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.
In a functioning CAPITALIST FREE MARKET SYSTEM the market is always unstable. Using government based wealth insurance stabilizes the market by destroying it. Investors are keeping their money sequestered not because of government regulation but because their risks are no longer insured by the government. They want their safety net even if it destroys the safety of the other 99.9%.
To overcome the hardship of the Great Depression.
Safety nets are supposed to be temporary.
If it wasn't for the safety nets, the current recession would be as bad or worse than the Great Depression. The economy right now is every bit as bad as it was in the early 1930s. The only reason it doesn't seem that bad is government programs keeping people afloat.
If it wasn't for the safety nets, the current recession would be as bad or worse than the Great Depression. The economy right now is every bit as bad as it was in the early 1930s. The only reason it doesn't seem that bad is government programs keeping people afloat.
I'm very impressed that you see and realize this. Hardly anyone does. The unemployment is almost, within 5-8 percentage points, as bad. See SSDI, labor participation rate, plus those earning $20,000 or less a year in part time or full time jobs. Which in 2012 is destitute.
Plus almost 50,000,000 on Food stamps which are the virtual modern day food lines.
Cut all the social programs and the cities would be in flames in less than 2-3 weeks. Maybe one.
In an ideal world I agree with you. In principle I agree with you. But we live in an imperfect world. There are people with BA's and MBA's waitressing and bartending and unemployed. Only 30% of the population, even in 2012, have as high as a B.A.
As you can see in the corner I live outside the city of Philadelphia in the northeast section of the U.S.
Look at these links on wages:
For large swaths of the country almost 50% of the jobs that even exist, and there's not nearly enough now, are practically and for all intents and purposes useless for your goal of self-sufficiency.
EH said:
"Going by IRS AGI/return figures for 2008: 50.6M of 142.4M returns were under $22,000. So fewer than 92M were over $22,000. Of course many of these returns are dual income.
BLS figures: About 139.4 million employed people in the US, (~300 million total population, ~238.7 million not in school or otherwise incarcerated) ~28 million part time, ~25% of total employed earn less than $10/hr.
A decent estimate based on BLS and IRS figures is that about 90 million (+/- 10%) earn enough to afford to pay modest bills, (~$20,000/yr. before tax) The effective employment rate (not unemployment) counting only those earning at least $20,000/ year on an individual basis is thus only 35-40%.
December 12th, 2010 at 3:26 am"
Thought it was worth posting since not many will even look at the links. I don't know how accurate it is but I doubt it's far off. Really puts things in perspective .
WOW! Third World here we come.
Cutting social programs in this environment is a pipe dream. Unless you like fire. Lots of it. Remember Watts and the L.A. riots... multiply by 30...
Location: Democratic Peoples Republic of Redneckistan
11,078 posts, read 15,082,780 times
Reputation: 3937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe_Ryder
I suspect the highly profitable discovery of penicillin had more to do with the lowered infant mortality than a social safety net. If supporting a free market instead of the socialism that stifles innovation and brings nothing but misery (as you said, history does exist.) makes me unpatriotic, then I have no issue wearing that label.
I had already tagged you as that long ago,but glad to know you are proud of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimMe
I agree with you that the taxing power of government should not be used to affect behavior--for good or ill. So if it were in my power I would eliminate every tax credit and every bailout of individuals (i.e., property owners) and corporations (i.e., GE, AIG, etc.). As far as feeding hungry kids which is it? Do we have a hunger problem or is it an obesity problem?
Come visit around here Jim...there would be a major hunger problem if welfare was to be cut off.
We always gave major portions of our garden to Churches for distribution and donate to food pantrys...that only goes so far.
It makes me fistfighting mad at some arsehole who voted for GW and the trillions he blew in Iraq with scab contractors and then they turn around and complain about Aid for Dependent Children and WIC...as far as I'm concerned they can go straight to hell where IMHO a special spot waits on them....just trash in my book.
Fastest way to "the destruction of America" is to adopt an "everyone for themselves" attitude.
Do you all really miss the Aristocracy system so badly? Is the meritocracy allowing underserving poor kids compete with your privileged progeny? And indeed, beat them on a level playing field? Tough. May I suggest you don't have what it takes to be an American if you're not ready to deal with the consequences of the American economic and social system?
Because the United States is not a country where a national identity can be based on common ethnicity, race or culture (like almost every other country on the world), it takes a lot of work to sell the "do it for your country and be a proud American" meme.
The first step in destroying America is to adopt your "divide and conquer" approach. But perhaps that's the point. Kind of like the whackjobs who think the second coming is imminent, and work to start Armageddon.
All amazing, of course, that conservatives on this board believe they would be just as successful today and live the lifestyle they enjoy today if not for the government subsidized roads, federal tax dollars to unproductive rural areas, universal education, farm subsidies, defense contracts, etc. etc. etc.
Actualy you seem to want to make it so complicated. Its realy quite simple. If ya cant afford to feed kids, dont have them. Why do democrats struggle with this one so much
I hear the same song from the left over and over again...."You want to do this or that on the backs of the poor!".
Cut medicaid, SSI, Food Stamps, Welfare, WIC and SCHIP.
Allowing people to fend for themselves would create a better society.
Two generations and we'll all be better.
Since most poor renters spend at least half their income on rent, I keep saying that they need a free market in which they are allowed to buy homes they can afford.
This will allow them to stabilize their housing costs in the short run, decrease their cost burden in the long run, and facilitate their ability to build wealth, of which they currently have none.
The bloated food stamp rolls are a function of extreme rent burdens borne by the poor.
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.
Cut all the social programs and the cities would be in flames in less than 2-3 weeks. Maybe one.
