no notification to anyone. additionally the universal healthcare never covers the expense cost of cancer medications that are most effective at fighting cancer because they call them experimental. Like the women from sicko who was dying from cancer and john stossel pointed out how that women would not had even had coverage for here $700 a pill medicine in Canada so she would most certainly go broke and die.
education in canada is pretty much the same for in-state tuituion cost, they are all around 6-10k a year like at most state universities. When you pay more taxes you cannot get out of poverty because it is money that is taken from you often before you have a chance to even invest or save it.
I think you might not know too much of the countries you are talking about. You don't understand that no country has full universal healthcare and the ones that did have them had to scale them back because they ran massive deficits decades ago to pay for them and are in debt double that of usa at 80% of gdp according to cia factbook like france.
A poor person in america is considered middle class in other countries and is in the top 1% of earners in the world. an american who earns something like 33k is poor, but a italian person who earns the same is slightly above average despite italy having way higher cost of living. After you factor in PPP there is no contest europe loses every time against america hands down. You clearly have never been to europe because every time I come here, people say o american, and after a while they will talk about how they want to move to america because there are no jobs in europe
1. I been to sweden on a visit from norway where I stayed for good time
2. I meet many swedes. Ps. sweden is not even the best Scandinavian country it is norway and I lived there too, not as good as america.
All you can pull is the poor and sick card, really how many people who are poor get sick and die because they are poor. At least in america you have a chance to get rich and buy good care. If you live in sweden your stuck on crumb bumb gov't insurance, or like in norway where your something like 300% more likely to die of prostate cancer than in america. Thats funny americans who have no healthcare are more likely to survive prostate cancer than norwegians who are the richest socialist state and ought have unlimited free healthcare for everyone. It just proves the healthcare myth that is socialism. Is the us system perfect, no because there is a gap of no coverage for those with preexisting conditions largely, but if you have cancer you will not survive anywhere else if you die in america, canadians come to america for cancer treatment.
As well health illnesses are the third leading causes of financial bankruptcy in canada. Odds are if you get sick enough that you cannot function at work your going broke anyways from inability to pay your bills. also realize that most universal healthcare practices death panels of doctors who decided if you live or die, who can refuse you treatment for being a smoker, who can pull the plug on you any time with no notification to anyone. additionally the universal healthcare never covers the expense cost of cancer medications that are most effective at fighting cancer because they call them experimental. Like the women from sicko who was dying from cancer and john stossel pointed out how that women would not had even had coverage for here $700 a pill medicine in Canada so she would most certainly go broke and die.
education in canada is pretty much the same for in-state tuituion cost, they are all around 6-10k a year like at most state universities. When you pay more taxes you cannot get out of poverty because it is money that is taken from you often before you have a chance to even invest or save it.
I think you might not know too much of the countries you are talking about. You don't understand that no country has full universal healthcare and the ones that did have them had to scale them back because they ran massive deficits decades ago to pay for them and are in debt double that of usa at 80% of gdp according to cia factbook like france.
A poor person in america is considered middle class in other countries and is in the top 1% of earners in the world. an american who earns something like 33k is poor, but a italian person who earns the same is slightly above average despite italy having way higher cost of living. After you factor in PPP there is no contest europe loses every time against america hands down. You clearly have never been to europe because every time I come here, people say o american, and after a while they will talk about how they want to move to america because there are no jobs in europe
1) The cancer survival rates are often quoted as being higher in the US, partly because the US is a culture of diagnostics. That isn't a criticism, but Americans (as a culture) are generally more health-aware and health savvy than Europeans, although it often goes too far when people start taking more pills than they actually need to take, hence the fact that we are blasted with pill commercials almost hourly.
2) No, I can actually pull far more cards than the poor/sick card, as you put it. Poor people here live in far more dangerous neighborhoods than say even the bad areas of Paris, London or Stockholm. Also, there are far tougher regulations in place in EU countries, protecting consumers from horrible food additives and pills that should never go on sale. Add to the fact that people work fewer hours, have more paid time off and as employees, they have *far* more protection.
3) So you've spoken to a few people in Europe who think that the grass is greener on the other side of the fence. Big deal -- I'd be willing to bet that none of those people have actually lived over here. My wife is British and we go over there a lot. I have had a lot of people tell me how they'd love to move to the US, only most of them have never even been here on vacation (grass is always greener on the other side).
4) A poor person in America would NOT be considered middle class anywhere else in the developed world -- that's nuts. When you factor in how much even basic healthcare costs over here, along with tuition....ah, you're just wrong about that too. You know, in many countries, you don't even NEED a car (just like in NY). Other countries are simply not as obsessed with the car culture as we are, nor do they strive to have the biggest house.
5) The unemployment rate in many European counties is no different from ours. There are no jobs here either, thanks to the recession and thanks to mass outsourcing to places like India.
I am not anti-American, nor am I trying to say Europe is any better or worse, but I am tired of the lies and ignorance of many Americans and the lack of respect and understanding of how other countries choose to do business. If you want to insist that Europeans are so unhappy with their "government ran healthcare" (as many of you put it, despite the slight misinformation), why don't they take to the streets and demand "for profit" healthcare? No, most of them would NOT trade what they have for a system like ours. If you don't want to take my word, why don't you go and start a poll in the World/UK forum?
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.
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.
