This bothers me

[ShelbyGirl1]

Originally Posted by tstone

This sounds like CNN style drivel, and isn't news. This gap you speak of will always be the case, and same goes for the gap in accrual of wealth.

(see laws of middle school level mathematics)

Anyway, the poor seem to be doing pretty well compared to ''what it used to be.'' Back in the day they generally didn't have AC's, flat screen color TV's, rent-a-rims, nor all the food that causes morbid obesity.

You forgot the $200 cells!

[rigas]

Originally Posted by portyhead24

Not sure if that last post was directed (referencing rigas) at me per se but I agree with you wholeheartedly, and thank God we have people in this world like Oprah and Bill and Melinda Gates. That being said there are people on the flip side too e.g. Bernie Madoff, Kenneth Lay (I'm sure we remember that pretty well) and so on and so forth. This greed runs the gamut though from monetary greed to social and political greed. These people have helped create an environment of inequities and disillusionment. They are not the only ones but I have a hard time dismissing big business as just people succeeding and trying to make a profit. If that were the case this world would be a whole lot different and better in my eyes.

see the extreme is trying to become the norm. call me a "glass is half full" type but i tend to see the "rich" not as greedy but as successful, and at the same time they, generally speaking, do what they can to help those less fortunate. talk about greedy, look at guys like al gore, who used his political prowess to earn a contract to build hybrid cars. sounds great doesnt it, save the planet and all right? oh forgot to mention those hybrids are hybrid sports cars being built in finland (with us dollars) and START at $90,000. now on the flip side, there are small business owners like myself and my father and COUNTLESS others who donate time and money to help out. even though my company has taken a loss over the last 2 yrs i still found the time and money to donate about $10,000, but i am part of the "greedy" side because in 2006 i made A LOT of money. well above the presidents "$250,000 is rich" level.

let me go find something and i will continue my response. to be continued.

[rigas]

ok my final response, and i am sure some of you have seen this but it really simplifies things both on taxes and on the rich in general.

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing (for their beer)
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20." Drinks for the ten now cost just $80. The group still wanted to pay their bi ll the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free.
But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay. And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
"I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man," but he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!"
"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they (they 10th guy) might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

[skeet09]

Originally Posted by rb4browns

For those who truly are unable to care for themselves or function in society, please see my post about society being built around the family first (not government or corporations first). It is the responsibility first and foremost of the families of these people to care for them, then the extended families, and then volunteer organizations such as churches, synagogues, etc. to care for them. It is certainly not the obligation of a corporation and it should not be the responsibility of government. Government is there to keep us safe from invading armies and those who want to do physical harm or steal things. It's (should) not (be) there to wipe our butts or noses.

So what are those folks supposed to do when they are banned by their family because of their disabilities? The family doesn't want to take care of them. That happens way too often. If you see the list of kids waiting to be adopted on any list, many of the children have severe handicapps and need around the clock care.

[Zhang Fei]

Originally Posted by crbcrbrgv

This may not even be a "Houston" topic per se, but it is occurring in Houston. As many of you know, I am a teacher looking for a job who currently works as a general handyman for many of the retailers. I was at a Victoria's Secret (we get a lot of work from them) when I started to talk to some of the girls. My pay is pretty lousy, but not the worst. They were telling me that Victoria's Secret starts out at 7.25. Also, I was told this is common at most of the high end retailers around Houston. Am I the only one bothered by the fact that a high end retailer such as Victoria's Secret pays their employees minimum wage? For what they charge for their clothing, it almost seems criminal to me.

In a country with a stable population, competition among companies for workers would raise wages. Unfortunately, our multi-decade unofficial open borders policy via a deliberately leaky southern border has put paid to that. The bottom line is that unlimited immigration has been a disaster for wage growth among unskilled workers.