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.
no one is talking about success in life including you. we are talkiing about financial success which is what YOU keep posting about not having between not owning a home and being a perpetual burger flipper.
There are plenty of middle class folks who know how to run their finances unfortunately they have to take care of financial losers too. And here you are laughing at them for it. Nice.
Ah the irony....I AM the demographic you describe. You miss the point entirely. I'm certainly not laughing at myself, I'm laughing at the self-righteous within my demographic who dabble excessively in schadenfreude and economic self-righteousness. The difference between them (epitomized by the musings of mathjack) and me is that I recognize that there is a vested interest in ensuring we do not continue sliding into a demographic construct where the preponderance of Americans toil for peanuts as disheartened laborers into infirmity and then the taxes of the increasing few pay for the upkeep of this wave of indigents, pricing the disciplined out of their own goals and plans too, crushing the tax base in aggregate and imploding the Country.
Recognizing that there is a social responsibility towards enabling the less aggressive, less intelligent, less dedicated amongst us to economic opportunity without moral judgement, is in effect in the best interest of preserving ALL of our individual expectations of happiness and prosperity in working life and retirement. Pounding your chest and wincing that 7 out of 10 are a bunch of morally bankrupt nobodies who can't pass a drug test and lack work ethic as a generalization, is not going to help us turn this thing around. I'm not advocating handouts, I'm suggesting our labor policies are jacked up and we need to incentivize private firms to drop more dime on wages and less hoarding. Government's role is to effect that, but big business has the funds to drown labor populist voices, and so here we are, as the despondent keep falling into the safety net while a couple of self-righteous call them lazy. I think we can do better. Labor policy is one angle we could effect change in for the positive.
then you have no credit history which is just as bad.
no skills,no credit history= application in garbage can.
I find that a bit offensive - why must one have a credit history if one plans to pay cash for everything and not borrow money? I choose not to have a credit history, and you think I'm a second-class citizen as a result?
If I have to work for 20 years while driving beaters (or no car at all) and live first with roommates and then in a small house or mobile home before I can have a nice house, so what?
And we've covered that one, too. To a point, some of us agree with you on this issue (or at least I do)...but the bottom line is we can't change the housing market regulations in your area. So if you really want to do something effective, why are you not lobbying your local and state government on this issue instead of wasting time on CD? I suspect it's because you are more interested in garnering sympathy and attention than in doing something constructive.
How is someone on such low wages going to hire a lobbyist, exactly?
How is someone on such low wages going to hire a lobbyist, exactly?
It is not necessary to "hire a lobbyist" to bring concerns to the attention of elected officials. Any individual or group can address their representatives with issues. It works better if individuals with similar concerns can get together and present a united front and address their concerns in an organized, professional manner, but it is not necessary to have a professional lobbyist on the payroll to do this. It takes effort and organization, but it can be done effectively and get results. "To lobby" simply means to address concerns to elected officials. It does not necessarily imply the employment of a professional lobbyist.
How is someone on such low wages going to hire a lobbyist, exactly?
Who said anything about hiring a lobbyist? I didn't mean it in a literal sense. I meant lobbying in a more personal sense, as in writing letters to congresspeople, talking to people in local government. Getting other people locally to support relaxing of zoning laws.
You say can this is ineffective, but it seems more likely to bear fruit than bringing up what is essentially the same old thread on CD over and over again.
I find that a bit offensive - why must one have a credit history if one plans to pay cash for everything and not borrow money? I choose not to have a credit history, and you think I'm a second-class citizen as a result?
If I have to work for 20 years while driving beaters (or no car at all) and live first with roommates and then in a small house or mobile home before I can have a nice house, so what?
because today the way most comanies judge what kind of applicant they are getting since they don't know you is by your CREDIT REPORT AND BACKGROUND CHECK.
after all as an employer if you cannot take care of your own money in a a responsible manner what can i expect when it is mine is the thinking.
a good credit score at least demonstrates some ablty to being a responsible person and at least being capable of good financial choices in life.
with so many applicants applying for positions the immediate filter is your data that is available.
usually no credit history or a poor credit history has your application passed over and your job skills are never even touched upon.
we have hundreds apply to our company and between drug testing and background and credit checking 80% of the applications today never get to first base.
also your insurance costs are based on your credit score as well as other factors.
there is little today that does not include some judgement based on your credit score and background check.
no credit history or a poor credit acore will just be another obstacle in your path for many things today.
do you think they tell all 1600 applicants to come in?
of course not ,they will use the data available to do the initial selection .
because today the way most comanies judge what kind of applicant they are getting since they don't know you is by your CREDIT REPORT AND BACKGROUND CHECK.
after all as an employer if you cannot take care of your own money in a a responsible manner what can i expect when it is mine is the thinking.
a good credit score at least demonstrates some ablty to being a responsible person and at least being capable of good financial choices in life.
with so many applicants applying for positions the immediate filter is your data that is available.
usually no credit history or a poor credit history has your application passed over and your job skills are never even touched upon.
we have hundreds apply to our company and between drug testing and background and credit checking 80% of the applications today never get to first base.
also your insurance costs are based on your credit score as well as other factors.
there is little today that does not include some judgement based on your credit score and background check.
no credit history or a poor credit acore will just be another obstacle in your path for many things today.
do you think they tell all 1600 applicants to come in?
of course not ,they will use the data available to do the initial selection .
Employers have been getting increasingly risk-averse, while more and more tools are becoming available for assessing (real or perceived) risk.
A perfect match for their needs.
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.